User talk:Donner60/Archive 7

Archive 7 starting with threads from October 29, 2014

Hukum Singh
-- Donner60: I do not know how to leave a message for you. I do not have an account with wiki. But I am surprised you earsed my fairly trivial edit of a fairly obscure page about Hukum Singh, former Chief Minister of the Indian State of Haryana. I wonder whether you even have preliminary exposure to the politics of that state. The main article contains a link to 'List of Chief Ministers of Haryana'. The edit I did had picked up some information from that wiki link itself. So I had added no new info to the wiki, it was not a controversial topic, and I was just cleaning up a wiki page and making it more helpful to those who may visit it. Please do not undo trivial edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.228.13.71 (talk) 04:34, 29 October 2014 (UTC)


 * You added an attack on a living person, calling him a "puppet" of someone else. That is contrary to Wikipedia policy. See Biographies of living persons. You provided no source, although I doubt you could cite a reliable, verifiable, neutral source that supported that statement. This was neither "cleanup" or "trivial." So please become more familiar with Wikipedia guidelines and policies before making edits which violate them and admonishing editors who are trying to apply them. Donner60 (talk) 05:02, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

My response : Now I see what you mean. Actually I got that 'he was a puppet' verbiage from the external link cited on the wiki page itself. Let me reproduce it again here : http: // indiatoday.intoday.in/story/new-haryana-cm-hukam-singh-owes-his-all-to-om-prakash-chautala/1/315452.html ; India Today is a highly reliable and fairly neutral source, plus I remember enough about Haryana state's politics around 1990. Hukam Singh himself may cheerfully accept that he was a puppet. But I don't care whether the wiki page mentions that he was a puppet. I mainly edited the page to mention exactly when he was the state's chief minister; viz, late 1990 to early 1991. I might have added the 'puppet' bit based on the external link I found on the page. 108.228.13.71 (talk) 07:17, 29 October 2014 (UTC) Dhananjay Naniwadekar (nani3skip45@hotmail)


 * Thank you for your explanation. I am glad that you understand that Wikipedia cannot include such statements unless they are reliably sourced. Even then, it would be good not only to cite the source but to include some explanation that it was "according to..." and perhaps that it was based on certain actions. Even using a different word or phrase would be better. We need to be careful not to be seen as attacking living persons or publishing opinions from unknown sources, possibly just the writer. The external link may support the point but without a footnote to the statement itself, few if any people would know that because we have to assume that most people do not read the external links.


 * I am sorry that my reversion of your edit also took out the valid point. Unless I were to edit the article rather than just revert it, I have to do it on an all or nothing basis. If I were to assume the rest of the edit was correct, I would be going into something about which I have no knowledge. So I have to assume that I can work out the problem with the writer and the edit can be made properly. By the way, most edits that appear to have some problem have a problem in their entirety so this situation only occurs occasionally.


 * I would have deleted the message on your talk page in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through) because you were obviously in good faith in making the edits and did not intend any accusation that you had not seen in a reliable source. Since you have already deleted it, I think we can leave it at that because I assume you will not get such messages in the future, with the always possible exception of a misunderstanding. (I or even you could restore it, then I could put in the strike through, but that is probably just a technicality here.) Thank you for your contribution. If you have not entirely restored your points to the article, please do so. Donner60 (talk) 20:31, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Amber Room
Donner please to approve www.baltic-room.com NEW AMBER ROOM!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baltic2028 (talk • contribs) 21:16, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Baltic2028 (talk) 21:22, 29 October 2014 (UTC)baltic2028 >>WE ARE SORRY<<


 * Sorry, your addition of a web link simply adds an advertisement or means of promotion. Your web site offers items for sale; perhaps reproductions of original amber room items but nothing of historic significance or direct relationship to the missing Amber Room treasure. It has nothing to do with the original Russian Amber Room which is the subject of the article and gives no additional information about it. This cannot be accepted. See What Wikipedia is not. Donner60 (talk) 21:33, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

www.baltic-room.com (((www.amber-chamber.com)))

 * We are sorry. www.baltic-room.com OUR link IS WORTH HALF MILLION $ (500`000 $). Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baltic2028 (talk • contribs) 22:59, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Deletion
Edit conflicted me out of a reply three times so I leave it at this: Deleted personal opinion message that does not appear to call for a reply. Will leave further edits to article to those most concerned with it rather than simply edit for recent changes. User who left message can proceed if desired (leaving footnote in article would be better for such changes) and deal with others if necessary. Donner60 (talk) 21:33, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the complement
I received your message regarding the Book of Wisdom edit. I appreciate your comments. I didn't have the patience to try to figure out how the odd info originally got there but yes, one has to be very careful. When I use WP for research I always try to get to the primary sources cited. I don't usually make edits but Judaism and Bible are my passion and sometimes I can't resist correcting if I find wacky stuff. Yours, 68.198.65.141 (talk) 03:17, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Morrocan Quarter edit - neutral POV
It struck me as lopsided that a displaced citizen's letter of thanks should be noted considering that wouldn't necessarily reflect the majority of people forcibly removed from their ancient settlement.

Pointing that out is a reinforcement of the neutral nature of the way the article should be reflected with respect to Wikipedia's guidelines. Having a gratuitous and questionable example of how the razing was "good" is a dubious addition. 24.120.204.66 (talk) 22:23, 30 October 2014 (UTC) Scott King


 * Deleted notice on your talk page due to explanation. Good faith edit. I think it would be better to cite an additional source if restoring the edit. Donner60 (talk) 22:33, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Stephen A. Parke
I would ask you to please delete the Stephen A. Parke page permanently from Wikipedia. I tried to do it myself just now. I am Stephen A. Parke and I am embarrassed to have this page here because I feel that it is grandstanding and egotistical. Thank you for kindly removing it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.18.144.224 (talk) 05:06, 31 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I have posted this message on your talk page. I have deleted the notice on your talk page due to explanation that you, the subject of article, wishes it to be deleted. Simply blanking the page is not the proper procedure, however. I am only a reviewer, not an administrator, but I believe even an administrator needs to follow a procedure. I am looking at the deletion procedures to see which may apply to this situation and if more than one applies, which might be easiest. This may take a little more time so I thought I would answer in part now and reply further after my review. Donner60 (talk) 05:40, 31 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I see you have added a request at the bottom of the page: Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. I have added a caption to show it is a new thread. While you may get some advice on that page (maybe even more promptly than I can write anything pertinent), I am reasonably sure you will not get the article deleted through that post so I will continue to look at the deletion process and policy pages. Donner60 (talk) 05:51, 31 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I think your request will have to go through the articles for deletion process. This is described in Articles for deletion. Unless a biographical article has no sources, I read the policy on Proposed deletion, a simpler process, as not applicable, although the wording could be more direct. You will see on the first linked page that you can start the process as a non-registered user but someone will need to complete steps II and III for you. I have never done this but I would do it for you if you do not wish to register or you can request someone to help on Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion. In fact, you might get an answer to your noticeboard post by putting your request for deletion, or help in getting the article deleted, there.


