User talk:EvergreenFir/Archive 2

Hello,

I am a student a Lancaster Royal Grammar school who was set a challenge by my history teacher. We were asked to make changes to the schools Wikipedia page and see how long it takes to be changed back in an experiment to discover how well Wikipedia is administrated. I do not believe asking a class full of 13 year old pupils to change a Wikipedia page is good idea as it could easily get out of hand. However I don't believe that a formal warning is fair considering that a teacher at LRGS had asked us to edit the page and report back our discoveries. I, GBfan, Scribble monkey, loleggs, troller74 and GRIMREAPER524 are all students I know of who had been set the same task. As it says on your page, you are a post graduate of sociology in Ohio which is in America therefore I wonder what relevance an English school could be to you and why you would change edits by students who attend the school because although some are obviously illegitimate changes, some could be serious changes that could improve the page and give more up to date information to people who aren't connected to the school like yourself. I would be grateful for the warning to be revoked as we had good reason to change the page as it was a particular interest a teacher had shown and had asked us to find out the information for him instead of him having to do so himself. Also as a numerous amount of students had made changes to the page so we could take an average of our different results to find the most accurate. I hope I speak on behalf of all of my fellow classmates when I say that we have got slightly out of hand in our changes to the schools page. As we were asked to change the page by a higher member of authority at the school I think that it is not as severe as you are making it out to be.

Dr.XXXX — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr.XXXX (talk • contribs) 21:49, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
 * As it is a grammar school you need to know it should be "number of students" not "amount of students".--Charles (talk) 21:54, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
 * For note, Scribble monkey's edits are all constructive. I suspect this user is lying. EvergreenFir (talk) 22:49, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

I have recently edited a page about an American National Historic Home that has been closed due to the recent occurrences of the Federal Governments negotiations regarding the budget. This information was not advertising, but merely to let people know that if they wished to tour the home at this time, they would be unable to gain admission. Clpowers08Clpowers08 (talk) 17:06, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

AnderJ21
Hi I am Anderj21 I do not know how to message you but that edit I made is reasonable because The links are just to the UN website's main page and the NGO websites main page, but after searching for hours I did not find the "official letter" from the UN on either website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnderJ21 (talk • contribs)
 * The section had archived links as well as current ones in the references. There were no unreliable links that you mentioned in the original edit.  Links used are this link and this link. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:14, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Both of those citations are not reliable sources. One is to a PDF of an "official letter", so that does not mean anything. I could create a PDF looking just like that letter saying that Unicorns are taking over the world. Also the Guardian newspaper is known to have misinformed the public numerous times on counts of inaccurate information. If you find the "official letter" on the official NGO website or UN website feel free to post that citation and I will gladly stop deleting it. After all the more accurate wikipedia is the better, and that should be all the editors goal! — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnderJ21 (talk • contribs)
 * The PDF is on the UN website... look at the URL. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:19, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Oops on WWE Hell in a Cell
That was a mistake on me. Sorry. -- Racer X11 Talk to me Stalk me  01:39, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem. The number of edit conflicts and vandalism on that page, it's completely understandable. :) EvergreenFir (talk) 01:55, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Kramer here
Hello Sir, the edits i made to my page today are wholly accurate. someone had posted a pic of a person other than myself, and my birth-name and adoptive name were not correct. i corrected them. the edits i made today were "undone" twice today. this is somewhat annoying. can you perhaps tell me what i need to do, in order to insure that the proper information remains intact, and that whomever is posting the wrong foto of me isn't allow to re-post it?

thanks for your courtesy.

-Kramer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Busterkeatons (talk • contribs) 03:18, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

KRAMER here
HEllo EvergreenFir,

thanks so very much for your message, and YES it helps enormously, and i THINK i understand it all. this is all quite new to me. my daughter tried to explain what she knew about how all this works, but i suppose i didn't absorb it all. i think i do now. I suppose i did make A lot" of changes, but if you compare the edits i made with what was previously there, you'll see that i only adjusted my birth name and adoptive name, and posted my full date of birth, as well as removing that foto of someone else. should i perhaps submit a true foto of myself, so that this doesn't continue to happen? if so, where 9or to WHOM) should i send it? this is not a priority for me unless you think erroneous fotos will continue to be posted. i must confess, i only look at my wiki page when friends email me to say something there is wrong, so...

I do want to follow the rules, but it may take a while for me to absorb them all. as i said, this is all quite new to me. thanks for your understanding. your courtesy is much appreciated.

and thanks for the "Conflict Of Interest" link. am i able to correct mistakes on my page without it being considered a conflict of interest? I have no manager of paid employees who monitor internet content about myself, so it seems i have no C.O.I...am i correct in that assumption?