 * Registering is no big deal. Choose a user name, which can be a pseudonym and fill in a few blanks on the registration and you are registered. For some types of edits or requests, you must have made ten valid ordinary edits first but I don't think that applies here. Unless you get better advice on the noticeboard, I suggest you go forward with this process. You need to request deletion of the article as the subject of the article and to note that you are a relatively unknown, non-public figure. Donner60 (talk) 06:32, 31 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I note that another editor did put the article up for deletion based on the posting. I added a comment and !vote supporting the deletion. Donner60 (talk) 07:54, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Francis Xavier
Thanks. That was a mistake. I had added a couple of quotes, and that some how messed up the references of the page. I was trying to fix that, and deleted all that by mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gmk7 (talk • contribs) 20:04, 2 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I have deleted the notice on your talk page in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through) because of the explanation that the removal of content was unintentionally made in connection with other changes. Thanks for the explanation. Happy editing. Donner60 (talk) 20:09, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

My recent edit
I believe it was constructive.

What do you mean not constructive? I was just at reddit.com and unfortunately clicked on a link with some very disturbing photos. That website is disgusting, depraved and beyond hope. Why does your website sugar coat it and pretend it is'nt there.

Are you some kind of sick person? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.13.134.127 (talk) 21:19, 2 November 2014 (UTC)


 * The page before your edits contains the categories on Reddit. You may have found individual posts on the topics that you tried to add and they may indeed be distasteful. However, since these are not formal categories, they cannot be added to a list of categories. Donner60 (talk) 21:28, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Presumption of Innocence : Islamic Law Addition
Hi there, Im not sure if this is how to properly use the talk page (sorry, not technologically savvy!). I tried editing your post on my talk page, but then thats MY page and I think I am supposed to do it on yours. I'll just paste what I wrote there: hank you very much for your message. I did not know we had such a guide, as a Muslim it is out of habit that we add such honorifics. Now I know it and will remember it next time. But if I may suggest, I think the mistake should not have called for a deletion of the entire section of what I wrote. Regards.Fajri.matahati (talk) 05:39, 3 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I have deleted the message on your talk page in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through). Since I did not check whether your sources were available on line or examine them, I should have simply deleted the honorifics. When you restored the edit, that is what I did. If anyone wishes to check the sources, they can do so. As between your edit and my second revision, I think we are now in accord. Donner60 (talk) 07:31, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Citation for 'Whiter shade of pale' lyrics edit
Hi there! I've edited the meaning of a song, based on my own research and consideration.I used wikipedia and most importantly Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. This citation would then be:. Should Wikipedia also be recognised as a source? Thanks for keeping the standards up! Donner60 (talk) 07:48, 3 November 2014 (UTC)HenryWSP — Preceding unsigned comment added by HenryWSP (talk • contribs) 07:18, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Reference


 * Since the edit is essentially your interpretation, it is original research. Wikipedia does not include original research. See No original research. See also What Wikipedia is not. Since you undoubtedly did not know this, I have deleted the message on your talk page in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through) and added these comments there to be sure you will get them. Also, Wikipedia itself can not be a source. Of course, any valid reliable, verifiable secondary sources cited in an article that supports an addition to another article can be used. See Verifiability. The entire page explains the policies and guidelines in detail but see Verifiability in particular. I also added a welcome message to your talk page. You will find links to some pages that will give you references and instructions concerning Wikipedia guidelines, style and policies. Donner60 (talk) 07:48, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Okay that's fine! I'll first get it published then. One tends to forget this is an encyclopedia and not a journal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HenryWSP (talk • contribs) 08:01, 3 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your reply. Donner60 (talk) 08:03, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Constitution of Armenia
Hi. Here, you reverted the removal of a large amount of text. But if you'd actually looked at it you'd have seen it had only just been added by someone else, was obviously inappropriate, and its removal was obviously correct. Neatsfoot (talk) 08:55, 3 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for catching that. Donner60 (talk) 22:03, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Miller Anderson
Not sure if this is how to do this:

You stated that my editing of the Miller Anderson page to include his time with/in the band Mountain was removed because it was 'unconstructive'... What's your problem?

He WAS in Mountain and the record should show that!


 * I have deleted the message about this on your talk page in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through) because your edit was only technically incorrect. You placed a footnote reference at the very top of the page before even the hatnote, much less the article. I reverted the edit because I saw this out of place reference and decided the edit was not proper. However, the rest of your edit was proper since he was a member of the band. I have restored your edit which adds Mountain to the article but deleted the reference entirely instead of placing next to the band's name. You cited the Wikipedia article on the band Mountain. Wikipedia can not cite one of its own articles as a source. If there is a reliable, verifiable reference in the Mountain article, that could be cited. Since you linked the Mountain article, however, that is sufficient in this circumstance as a reference to the band. Sorry that I was not more explicit about this. Donner60 (talk) 21:18, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Clinton Public School District
No problem. I blocked both of the editors as well. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 22:04, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

your warning
I have been warned twice now on making nonconstructive edits for edits that are proper and with an explanation... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.75.24 (talk) 22:09, 5 November 2014 (UTC)


 * received your message and replied. Thank you. I should register an account too. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.75.24 (talk) 22:23, 5 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I thank you for your reply and understanding. Again, I am sorry I did not follow the link before reacting. One who is reviewing changes occasionally needs to be reminded that every example of a similar change may not in fact be identical (so look at any links first). Donner60 (talk) 22:27, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

So to question about a kiwi is not a contribution
OF COURSE IT IS NOT, i am asking and it is why the "talk" is about. Are you high or simply stupid?

--201.241.26.52 (talk) 13:50, 9 November 2014 (UTC)--201.241.26.52 (talk) 13:50, 9 November 2014 (UTC)


 * In response to your unnecessary personal attack accompanied by a question, you put your question "about a kiwi" in a template into the template page itself, not on the talk page. If it had been on the talk page, I would not have reverted it. See Avoid personal remarks. Donner60 (talk) 23:43, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Edit in the page of Jai (2004 Telugu Film)
Hi, I just want to let you know that the film did not receive any awards in neither Nandi nor Filmfare. I just checked the respective pages. In fact there should be a citation if the film received an award. And I am hailing from that location, I strongly believe the film was a Box-Office flop.

For references regarding the awards, You could just open the links of the awards and check them for the respective year. You would not find any. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.204.172.194 (talk) 03:32, 10 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Left this message on your talk page: :I am deleting this notice in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through). An explanation has been provided that the edit is correct. Sorry for the extra work. Donner60 (talk) 03:36, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Very Special Christmas
Hi, the edit was not a mistake, the link removed doesn't exist and has no sense. And the official website link wasn't working either, I Updated it. I'll be carefull to add this in the edit summary from now on. Thanks187.189.118.242 (talk) 21:32, 10 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Left on your talk page: I am deleting this message in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through). An explanation has been given that this was a change of web address. I rolled back my reversion of the edit. Thank you. Donner60 (talk) 21:39, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Please Cancel Your Editions in "Liu Gang"
Hi, Donner60

I am the Wikipedian who created the Wiki article "Liu Gang". I want to let you know that the reverted edits you just made earlier today are involve to the confidential and private information about Liu Gang. Since those information will affect Mr. Liu's personal privacy, Mr. Liu had authorized me to make a big deletion in 4 November 2014‎ and 10 November 2014‎. I am writing to you to remove your new edition completely as soon as possible and resume to the original page that I made previously.

Wikipedia is a good place to introduce the notable people, but we also should respect the wishes of the litigant who has been written in the article.

Once again, please to recover to the OLD EDITION that made in 02:50, 10 November 2014 as soon as possible.

Thank you. 国冬礼 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 國冬禮 (talk • contribs) 01:00, 11 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I have removed a paragraph of personal information from the section about his work in the United States. I think the newspaper article which was given as a reference does not support some of the content of the paragraph and does not seem to take a position as to the truth of the rest of that paragraph. However, the edit you refer to also removed two paragraphs about his work in the United States which appears to be supported by other publicly available information and does not appear to me to be private. I can find no reason to remove this. If you have a reason for any further removal of content or wish to make further changes to the article, I will leave that between you and any other interested editors. Please be sure to state your reasons in the edit summary. Donner60 (talk) 03:11, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

‘Liu Gang's T-method Forward“
Thanks, However, I still want you to remove the part about the "T-method Forward" because the information listed there provided some confidential and private information about Mr. Liu. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 國冬禮 (talk • contribs) 03:49, 11 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I have looked at the page. The change has been made. I will leave it. If anyone else wishes to review the change, of course, they may do so. Just from its name, it seems to involve - at least in part - a technical matter. Donner60 (talk) 21:39, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Jaw Jerk Reflex
Hi Donner60,

I made the change to the Jaw Jerk page because I am currently studying for Medicine exams and the page incorrectly said "This is not a routine part of the clinical examination". It actually is a routine component. I referenced using Talley, which is considered the "bible" of clinical examinations. But in hospital practice the jaw jerk reflex is commonly tested as well, irrespective of whether or not the patient shows signs of trigeminal nerve damage.


 * Left this message on your talk page: I am deleting this message in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through) because a reasonable explanation has been given. I defer to your expertise. Sorry for any inconvenience. Donner60 (talk) 06:31, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Gideon Johnson Pillow
Just trying to be honest with you. I only created this account to fix wrong doings. I am a descendent of General Pillow and I don't like my ancestor's name to be "dragged through the mud" so to speak from false accusations of wrong doings made by his political enemies. One I get the good name of Gideon j. Pillow more respected, I'm deleting my account.


 * Left this message on your talk page: Although I sympathize with your frustration, one cannot simply add contradictions to existing articles. You can add alternate points of view, even minority points of view, provided they are based on reliable and verifiable sources. I agree with BusterD's advice. Also, the article cites sources but does not have many in-line citations. If the text does not coincide with the sources, it can be changed to do so. You also have pointed out that editors who are interested in Civil War history and biography also ought to look at this article and edit it, especially to add inline citations or any corrections that may be needed. You may wish to review the following pages to assist you in editing:


 * Getting started
 * Introduction to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * What Wikipedia is not
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style
 * Help:Referencing for beginners and Help:Footnotes are useful for tips on references and instruction on inserting footnotes
 * Citing sources and Inline citation discuss the policies and also offer some advice about referencing Donner60 (talk) 04:09, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, but I feel that Wikipedia is not for me. I am not nor have a need to be tech smart. This has been a confusing experience. I am going to abandon my account.


 * You do not need to be "tech smart" but it does take some reading and a little effort, and practice (in the sandbox if necessary) to get accustomed to the formatting. I am not "tech smart" either but I have learned, or copied, enough to learn the basic formatting. You can turn on Visual Editor on your preferences pages which simplifies the editing for some people. I would encourage you not to give up, or at least to return later after giving it some thought. I have added a few references to the article and will try to add some citations and to review any statements that may be controversial. However, I cannot promise a particular time frame to finish any reviews or changes. I have some other articles to work on that require attention before the anniversary dates of the events occur or that have been only partially revised and need to be finished. Additionally, I can say that I will be neutral and objective but will follow the sources and not have a definite outcome in mind. Donner60 (talk) 04:28, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Once again, thanks for the advice but I still think that Wikipedia is not for me. I feel like I could get the truth out better by starting a website.

Tiger II
I edited Tiger II info since it is crontadictory talking about an autloader... and then two people to load the gun...


 * Left this message on your talk page: I am deleting the above message in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through) because an explanation has been given. Please proceed but give your reason in the edit summary and a citation if one is appropriate. Thank you. Donner60 (talk) 02:20, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Midy's theorem
I'm the owner of http://www.abdulbaki.org/math/Midys_Theorem.pdf. Why did you undo the edit? My website has changed and I thought it prudent to change the link.