...just went to that "TALK" page on my wiki page and had the displeasure of reading a very disturbing debate about my self, my work, my personal life...i really don't want to post there. i don't think it's right for me to add comments to such a debate, which is more bickering and nastiness than anything else. I can't get involved with such a dialog. i hope you understand.

Busterkeatons (talk) 03:59, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

-Kramer

Busterkeatons (talk) 03:36, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

The "poopy" usernames
Don't worry. I have blocked them all. You were right to report them; sometimes (particularly on Sundays) people from 4chan or wherever try to see if we're paying attention like we say we do. You were, and so was I. Daniel Case (talk) 04:30, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

I consider them among the rare category of block-on-sight per the username hardblock template. Report them even if they don't edit as using language unambiguously referring to excrement is offensive regardless of the words used. Daniel Case (talk) 20:25, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Haven Wiki
I noticed that you undid my recent changes to Bad Blood (Haven) and Douen. Yes I am affiliated with http://www.havenmaine.wikia.com, I am an editor there. I have absolutely zero connection with the show or anyone on it. I have as great a connection to the Haven Wiki as I do any Haven website that allows for editable details, I've also fixed things at Haven's IMDb pages. I am aware of wikipedia's relevant policies (WP:NPOV, WP:COI and WP:EL), and that's precisely why I created a specialised account for these edits. There's noting particularly nefarious going on here; I simply like the television show Haven and I like it enough to edit wiki pages on it. I know that there's a great difference between what wikipedia considers appropriate content for it's pages on television shows and episodes and what a wiki specialising in that show does. But as long as I follow the policies of the wikis I edit on, I see no reason why I can't edit the pages for the shows I'm a fan of at any wiki. There tends to be a certain amount of overlap between editors who edit television project pages here and editors at wikis centred around those shows. And it is pretty standard for television show articles on wikipedia to link to the relevant page at the wiki for the show. The Haven pages on wikipedia need a fair amount of work. Most of them don't even have a project box for the relevant wikiprojects (TV and Horror) on the talk pages and the pages on individual articles really need to be trimmed, have appropriate references added and include a couple links to the page for the show on outside websites. Right now they have no external links and they need them. HavenWikiWiki (talk) 19:59, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013
Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made&#32;to Grojband: you may already know about them, but you might find Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 15:09, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the info! I typically do try to use the templates available on Twinkle but I must have forgotten in that case. EvergreenFir (talk) 01:21, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 01:30, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
 * By the way, I'm still wondering about something from a while back: how come you never responded at User talk:Dogmaticeclectic/Archives/2013/08 even though I left you a talkback? Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 01:32, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Wow, I honestly don't remember that. I probably saw it, thought "I'll reply in a few minutes" and just never got to it.  Or got distracted by enabling Twinkle.  Sorry about that.  Because of your message, I did start using Twinkle and have asked questions on the Teahouse a few times.  Thank you for welcoming me and showing me those tools.  I do really appreciate that.  :)  Thanks again! EvergreenFir (talk) 01:38, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Semi?
Hi, EvergreenFir. Your userpage seems to be something of a magnet for nonsense from throwaway accounts. Would you like it semiprotected? Bishonen &#124; talk 15:15, 11 October 2013 (UTC).
 * For now, I will leave it but I might ask for it in the future. Thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) 01:19, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Clarification
Regarding your reverting my removal of the most recent edits at Talk:List of countries where French is an official language, I understand that you are not a sockpuppet (apologies if you thought otherwise), but the only other person having the conversation with you is a confirmed serial socker. If you would like their edits to stay there that's fine, however leaving the conversation on the page serves as an enticement for more socks to pick up where the blocked one left off. --Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 18:55, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see what you mean. Can I just remove that sockpuppet's comment but leave the proposal?  I know it might attract more socks in the future, but I'll be sure to report them if I see them. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:58, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure thing. Sorry for the confusion!--Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 19:00, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

hello evelyn well im reallly sorry if your offended i changed your asa butterfield picture i just thouht i would put amore recent one on but i dont know how to you see i just joined an hour ago and i just want to change pictures to more recent ones im sorry if i did anything just wanted to explain

-editingpolicy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editingpolicy (talk • contribs) 16:56, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Sorry
Im not the only one on this pc. i will mention this to my family to make sure there is no false editing.NoelPickles (talk) 22:51, 12 October 2013 (UTC)NoelPicklesNoelPickles (talk) 22:51, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Carmen Agra Deedy page
Hi EvergreenFir,

I am trying to get more accurate information on the Carmen Agra Deedy page - you reversed my edit saying it broke a ton of links and made redirect links... I'm new at this but the links all seem fine when I look at that revision. Can you give me any more info on what I can avoid when I try this again? I'd like to improve the page without breaking anything.