 * I left this message on your talk page: I am deleting the above message because I made a mistake in reverting your edit. All you did was change the web site reference from a dead link to the current link. I cannot remember why I would have reverted such a small change without checking it further. I may have even made a mistake in "pushing the revert button" rather than just advancing to the next item in the queue. In any event I apologize for the error and hope it will not discourage you. I will replace the edit with the update if you have not already done it. Donner60 (talk) 02:18, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Dutch Shepherd
The picture of "trainer with Dutch Shepherd" was removed from the Dutch Shepherd page because it contains a link to the trainer's for profit business. I believe he has posted this picture as an attempt to recruit business for himself.70.210.74.74 (talk) 23:21, 10 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I restored your edit and put this message on your talk page: I am deleting this message in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through) because an explanation has now been given. Thank you. Sorry for any inconvenience. Donner60 (talk) 23:45, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Alexander de Cadenet
Hi,

You just reverted this page back to how it was before. I am editing this page on behalf of the artist Alexander de Cadenet. Is it possible to put back the changes? I'll make sure I write reasons for changing it next time. Thanks, AlisaBurge


 * I left this message on your talk page: I am deleting this message in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through) due to your explanation. Since you have made several additional edits after leaving your message to me, you will need to make the changes you desire again. Otherwise, if I try to do it, I may mess up your later edits. Please do leave an edit summary for your changes or someone else may revert them for the same reason. Thanks. Sorry for any inconvenience. Donner60 (talk) 23:43, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi again, thanks for the tip. Yeah, I decided to go ahead and edit the page again. I'll keep writing the reasons for editing in future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlisaBurge (talk • contribs) 00:07, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Edit on Daniel Morgan
Hello. Please go to Daniel Morgan and search the page for the text The Invasion of Canada. You will notice that the text below it is intended to be a section of its own, but it isn't. This is because the header markers (===) are followed by an alphanumeric character (e), thus the MediaWiki parser recognizes the line as normal text, instead of a section header. This is what my edit aimed to fix. TChatzigiannakis (talk) 23:11, 16 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I left this message on your talk page: I am deleting the above message in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through). You provided me with an explanation which showed that your edit was meant to be constructive and I did not understand it. It seems I did not understand the technicality. Thanks for straightening this out. Please proceed to fix this. I do not wish to make another edit, just to end up interfering with your purpose again. Donner60 (talk) 23:24, 16 December 2014 (UTC)


 * No problem at all! TChatzigiannakis (talk) 23:42, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Civil War Institute, 2014
Hi! Thanks for being an appreciative reader. Happy holidays to you (or as they said during the Civil War, Merry Christmas). Hal Jespersen (talk) 15:53, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of &#123;&#123;U&#124;&#125;&#125; to all registered users whom have commented on his talk page. To prevent receiving future messages, please follow the opt-out instructions on User:Technical 13/Holiday list

174.112.44.106
Let's keep a close eye on this "contributor", shall we? - Denimadept (talk) 21:00, 26 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes. This person seems to make one or a few nonconstructive edits per month and when warned, backs off, at least until the next month. I did not see any constructive edits. In my view, deleting the warnings weighs against a person who has this kind of edit history. Nonetheless, he seems to believe that if he spaces his vandalisms and does not accumulate many warnings in a month, he may get away with a few of them and also will be safe from being blocked. Some administrators want to see four current warnings before acting; others may block a user for some period of time for persistent vandalism. So a report to AIV with a persistent vandalism complaint may not result in action. This IP user either knows that or must strongly suspect something along that line. Such a user does need to be checked occasionally since stronger action may or may not be forthcoming. Donner60 (talk) 00:00, 27 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Agreed. That's one reason I haven't reported it yet.  Another is that we don't KNOW for sure that it's only one person. - Denimadept (talk) 00:38, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!


Happy New Year! Donner60, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. NorthAmerica1000 13:02, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2015}} to user talk pages.

Corrective rape
Hello. I'm the person who tried to the change the "Corrective Rape" webpage. I've looked up Julia Decker's name and it seems like she's American, which is why I inserted that word. I am concerned that the article mentions corrective rape in detail in a variety of third world countries without mentioning that it happens in America too, even when there is strong evidence that it does (Julia's case being a prime example). Therefore, I'm concerned omitting the word "American" from the paragraph entirely could encourage readers to mentally exaggerate the prevalence of corrective rape in the "third world" versus in the United States. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Czwelker (talk • contribs) 20:00, 13 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I left this message on your talk page: I am deleting the above message because you have provided an explanation that indicates your edit was in good faith. However, I still think it is too controversial to include without supplying a reliable, verifiable source in a footnote. Donner60 (talk) 20:05, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Ok. I will look for a bio showing where she's from and attempt to link it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Czwelker (talk • contribs) 20:06, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you. Donner60 (talk) 08:11, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

RSA Communications
Why have you deleted my post? I am an employee of the Retirement Systems of Alabama and trying to correct disinformation that has been placed on David G. Bronner's page.


 * A later editor has added a satisfactory paragraph to the article. Your edit provided no reference (as the message stated) for a statement which directly contradicted the existing article with an unencyclopedic notation to that effect. The later editor removed the direct contradiction and provided a reference. That clears up the problem and leaves the same information you wanted to insert in the article, now properly stated and referenced. I am sorry this was not made clearer earlier but I am glad the subsequent edits resolved the problem. Donner60 (talk) 10:22, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Tahajjud
This is my first time so I have done something worth laughing your guts out then please do so.Anyway I am elatra and about the edits on Tahajjud I did not know about the honorifics so I am sorry about that,and I think the sentence construction should be "has been recorded performing",so none of us in my opinion is correct(maybe we could seek the attention of someone expert in grammar)............................... (User:Elatra) §
 * My messages to you only concerned the honorifics. Otherwise, I am not sure whether you are concerned with the content or just the way it is written. In any event, I did not consider that to be an issue. I suggest you add a footnote if you wish to change the content. If you just wish to change the way it is written, you can do that, subject always to the Wikipedia policy that anyone else can edit an article, especially if they think your edit is wrong or not an improvement. They would be well advised to back it up with a good reason or a citation, as well. You can seek some advice at the Teahouse or other notice board if you wish but only for clarification, not because I have disputed your grammar. Donner60 (talk) 03:04, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Yeah thats a problem
The WHO document is biased. It does not give a good summary of the prepuce, its topic is not the prepuce it is HIV. Also, the clearance one is not supported by literature. Literature says that it is cleared from the surface of the penis not the body.

JohnP (talk) 22:59, 18 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I left this message on your talk page: Since adequate explanation has been given for deletion of above message, I have done so in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through). I see you have already restored the edit so nothing remains to be done. I am sorry I misunderstood this. Donner60 (talk) 23:05, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

January 2015
Hi Donner60. I saw that you undid one of my edits to the article Mariachi and I wanted to know why you fee it was not constructive. I feel you have made a mistake. Please explain, as I may revert the edit. Thanks 2602:306:36AF:7470:B561:7EE9:7A9D:676B (talk) 22:22, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

BEST,

see below

Hello, I'm Donner60. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Mariachi— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 22:10, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.


 * I left this message on your talk page. I am deleting the above message in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through) because it appears I made a mistake in reverting the edit. Please check the caption when you restore it. Sorry for the inconvenience. Donner60 (talk) 01:53, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

my last links
Donner60. Hi, the last edit I have made does seem to be constructive and assist any user visiting the page, I have viewed the guidelines and don't exactly see otherwise, can you explain? Thanks


 * I left this message on your talk page: I am deleting the above message in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through) because your questions shows you did not know about certain Wikipedia guidelines and I did not explain it to you. Please see See What Wikipedia is not, which includes, among other things, not a soapbox or means of promotion, a mirror or a repository of links, a directory or an indiscriminate collection of information. You will see that such a reference in the text of an article - advice to go to another web site - is not proper under several categories. Donner60 (talk) 21:51, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Stiernhielm
Stiernhielm's original name was Jöran (or Göran) Olofsson. When he was made noble he took the name Stiernhielm, he also "Internationalized" his first name as Georg. The name Göran originates from Georg(e)/Georgius. The spelling of his original first name varies: somtimes you see it as Jöran, other times as Göran (Both spellings have the same pronunciation). In Rune Pär Olofsson's book about Stiernhielm (1998; Georg Stiernhielm - diktare, domare, duellant) the spelling is Jöran, in the Swedish Wikipedia article the spelling is Göran. 85.229.0.138 (talk) 01:42, 24 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I left this message on your talk page: Thank you for the explanation. I am sorry for the delayed response but I have been offline since before you left your message. I am sorry I misunderstood your edit and I hope you will go ahead with your editing. I am deleting the above message in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through). Donner60 (talk) 04:09, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

New Message: Bureau of Health Professions
Hi Donner60, I am writing to inquire the reason why my edits to the HRSA Bureau of Health Professions page was not accepted. You said my edits. "because it didn’t appear constructive." I was updating the agency webpage to reflect a recent change to the agency last year. In May 2014, the Bureau of Health Workforce was created, integrating HRSA workforce programs previously housed in two bureaus: Health Professions and Clinician Recruitment and Service. My intention to update the Health Professions page was to reflect the changes to this Bureau, including the Bureau name, which is now the Bureau of Health Workforce. I am a HRSA employee. Please let me know if there is anything I need to do to make these changes accepted. Thank you for your assistance. Roxane27 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.99.233.153 (talk) 22:23, 27 January 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.99.233.153 (talk)


 * I left a reply on User talk:Roxane27 with suggestions and a welcome message. I deleted my initial message because of your explanation. I also left a welcome message which has some useful links about editing. I am sorry for any misunderstanding or inconvenience and hope you will continue to contribute to Wikipedia. Donner60 (talk) 22:39, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Ab (Semitic)
RE: Ab (Semitic) with this edit

Hey! Thank you, Donner60, for your message. Please notice, that I did in effect not removed content! I did place the "Jesus stuff" in it's context, that would be the Christianity section. The simple term abba is just a word denoting the english meaning father - there would be nothing more to say (exp. a wikia link?). The specialities about it's claimed/suggested use in "times of Jesus" are not universally representative under the heading "Aramaic" but better placed under "Christianity", wich I then did. The sources to the replaced text-block are christian as well, more or less commenting the christian use of "abba" or speculation, rather than a real ethymology and scientific theory about the use of "abba" in «times of Jesus» (what is this a kinda time anyways?). Good faith edit, I though the replacement was self-evident and the context-sensible replacement of a textblock to it's respect. sub was worthy a "minor edit (old: M.E.) statement. Sorry for stealing your time. Undid your revert, in good faith, though --85.181.118.117 (talk) 22:28, 27 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I left the following message on your talk page along with a welcome message with some useful information: I am deleting the above message (my original message) in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through) because you explained it. Please use the edit summary to briefly explain such edits because the intention in the removal of content, including its rearrangement, may not always be obvious. I am sorry for the misunderstanding. Donner60 (talk) 22:42, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Bureau of Health Professions
Hi Donner60, Thank you for your assistance. I took your suggestion to link to a new page for current and future information and leave old information on the old page. This seems like the fastest and easiest option. Roxane27 (talk) 14:54, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Rastafari Movement
Hi I was Wondering what edits you added to the Rastafari Movement Page, please reply as soon as possible Thank you in advance for your time. (signed by Mi Name Israel).


 * I deleted ":)" from the page. That is all. If you look in the "View history" tab, you can find the edits of various users. Of course, if the page is long and the edit is old, it may take you a few minutes. Click "prev" next to the edit you wish to see and it will come up with the previous edit for comparison. Donner60 (talk) 22:32, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

One more question What did you delete? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mi name Israel (talk • contribs) 22:27, 28 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I deleted the characters :). Donner60 (talk) 22:34, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Regarding the terrible rock group The Styx
Hello. I believe that the characterization of Styx as a derivative, pretentious, cheesy, and self indulgent band is an accurate one and I don't think my edits should have been deleted.


 * Please see What Wikipedia is not, especially What Wikipedia is not. Donner60 (talk) 23:59, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

The Boy Next Door (film)
Im new to this.... look I will stop changing It but can u please and I mean PLEASE change the amount that the boy next door made cause everyone in there right mind knows that it didnt make no 100,000,000... thats my only problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by German elizabeth (talk • contribs) 02:16, 30 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I left the following message on your talk page: Someone changed the number just as I was putting in the same number which was in the source. The links in the following message can help you to make proper edits to Wikipedia. (Welcome message followed; omitted here). Donner60 (talk) 02:35, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Absolute Music
The edit I made to this page was to revert a vandalizing edit someone had made earlier that day, changing 'A group of early Romantics' to 'A group of early League of Legends players'. I believe you have made a mistake by reinstating the edit I had reverted. 173.48.200.190 (talk) 02:31, 31 January 2015 (UTC)


 * You are correct. I thought I was reverting the edit that you reverted. I am not sure how I made the mistake but I suppose I could have read the wrong column. Thanks for letting me know. Donner60 (talk) 04:22, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Why you are change my edit?
Why you are change my edit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:D:CC01:3700:AC29:4933:8ED1:262D (talk) 22:06, 2 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I left this message on your talk page: I am deleting the above message in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through) because it was a mistake. I read the sequence wrong. You corrected the problem; you did not make it. I am sorry for the mistake and hope you will continue to edit Wikipedia. Donner60 (talk) 22:13, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Can you please upload an image?
I am a digital media manager for the school district and we need to replace a copyrighted image that someone mistakenly uploaded with the correct image. The incorrect patriot logo for the school, which is copyrighted by the New England Patriots, is on their page here now: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_High_School_(Saint_Paul,_Minnesota)