Hopefully this is the right way to communicate with you.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by LlamaStory (talk • contribs) 23:45, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Black Sabbath is now blocked
Howdy,

He vandalized my user page too. I reported him and he is now blocked. --Wlmg (talk) 18:32, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know! EvergreenFir (talk) 20:02, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Gravity Falls
Hi. Why did you delete my edits? I thought they were good faith. If they are not, then tell me why they are not.98.169.63.91 (talk) 22:10, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi
I'm so glad to meet a fellow sociologist and genderqueer. How are you-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 02:16, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi! Great to meet a kindred spirit!  I'm doing okay, but super stressed.  About to do prelim exams (need to pass them before I move on to my dissertation phase).  How about you? EvergreenFir (talk) 19:35, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm good. I'm mostly watching anime right now. What branches of sociology do you study? Do you have any other interests?-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 23:09, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm specializing in criminology and gender. Most of my interest has been in gender, but I'm branching out.  For the past few month, I've not had time for much else beyond studying, but I do edit on Wikia a fair amount and watch cartoons.  I love gardening too, but with the fall and winter, that's not a possibility.  How about you?  Are you still in school?  EvergreenFir (talk) 23:13, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * My specialty is race and ethnicity, gender and sexualities, religions and disabilities. I just love sociology. My real focus is on anything and everything conflict theory. Outside of sociology I love the arts everything from painting and literature to television shows and opera. I just love seeing what humans are able to create. What is studying criminology like?-Rainbowofpeace (talk) 23:48, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm very sorry
The vandalism I made to your account was not acceptable and I apologize upon further notice. This account is essential to me as a student and I take it seriously. Once again, sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HarvardGraduate7 (talk • contribs) 23:27, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
He's scrutinizing the new user log, just like you! Thanks!

-- Wywin (talk &#124; contribs) 19:36, 7 November 2013 (UTC) 

...
I own that site that I edited with on Bali. Just because I'm Hispanic, it does not mean that you can racially abuse me. DRGENITALIA (talk) 07:26, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 * There was no racial abuse or any personal comment. You added copyright material, even if it is your web page. You have a conflict of interest so shouldn't be adding your web page, and in any case the material was unencyclopedic. Dougweller (talk) 11:54, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you Dougweller. EvergreenFir (talk) 16:00, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of organizations designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center as hate groups, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New World Order (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Marriage in Islam
Please have a look onto the discussion page. --Metron (talk) 12:37, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

UAA
Hi,

While I appreciate your work in keeping the base of usernames professional and neutral, accounts usually won't be blocked until and unless they've been recently used. This applies especially to usernames that aren't particularly derogatory toward an individual (having "gay" in the name is usually problematic, but any such user is unlikely to edit if they haven't within the first few hours). Further, if an admin declines to block for a reason backed by policy, it's not advisable to readd your request. Thanks for understanding, and I look forward to seeing your continued efforts. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 22:14, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Offensive, or potentially offensive, usernames with no edit histories
Funny this should come up between you and Julian—he lives (or at least did) in the same region as me, and while I've only met him once offline I consider him someone I know socially. I have known him for quite a few years, and to see him getting back to being more active again is IMO a good thing for the project. So, I defer to his judgement on how he handles the reports in front of him.

I'm perhaps a bit more likely to consign offensive names that haven't edited to a username hard block. But it depends on how egregious they are. Once there was a "I like to eat hot nigger twat" (yes, that was a real username), which I think I blocked within a minute or two of creation. Absolutely no question there.

But something like "Gaypotatoes" ... is that offensive? Just because it has the word "gay" in it? Are gay people likely to take offense to it? I'm not sure. I'm not gay and wouldn't presume to speak for that community, but I think I could safely predict the answer would be in the negative.