The correct logo of the Patriot is here: https://central.spps.org/uploads/minutemanlogonewright.jpg

Thank you! Tmelhus (talk) 22:26, 2 February 2015 (UTC)-troy.melhus@spps.org


 * This is something I should know how to do but in fact I have never done it. Please see Files for upload. This page includes not only instructions but links for asking for help or submitting a request which someone knowledgeable can act upon. Donner60 (talk) 03:05, 3 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Appreciate the help — thanks. I have done a lot of editing but several years ago -- so apparently I need to edit a page more than 10 times and then I will have the ability to add images. So I may do some very minor tinkering on this page (some word rearrangement etc.) so that I meet that threshold. Thanks again for the help! Tmelhus (talk) 17:12, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Potsdam agreement
''"XII. Orderly Transfer Of German Populations

The Three Governments, having considered the question in all its aspects, recognize that the transfer to Germany of German populations, or elements thereof, remaining in Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary, will have to be undertaken. They agree that any transfers that take place should be effected in an orderly and humane manner.

Since the influx of a large number of Germans into Germany would increase the burden already resting on the occupying authorities, they consider that the Control Council in Germany should in the first instance examine the problem, with special regard to the question of the equitable distribution of these Germans among the several zones of occupation. They are accordingly instructing their respective representatives on the Control Council to report to their Governments as soon as possible the extent to which such persons have already entered Germany from Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary, to submit an estimate of the time and rate at which further transfers could be carried out having regard to the present situation in Germany.

The Czechoslovak Government, the Polish Provisional Government and the Control Council in Hungary are at the same time being informed of the above and are being requested meanwhile to suspend further expulsions pending an examination by the Governments concerned of the report from their representatives on the Control Council."''

The transfer of a whole population is called ethnic cleansing, you've never heard of it? 80.136.78.204 (talk) 04:21, 3 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I thank you for your explanation and citation. However, I think ethnic cleansing has the overtone of mass murder or at least extremely bad treatment. If any bad treatment was made, it was because of those making the transfers, not because the treaty required it. The treaty says these transfers should be made in "an orderly and humane manner." Also, the treaty asks that expulsions be suspended pending an examination by the governments concerned. I do not quarrel with your edit except for the use of the term ethnic cleansing. Can you make these edits without using that term? I think it would be less controversial, more accurate and stop any more questions. I also think it would be a good idea to cite the exact provision of the treaty and a reference to it (which you seem to have) so no one else raises this question. Thank you. Donner60 (talk) 04:30, 3 February 2015 (UTC)


 * To clarify: Use of the term ethnic cleansing "according to the treaty". Perhaps it occurred as commonly understood, but not because the treaty required it. Donner60 (talk) 04:33, 3 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Deleted original message on your talk page because of explanation provided and thanked for latest edit. Donner60 (talk) 04:54, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Senusret I
No need to worry about that article for now, because User:Favonian has semi-protected it, but yes, that was Ararat arev. His behavior lately has been to insert "Osiris-Orion son of Ra", or something similar, into articles, often forcing them clumsily into a sentence. It's a small part of his convoluted belief system, which puts Armenia at the center of everything. If you see those words, or similar ones, being inserted, don't hesitate to revert. When there's legitimate reason to explain the relationships in Egyptian religion between Osiris, Orion, and Ra, it should be done much more clearly, not in the cryptic and misleading way Ararat arev does it. A. Parrot (talk) 20:58, 7 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 22:44, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Notability
Hi I'm sure your highly noteable for something but unfortunatley they didnt provide suitable references so it failed to meet WP:GNG ;). Amortias (T)(C) 03:13, 8 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I am not sure about the first but must say that you are correct about failing to meet WP:GNG. Donner60 (talk) 03:15, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Not a Mistake
Unexplained content removal LaSalle, Illinois. There was an edit summary, I believe. Perhaps it was inadequate? I have since looked at edit summary and will be more concise in the future. Please tell me what you would like me to do, so that we may improve this article. --Etemtenem (talk) 18:21, 8 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I left this message on your talk page: I have deleted the above message in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through) because I made a mistake in reverting the edit and leaving the message. I have rolled back my reversion to your latest version. After a few days, I only can say that I must not have focused on the edit summary. If I had, I would have looked further into the article which was where your rewrite was placed. I am very sorry for the mistake and hope this will not discourage you from editing Wikipedia. Donner60 (talk) 22:12, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

February 2015: Való Világ
Hello, I'm Donner60. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Való Világ— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 22:45, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Hello, not sure why you undid my changes. What I wrote is true, anyone can check it by visiting the |the official website of the show. I update this wiki article regularly, I was surprised this contribution was reverted. Rhymane (talk) 11:29, 9 February 2015 (GMT+1)


 * I left this message on your talk page: I am deleting the above message in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through). Your message indicates to me that I did not understand your edit. You have stated that you regularly update this article so I will assume you are keeping it up in good faith. I must say that the edit did not appear to cover a likely event but I will defer to someone who regularly keeps up the article. Admittedly, I am not familiar with the show. I could only judge this on the words included. I could not check this further because the web site is not in English (Hungarian). Again, I will defer to your familiarity and suggest you go ahead with any edits which update the article. I am sorry for any inconvenience. Donner60 (talk) 11:24, 9 February 2015 (UTC)


 * No worries Donner. It's good to know that people monitor the changes to prevent abuse. Have a nice day. Rhymane (talk) 10:06pm, 9 February 2015 (GMT+1) — Preceding undated comment added 21:06, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

In-line skating edit
(donenr60 sorry I couldnt find a way to message you another way so let me tell you something and that is im sorry for the inline skating edit i was just joking around and im sorry im editing this right now plz forgive my bad behavior:)) Kennethplaysmc


 * Left reply and welcome template on user's talk page. Donner60 (talk) 02:56, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Sun News Network
Hi, I revised my comment on Sun Media that you removed. The Sun is a strongly conservative leaning news organization, and with a dwindling viewership with that mindset, they are no longer able to remain on air. Hope this is where it is supposed to reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djenning (talk • contribs) 03:34, 13 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Please see What Wikipedia is not, What Wikipedia is not, Neutral point of view and Citing sources. Thank you. Donner60 (talk) 04:20, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Guy Fieri
Is this not reputable evidence? https://www.facebook.com/pages/Guy-Fieri-and-the-lead-singer-of-Smash-Mouth-are-the-same-person/291774550930662 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.19.116.235 (talk) 03:40, 14 February 2015 (UTC)