Julian has a point worth taking when he talks about how the obscurity such a name remains in when we don't take action may actually be a better way of suppressing it than taking action. He doesn't link to Streisand effect, but it's worth understanding in this context. I may not always agree, but I accept his judgement there. Daniel Case (talk) 04:31, 28 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your reply. I gave myself a couple days to think and then just didn't have time to write a full reply for a day.  I agree that minor infractions of potentially offensive names like "gaypotatoes" need not be blocked immediately.  And the two usernames I reported fall into this category.  What I was upset about was their dismissal with the "no edits" explanation.  It had seemed that Julian was just removing them for lack of edits, not because their names weren't that bad.  And I do agree with Julian that we don't want to give them too much airtime.  I will focus on reporting more egregious names if they don't have edits (e.g., I reported Rapeface1999 the other day).  I'll report names like "gaypotatoes" if they are being disruptive and/or offensive in their edits as well as the combination of their name and their behavior seems like it would be enough to warrant administrator attention.
 * TL;DR - I'm okay with all this so long as truly offensive names are still banned without edits (as the name itself is grounds for banning and those aren't the kind of people we want on WP). Cheers!  EvergreenFir (talk) 01:26, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Permanent ban
Personally, I could care less if you ban me, but I have not made any personal attacks. Your definition of a personal attack is absurd. Your accusations that I am obnoxious and incivil are nonsense. You are simply taking sides in a debate.Pistolpierre (talk) 17:04, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Just a note as I was looking at your reply to me on the unrelated matter above. You really shouldn't have removed this edit per WP:REFACTOR; removal of personal attacks should really be left to the user who made the personal attack, as long as they indicate that they did so (I usually just use strikethroughs on the rare occasions I've felt it necessary to eat my own ill-chosen words). Daniel Case (talk) 02:39, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Daniel Case - Thank you. I was under the impression that removal of personal attacks and "forum" things was okay, now I know.  Is the removal of "forum" stuff okay?  Or should that be dealt with like this or this?  How about advertizing?  Sorry, just want to make sure I am not refactoring. EvergreenFir (talk) 03:14, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, things like that can be done to whole discussions. Individual remarks should be left to the person making them to deal with. My way of looking at it is, if you have to clean up your own mess, you're less likely to make them. Daniel Case (talk) 03:18, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Many times they will not "clean up their own mess". I have seen, over time, personal attacks removed by admins (although usually it is a whole statement that is removed) or stricken through, as well. Kierzek (talk) 21:44, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Notability
Hi, I see you think there might be a notability issue with one (or both?) of my recent additions to Deaths in 2013? Which one do you think is problematic? Best regards,--Mycomp (talk) 07:50, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I just noticed that the page says they must be "notable enough to have their own page". I imagine that if they have their own page on the Japanese wiki, that's good enough.  But on the English wiki they don't.  That was my only concern.  Cheers! EvergreenFir (talk) 18:06, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=584092866 your edit] to BlueStacks may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:07, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
 * launched May 25, 2011, at the Citrix Synergy conference in San Francisco. Citrix CEO Mark Templeton demonstrated an early version of BlueStacks onstage and

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=585964310 your edit] to Ryōko Kinomiya may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:41, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Expand Japanese|来宮良子|date=December 2013}

Waitakere Hospital
Please advise why you have reverted my edits to Waitakere Hospital information updated on 29 November 2013? Thanks Qtowner (talk) 22:50, 1 December 2013 (UTC)Qtowner
 * You removed information without explaining why. This article has been subject to edits by people with a conflict of interest and promotional edits.  Your edit appeared to be in the same vein as those edits. EvergreenFir (talk) 23:08, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks - the removal was of information from 2006 that is no longer the situation at this hospital. I will re-edit and update the factual information that is now current and leave any previous information that is no longer correct there. Qtowner (talk) 22:10, 2 December 2013 (UTC)qtowner
 * Thanks for the explanation! EvergreenFir (talk) 22:43, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Verifxn
You tagged Verifxn for deletion under multiple criteria, including WP:CSD. This article has been deleted several times before, but always as a speedy deletion, never as the result of an AFD discussion. G4 only applies to articles that were deleted by discussion, and then reposted with substantially the same content as before. For articles that were previously speedily deleted, check to see if a speedy deletion criterion applies to the present version. (In this case, both G11 and G12 apply.) WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:21, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
 * WikiDan61 - Ah, okay. Thanks for letting me know.  I was just looking for a way to indicate that the article has been previous created and deleted a few times. EvergreenFir (talk) 14:37, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your information. Next time I shall select the title of writing new article carefully when there are no way to change title propertly. And avoid to effect further amendments if triggered many negative feedback when this can be so foolish to do so when people will focus on monitor active thing rather than inactive poor articles there. My second article the title Multiway data analysis seem selected in the right direction, so I spend a very little time on this. So if I follow the method of selecting proper name of article as same as my second article, the problem shall be removed. Mgt88drcr (talk) 03:38, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Ramdomeditss
account does not seem to exist. Was this your intent on wp:aiv? Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 07:42, 7 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I mentioned them because I saw the accounts were created in the log (see here). Just wanted to point them out to the admins instead of filing a sock report. :) They aren't active yet, but they are clearly the same user. EvergreenFir (talk) 07:45, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
 * A log! Learned something! Thanks Jim1138 (talk) 07:51, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

TheBambooPoo doesn't like you
Why did you mess up my contributions? They had validity to them and contained hard work. Please refrain from smothering creativity and originality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheBambooPoo (talk • contribs)
 * Because they were vandalism. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:49, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Immediate block can and should be sought
Hey EvergreenFir. I just wanted to let you know that when you come upon an editor like Mormonpride333 posting blatant racist hate speech, you can report immediately to WP:AIV. Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy. Any admin worth their salt would block this account in a second (without the need for any slavish adherence to the normal warning scheme or even a single warning having been left), and it would be good if that did occur as fast as possible given the nature of the edits. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 06:06, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for letting me know. Still trying to figure out the balance of AGF, templating, etc.   I knew it was egregious, and even looked up how to do a courtesy blanking... but didn't want to overstep bounds.  I'll be sure to use AIV in the future though.  Thanks!  :) EvergreenFir (talk) 07:03, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Anytime! Thanks for the page patrolling. We certainly need the help. Please feel free to contact me directly for any reason.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:35, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Invitation
We need more people with your tenacity and interest in improving WIkipedia articles related to Cleveland and the Greater Cleveland Area. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 17:21, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the invite! I'll check it out! EvergreenFir (talk) 22:09, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Unexplained reversion
I don't understand why you made this edit. You realise, don't you, that the category had just been added today, and removed a few minutes later? In any case, please provide edit summaries for reversions like this. StAnselm (talk) 21:57, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I hadn't realized until I looked at the history after your revert. I'll be sure to provide edit summaries in the future. EvergreenFir (talk) 22:08, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, shucks. I think I neglected to add a summary for my comments on your helpful undo to the Alaska Political Corruption Page. I appreciate your vigilance. Given your description of your interests, you might find a search on Rick Seiter useful. He does not have a Wikipedia page Activist (talk) 16:32, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

How are you?
It seems like a cold winter, but too bad there's no snow where I live. What do you like to do in your spare time? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.19.163.225 (talk) 17:58, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of Elias Haddad
I've deleted this page as a copyright infringement. However, i thought it was worth just mentioning a couple of things about deletion processes to you, based on your edits to the page. Firstly, if a PROD tag is removed, you cannot replace it; even if it has expired, even if the user who removed it has a conflict of interest. Once it's gone, it's gone, period. Secondly, G4 is only applicable if an AFD discussion has previously taken place and concluded that the page should be deleted - prior deletion for other reasons, such as PROD or (in this case) CSD do not mandate a G4 tag. Hope this helps clear things up. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  10:05, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

An edit yesterday at the Manga talk page
Hi. Yesterday you edited the Manga talk page, and said that you had contacted an admin for advice. Please reply and tell me that admin's username, as it is time for me to contact an admin. Speling12345 (talk) 9:34, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Jesus lede edits
Hi, thanks for commenting on the proposed Jesus lede edit on Talk:Jesus! I noticed that you made another revert on the article here. We need to avoid continuing the edit war on this page, or we will need to protect the page or block users. I'd like to get a good discussion going, I hope that you (and Dr.K.) might be able to take on some part of setting that up on the talk page. We can work from what's already been talked about there for sure. Definitely though refrain from reverting any more on the article. Cheers, Prodego  talk  02:12, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Definitely not my intention to edit war. After Dr.K undid my edit we went to the talk page. I did see others were warring though. I appreciate your vigilance and will be cautious in my edits on that page (I know it's already a high traffic page on top of its upcoming feature). Cheers. EvergreenFir (talk) 03:26, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
 * PS mentioning you here since my phone freezes on your user talk page when I try to leave a talk back message. EvergreenFir (talk) 03:34, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
 * So you are telling me I need to archive my talk page then? :) I'm sure you didn't intend to edit war, and I don't mean to say you did either: we just all need to stop reverting so it doesn't go on! I'll try to participate on the talk page, but I'm a bit inactive lately so it will mostly but up to you all to figure out what's best. Prodego  talk  04:45, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

HI 2
In MY Best OF Knowledge The next episode of Sam and Cat is #Lumpatious nut wikipedia shows it magic atm. Lumpatious air on January 4 and the episode cod is 122  — Preceding unsigned comment added by SamCATfan (talk • contribs) 04:55, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * My main concern is that the episode had citation, namely http://www.thefutoncritic.com/showatch/sam-and-cat/listings/. If you have a better source that says it's not the next episode, please share it. :) EvergreenFir (talk) 04:57, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * my source check the image http://prntscr.com/2b7ng1 --SamCATfan (talk) 05:18, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay! Please start a discussion on the Talk:List_of_Sam_%26_Cat_episodes.  Others can weigh in and consensus can be reached on what to do. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:50, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Lou Spudhole here...
Hey guy! why did you delete my comments on the "Shores" page. http://fantasy.nfl.com/league/886741#leagueHomeStandings=leagueHomeStandings%2C%2Fleague%2F886741%253FstandingsTab%253Dstandings%2Creplace you can clearly see Brian's team did finish in last and did die of AIDS! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lou spudhole (talk • contribs) 05:35, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
 * That page is about the band, not a fantasy football team. Also, it's notable if true. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:41, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
 * If Brian had his own page would it be considered "notable" information? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lou spudhole (talk • contribs) 06:06, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Frankly, I don't think so. Moreover, the link you give doesn't say anything about a team dying of AIDS... nor can I locate any team that is Brian's. In other words, stop with the trolling nonsense please. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:09, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