 * No. It seems to be a prank page. Also, none of the other sources give this information. Finally, such a Facebook page is not considered a reliable source for such information. See Verifiability. Donner60 (talk) 03:52, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

newkifs
I would greatfully apreciate if you change it back for 5 minutes so I can screenshot it then I will be done. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newkifs (talk • contribs) 03:47, 14 February 2015 (UTC)


 * No, I can't put up information that I know is wrong, even for a few minutes. Donner60 (talk) 03:55, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Editing
Hey, Donner60. I noticed that, you removed most of the writing I did (I believe its reverting), an am just wondering if it wasn't constructive enough. There must have been something wrong with it, so I am asking for your advice on how I can improve it next time. Thanks for reading this! Nyse Vicente


 * I should have explained this better. I will leave a message on your user talk page. Donner60 (talk) 18:54, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Joseph B. Soloveitchik
My edit wasn't a test. I was actually about to put up the citation.71.183.129.253 (talk) 23:12, 17 February 2015 (UTC)


 * OK. I deleted the message on your talk page and suggested you add the reference when you restore the edit. Sorry for any inconvenience. Donner60 (talk) 23:16, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Pyrolysis-2/19
Hello. I do not understand why you find my contribution 'non-constructive' and reverted all of it back. I significantly expanded on the pyrolysis of car tires using several sources. The last edits were a bit repetitive because I was trying to tighten up my language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.124.129.106 (talk) 03:11, 20 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I was concerned about the non-English characters in the edit. I am not sure why these would be needed in the English Wikipedia. I should have explained that instead of using a template. Donner60 (talk) 03:15, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Non-English Characters? One of the academic sources I cited is in Thai and I translated to English. However, the rest of my sources are in English and so are my writing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.124.129.106 (talk) 03:20, 20 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I have deleted my original message on your user talk page. When you restore the edit, I suggest you include this explanation in the footnote so that the origin and purpose is clear. Donner60 (talk) 03:24, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I have restored the edit. However I'm still a bit confused. Are you suggesting that I add it to the reference (I included a translation of the author and title)or the edit summary? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.124.129.106 (talk) 03:34, 20 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I have added the notation to the footnote. However, I notice that the reference is only to the University Department. Is this an article from a journal that could be cited or is it only on the University web site or in some other reference? Donner60 (talk) 03:50, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I am having trouble finding the copy I used. However, I found another copy at http://www.vcharkarn.com/varticle/408, which is an educational website, under 'academic journals' category. I'm not seeing where it is actually published. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.124.129.106 (talk) 04:06, 20 February 2015 (UTC)


 * If the web site has the actual contents of the article which you relied upon, I see no reason not to cite the web site. It would be helpful if that also cited the original publication which you could mention as the source. Donner60 (talk) 04:31, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Noetics
Fallenangelius here – remember the wiki is not just a dictionary but a means for the world to share knowledge, experience, understanding and there are readers who will need explanation. I am sorry you were unable to understand my definition of Noetics but I was merely adding what was missing as the quotes are already there - but then I suppose you have to start somewhere! I am an academic and so much more – I must assume you are a PhD who has somehow managed to get by on quotes alone. If I were you I would avoid plagiarism lawsuits at all costs. I trust you are beginning to appreciate the beauty of pure “Noetic” thought which seems to be so elusive to so many! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fallenangelius (talk • contribs) 23:41, 21 February 2015 (UTC)


 * No personal attacks; No legal threats. Donner60 (talk) 00:12, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Given that Fallenangelius appears to be sincere, I have started a discussion of this addition on the talk page of the article so that we can figure this out. Your input is welcome. Iwilsonp (talk) 23:58, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I left a comment on the talk page. Donner60 (talk) 20:13, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

You've got mail!
ceradon ( talk  •  contribs ) 03:56, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
 * New one! --ceradon ( talk  •  contribs ) 00:07, 25 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Got it and replied. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 01:54, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Hillside Colorado
Donner60

Please revert the edit you performed on this page. I own the town of Hillside and I placed the information on the Wikipedia page as a current assessment of where the town stands and its proximity to other areas in Colorado. If you would like to travel to Hillside and prove me wrong or take pictures and add your own comments I would be more than happy to host you, barring that, you do not have an understanding of this town to make any edits.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hillside colorado (talk • contribs) 14:24, 24 February 2015 (UTC)


 * In response to the above message and restoration of the original edit, I put the following message on your talk page: I won't leave another edit message because apparently you are unfamiliar with some Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Wikipedia does not publish spam, advertising or promotional material. Please confine your editing to facts that do not fall within these categories. Please see What Wikipedia is not and links and What Wikipedia is not and What Wikipedia is not. Thank you. Donner60 (talk) 23:08, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Lalak Jan
to Donner 60 the editing you removed are taken out from different references and true base. i am mentioning the references u can check by your own self pakistan officer book reference — Preceding unsigned comment added by Waji rao (talk • contribs) 23:09, 25 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I left the following message on your talk page: I am deleting this message because you have cited references to me. However, you did not put these references into your edit. Please insert these citations in appropriate places in your edit if you are going to restore it. Also, please put your entire edit above the boxes at the bottom of the page. The links in the following welcome message should give you helpful information about citing sources and about Wikipedia formatting, policy and guidelines. One more thing the addition of "[WAR]" is not understandable to me. Is this supposed to be some sort of reference? If so, it needs more explanation. Thank you. (Welcome message and links placed on your page but not repeated here.) Donner60 (talk) 23:35, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

THanks
For catching the markup copyedit issue at Laboratory Condensers. Cheers. Le Prof — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.15.56.201 (talk) 02:49, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Re: Abomination of Desolation
I provided a reference which contains the reliable source. The 2nd King of Persia died from complications due to an automobile collision. His wife and mother stated concerning his incoherency, not me. When I got to him, he was breathing unconscious only out of one lung with heaving. The date is accurate and pans out to be in alignment with Feast Days in accord with other prophecy.