will ross here
ok, so you don't like the photo i posted. i find it curious that you think a bland solo photo clumsily cropped from a group picture "seems better" than the excellent photo i posted of the lt. governor with churchill. it's clear i have a bias because the lt.gov. is my great-grandfather; by the same token, i have access to some excellent photos. i have another one of him with the prince of wales at the dedication of union station in toronto in 1927. plus i have been posting wikipedia content for about 7 years (wdr3). and i am not a student on assignment, i'm a technical editor with decades of professional writing experience. in the photo i posted the two subjects are clearly at the ontario government office building, the lt. gov. is hosting a visiting mp in his capacity as lt. gov., and the photo is historically interesting because this is during the month long visit to canada by churchill following the conservative defeat in the 1929 united kingdom parliamentary elections. that is, churchill had just stepped down after several years as united kingdom chancellor of the exchequer. this is the start of his so-called "wilderness years." also, look at the other lt. gov. photos, many are suboptimal. i see no good reason for you to arbitrarily change the photo. i'm changing it back because i think you're just measuring how long it takes for your interference to be noticed. by wdr3, a small time wikipedia contributor over many years, and a community volunteer not on school assignment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.142.37.160 (talk) 23:28, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

will ross continuing: dear evergreen fir, i see you are hiding behind wikiprocess so i'll just talk in the open to force this discussion to be civil. i agree with your observation that a solo photo is typically best for a govt figure. but you did not say that in the first place, all you said was "it seems better," which is an unsupported opinion. in response to your unsupported opinion i offered a cogent explanation why the photo i posted is better. but you ignored everything i said and instead played a behind the scenes conflict of interest card. is that good faith or simply combative? it's true, i am a relative of the fellow in the picture (i even have the same name!), but i presented three neutral reasons why the replacement photo i supplied was more relevant to the context of his role as lt. gov, reasons that have nothing to do with my relationship, and reasons that pass all of the neutrality tests. if you think my reasons are not neutral, then explain which one fails the neutrality test. here's a quick summary (1) the photo is on the job at the govt office, (2) the photo is of the gov in his official capacity, and (3) it's interesting because it has churchill in it. [aside, your comment that people cannot tell which person is churchill and which one is ross is specious because i included a caption of the two people in the correct order. but your argument that people can't tell which one is ross is red herring pseudologic that is orthogonal and not substantive to the issue. seriously, lt. gov. ross is a relative nobody, working his way up from nova scotia farm boy to a minor regional role within ontario in his era, while sir winston churchill is on the short list for "man of the century". end aside.] if your only objection is that it is not a solo photo, then i can produce a solo photo. as i mentioned, i have many photos of lt. gov. ross. btw, since you are concerned about solo photos as a rule to be observed, are you going to track through the other lt. gov. photos? many are not solo shots. anyway, i'll have another photo for you shortly. where shall i send it so you can comment on it? [wr - aka "wdr3"] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wdr3 (talk • contribs) 01:06, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Mr. Ross. I templated you with a COI because you do have one.  The template does not assume anything, just informing users that they must be cautious in their edits.  I stand my by orthogonal pseudologic; I think you generously overestimate people's ability.  Most people couldn't pick Churchill out of a lineup.  I have no problem with the image you added, just that I've usually seen articles about people having solo images in the lead or infobox.  But I looked through the guidelines and can't find anything that stipulates that.  If you really want to add that image, feel free.  I did find this guideline about using your own images.  Just thought I'd share since you said they were your images. EvergreenFir (talk) 01:21, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
 * dear ef - you are sooooo right about people's ability to identify historic figures in a lineup. or even to place them in the correct culture, century or continent. but i sought to anticipate that concern by use of a caption. the image is not "mine" - it was a present to my father from wdr1 (his grandfather). i scanned it into a jpg many years ago, and i am unaware of what the copyright status may be for an ontario provincial government photo taken in 1929 (i.e., 84 years ago). my solution was to look up the wikimedia guidelines for ip, then to post the photo to my flickr account (wdr3) using the correct creative commons license for release via wikimedia, and then i uploaded the photo to wikimedia commons.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wdr3 (talk • contribs) 01:49, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me! The copyright stuff is beyond my ken, I must admit.  Well, as I said, I won't oppose you adding the image since I can't find any guidelines regarding the issue and it is apparently my own personal taste.  Cheers! EvergreenFir (talk) 02:00, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
 * dear ef - maybe you can point me at a resource to resolve an issue. i checked the ip guidelines for images and i concluded that the image needed to get onto wikimedia commons before it could be posted to the article. but wikimedia commons would not let me log in with my wikipedia user id. so i created a rogue id just to post the image. how can i get someone to troubleshoot my user id issue between wikimedia commons and wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wdr3 (talk • contribs) 02:20, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

actual company spelling is "filet"
"Chargrilled Chicken Filet (no bun)"  etc.  Collect (talk) 21:26, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Moving this to the talk page where it belongs. EvergreenFir (talk) 21:28, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Conversation
Was that conversation I had heard a few ago? I wasn't sure.71.35.24.48 (talk) 04:40, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Revert in mens rights movement
Hey EvergreenFir, I reverted your revert to my edit on the mens rights movement article and wanted to ping your talk page so we don't get into some revert war. I removed the concept of backlash from the sumamry as I feel its insufficiently expanded upon. That is to say, I feel its important to note that mrm is often seen as a backlash to the excesses of the feminist movement (things like custodial laws) rather than the "basic" feminist movement (things like voting rights). In your revert comment you say "move where you will" but you feel that the concept belogns in the article. Prior to my edit it was in two places, summary and "relation to feminism" section. I feel that only the second is sufficient. Lemme know? Perpetualization (talk) 15:21, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Your explanation is appreciated, despite you using the time to bash feminism. Another user reverted your edit though. EvergreenFir (talk) 21:35, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I made no attempt to bash feminism. Custodial laws are complex.  When I saw "the excesses of the feminist movement," I am using the language that mens rights activists use - not expressing my own view.  I have edited the page further to reflect the full context that is later in the article. Perpetualization (talk) 09:18, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Men's rights movement probation notice
Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Men's rights movement, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Talk:Men's rights movement/Article probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages. ''The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is necessarily any problem with your edits. Thank you.'' -- Bbb23 (talk) 02:50, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I am aware.  AFAIK, I didn't violate anything, just undid an incorrect edit (specifically the "women's movement" part).  I know there's a 1RR rule on that article.  If I've done something incorrect, please let me know.  Might just stay away from that article and work on feminists articles anyhow. EvergreenFir (talk) 02:55, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
 * You did nothing wrong. I just wanted to make sure you were aware of the rules.--Bbb23 (talk) 03:00, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) 03:01, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Edit - Millionaire
I edited the "Who Wants to be a Millionaire? (US Version)" page due to the fact that it says "country of origin: United States... well, that is FALSE. It originated in the UK and needs to be NOTED AS ORIGINATING IN THE UK. The game show franchise is all based from the original mother show "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?" from the UK and is now owned by 2waytraffic. Thank you. I will continue to edit the page until you get tired of fixing it on your own error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BugleBoi (talk • contribs)
 * It's mentioned in the first sentence of the article. The show is produced in the US, so that's it's origins. The show it's based off is different.  Do you see the distinction? EvergreenFir (talk) 07:16, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0aMrkbUAxQ
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI2SXUzMFtQ
 * No. It is the EXACT same game show. The originating formats where exactly the same. Same music, same graphics, same lifelines, same logo (different currencies.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BugleBoi (talk • contribs) 07:20, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I recommend you bring up the issue on the talk page. There people who follow that page can weigh in on the change. If you're right, there should be lots of consensus. EvergreenFir (talk) 07:25, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Your edit is being Discussed
Please see Racism where your edit is being discussed on the talk page. --Inayity (talk) 18:52, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Illegal Conspiracy Writing
Part Owner Of Wikipedia

Please Refrain From Inappropriate Behavior

Inappropriate Definitions

Looking Persons Up On Internet With Out Consent

Writing Slander — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aeprime (talk • contribs) 22:08, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Reporting Individuals
I was posting legitimate information on the Fort Fairfield, Maine page. This is my hometown and there has been an update on who the superintenedent of the MSAD #20 district is, hence why I edited this to Hannah Holbrook. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lickingrainbows420 (talk • contribs) 04:21, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Evil Creature: AKA U
Why you be hatin? I thought we were bros, like so close and everything. You be reporting me. Whacho prob wid me? I ain't doin notin 2 u. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lickingrainbows420 (talk • contribs) 06:26, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Please advise on reason for revert on Bedford_Road_Collegiate
I was requested by the Saskatoon Public School Division to make edits on behalf of them. The previous page has an old logo which people are taking offence to, and I need to get the clarification onto the wikipedia ASAP.