This is the second time the "Current Reckoning" has been vandalized. Please undo your error in judgment and see to it that it doesn't happen again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.94.152.209 (talk) 02:54, 27 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Not a reliable source. See Identifying reliable sources. Also see Fringe theories. Donner60 (talk) 06:29, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Sally Kern
"but that you didn’t support your changes with a citation to a reliable source." I cited The Journal Record http://journalrecord.com/ founded in 1937 in Oklahoma city http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Journal_Record — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.168.66.175 (talk) 21:50, 27 February 2015 (UTC)


 * See Biographies of living persons and Neutral point of view Donner60 (talk) 21:56, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

I can do this for a while I have so many IP addresses so block all you want. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.229.206.47 (talk) 05:41, 28 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Her views are stated in detail in the article. Potentially libelous name-calling, without even identifying that it was done by an editorial writer, is not only contrary to Wikipedia policies, but totally unnecessary. Donner60 (talk) 07:42, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Richard Armitage and stuff
So basically I'm just having fun. They are dating, everyone knows. I thought it would be fun it a screenshot trended. Sorry if you're annoyed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.74.203.157 (talk) 22:17, 7 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I deleted the original message on your talk page because your note to me indicates you were in good faith. I am left you a welcome message (omitted here) to give you some links to pages that can familiarize you with Wikipedia guidelines, policies and help in editing. I am sure you can appreciate that Wikipedia cannot rely on "common knowledge," even if it is accurately set out. Without a valid reference, anyone could insert any rumor or false report that they wished. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia must hold to a higher standard than a blog or fan site or open comment site. Donner60 (talk) 22:31, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

IceCream Apps is spam
I angrily edited their page to reflect the nature of their spamming operation. I apologize for being angry. They propose to offer free software, instead you have to pay for it. I posted the link and am reposting here where they ask for money. Take a look at the link, and compare the information there to all the references. That page is on their own website! And it contradicts the rest of the mentioned references, which claim the software is completely free and without limits.

Also take a look at their about page. It has no information at all. This is a spamming operation. And they are manipulating wikipedia well. They have a wikipedia page on non-noteworthy software, with zero useful information except a listing of the software features, using their own site as references. They reference other websites which are remarkably similar in message, likely written by themselves. And they are taking advantage of folks who don't have much power combat this misinformation.

I hope you will investigate.

An annoyed user 209.6.201.191 (talk) 22:51, 8 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I am deleted the original message on your user talk page in the manner prescribed by the guidelines because of your explanation. You can put critical information into an article provided it is done in neutral language and is supported by citations from verifiable, reliable sources. Your explanation gives me the impression that you could do this. The following welcome message (on your user talk page; omitted here) contains useful links concerning Wikipedia policies, guidelines and editing help. Donner60 (talk) 00:54, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Domes
I did put a reason in the edit summary; I am trying to cut this huge article down to size per WP:SPLIT. Therefore, I am splitting daughter articles off from Domes. I hope that's a good explanation. RuneMan3 (talk) 03:27, 10 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I left this message on your talk page: I am deleting the above message in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through - in order to show that it is my deletion) because I made a mistake. You did leave an explanation and further explained it on my talk page. I just missed it for some reason. I am sorry about the mistake. Please proceed with your edits. Donner60 (talk) 03:32, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Input?
Hi Donner, I see some content that you removed a while back has been added back in. Do you have any input? Spicemix (talk) 20:20, 10 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I am sorry for the delayed reply but I have been in the hospital for tests for a few days. I have removed the material again. I do not see any relevance to the article for this statement of a rape by a nephew even if he inherited some of the property. Besides that, it was unsourced when it was originally put in the article and it remained unsourced because the bare urls put into the text (improperly) simply referred back to the editing page of the article. I do not watchlist articles in which I find problems when looking at recent changes because they would run into the many thousands, so I can't guarantee that this will not be put back in the article. If it is, I hope someone is watching who will realize it is not supported, really it is not even relevant. Donner60 (talk) 18:19, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your time and expertise, and wishing you the very best of health. Spicemix (talk) 18:44, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

David Willis edit
Hi Donner60 - I'm the person that made the edit to the David Willis (Cartoonist) page. The edit was not a test, but was an attempt to add useful information to the page (although I admit I am not very experienced at editing). The edit was to include details of Willis' current traffic figures for Dumbing of Age, along with a comparison of how this compares to his previous works, based on a post to Willis' tumblr. If you believe I did something incorrectly, please let me know and I will adjust the edit accordingly. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.238.30.41 (talk) 01:41, 20 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I left this message on your talk page: I have deleted the above message in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through) in order to show that I made a mistake with the initial edit. I was responding to your edit of March 19 only, which did not make sense to me out of context. However, I now see that it was a minor correction or addition to your good edit of March 17. I should have notice that. I am sorry for the mistake. I have rolled back my reversion of your edit. I hope you will not be discouraged by this and will continue editing. The links in the following welcome message, which is slightly different than the automated message that usually shows up, may be helpful to you. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. (Welcome message omitted here.) Donner60 (talk) 01:58, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Translation
Hi! Donner60. I want translate French to English https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nukl%C3%A9-Art to English..Can you help me? thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Worldgallery (talk • contribs) 18:17, 20 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I suggest you read Translation. I have never translated any text and can not be more help than to direct you to the Translation page. However, a quick look at that page suggests to me that the information there could be quite helpful. Donner60 (talk) 00:39, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Last surviving Confederate veterans
Hello Donner60 and trust you are well. Regret to say that the unregistered IP in Australia is once again making alterations to Last surviving Confederate veterans. They have made quite a mess of the article, which I have reverted. I suggest that if this starts up again, we get a admin involved, as they refused to enter any discussion you tried to initiate before. Regards, David J Johnson (talk) 18:36, 21 March 2015 (UTC)


 * They have also reverted my edit restoring the text!! 18:42, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Danza de los Voladores
You reverted my edit about "man [seen as] bad entitites". I back-reverted it (is that a word?) to my original edit. 2A01:E34:EF75:CCE0:223:12FF:FE57:5ADD (talk) 10:20, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
 * From the whole paragraph, it makes sense that WOMEN, not men, are considered as bad entities, since they're traditionnaly banned from the Danza.
 * This is quite literally a translation of the first sentence (Consideradas "entes pecadores" [] las mujeres totonacas...) from La Jornada reference.
 * spelling and grammar


 * I left this message on your talk page: I am deleting the above message in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through) because I misread the change by not looking at the entire context and your edit appears to be correct. And I don't know much Spanish but I do know the word "mujeres" which should have been a hint about the edit. I am sorry for the mistake and hope it will not discourage you from editing. Donner60 (talk) 02:07, 31 March 2015 (UTC)