Please advise why this page was reverted: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedford_Road_Collegiate.

Thanks.

Microtic (talk) 12:18, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Hello. Is there anything online on a school website that can be used as a source?  You cited the "46th Annual BRIT 2014 Program", but I can't find a copy anywhere.  I reverted your edits because it appeared to be a direct quote.  It also wasn't not neutral in its wording.  Claims about a 1920s reporter need some outside citation, as do other questionable claims.  EvergreenFir (talk) 19:46, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I took what you added and whittled it down to be more encyclopedic. I removed anything that sounded like an essay, was not neutral, or sounded dubious.  Any sources that I can add would be useful (esp. for that 1920s claim). EvergreenFir (talk) 19:59, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Re: Talk: Adventure Time
Just because I do not believe that SpongeBob SquarePants is not very comprehensive enough, so I've been keep selecting SpongeBob and Adventure Time back and fourth at the Animation portal, but I believe that SpongeBob is pretty much lower then Adventure Time. JJ98 (Talk) 20:07, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It's at Portal:Animation/Selected article/13, and at Portal:Cartoon Network/Selected article/6. JJ98 (Talk) 20:43, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Question
Hi EvergreenFir, I was wondering, would the reviewer userright be something that could be useful to you? You seem as though you'd be someone who would make good use of it, based on all the great work that you do. If yes, I'd be happy to grant it; if not, no worries. :) Best. Acalamari 11:48, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Done. Don't worry, reviewing edits is easy; you'll be fine. :) You're welcome for the compliments! Acalamari 21:36, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Jeromethebassist
That username should not have been reported to the Username board. While the link in his one sole eddit was to a website with the name Jerome in it..it's significantly different enough to be allowable. You may still wish to template a COI welcome though it may help. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 04:00, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
 * You are correct. I misread the url. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:03, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Yoko Ono GAN
What do you mean it wasn't complete? A bot puts it on that list not me, don't go by that. Please don't delete the GAN tag on the page. thanks--Aichik (talk) 21:25, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

March 27
I am interested to understand why you have accepted revisions to March 27 that I rejected. See  Could you explain your reasoning? Lineslarge (talk) 20:57, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It didn't appear to be vandalism and seemed plausible. While I usually double check, my understanding is that we don't have to check if the edits are correct or not, just if they are not vandalism, libel, etc.  But you are correct in your edit that they do not appear to be correct, so I reverted.  Thanks for alerting me. EvergreenFir (talk) 21:43, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for getting back to me. You are correct that reviewing does not require accuracy to be checked, I just happened to notice the discrepancy on this occasion. Lineslarge (talk) 22:08, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * And you were totally right to point it out. The day pages are protected due to subtle vandalism so I'll be sure to take a closer look in the future.  Cheers! EvergreenFir (talk) 01:45, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Naga, Camarines Sur
Thank you for appreciating this edit. It is good to know that there is support for this kind of clean up. But right now it is just me reverting the POV and propaganda, so it starts to look like an edit war. Can I ask you to keep an eye on Naga, Camarines Sur, for a while as well? Thanks again, -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:55, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Sure thing! I have it on my watchlist. Thanks for cleaning it up! EvergreenFir (talk) 18:22, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:11, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

bayern munich
in english wiki, in common put popular o short name above the inforbox, look history "FC" was just added until 25 january. Bayern Munich is correct! https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=FC_Bayern_Munich&action=history — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scoelho86 (talk • contribs)
 * Okay! I'll undo my edit.  Thanks for pointing that out. EvergreenFir (talk) 03:14, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Original research re-learning curve
Thank you (this is a complement, right?)! :D EvergreenFir (talk) 22:10, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it is. I couldn't keep my acerbic tongue in check for nearly a year. Even worse, my concept of NOR was linear, but conspicuously lateral.


 * I couldn't help but notice how helpful and pleasant you are with other contributors and was full of admiration. A civility barnstar seemed inadequate. For all I know, you've taken up axe-murdering for relaxation... Whatever it is you do to maintain your good disposition, it's working. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 23:41, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you! :D EvergreenFir (talk) 04:48, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

hello EvergreenFir Re: your edit of gay bathhouse page
Hey EvergreenFir,

I admit I am upset right now. On 25th of January you removed an external link at the gay bathhouse to the website gaysaunas.net, with a note 'seem to be more advertising than information'. Do you have any idea how much work it is to create and permantly update a directory for websites of all gay saunas in the world? Every month manually check all websites if they still exist, searching for new gay saunas... Why you don't respect other peoples work? It takes you seconds to remove a link, but it takes hundreds of hours to create and maintain a directory. And don't you think that visitors of the gay bathhouse page want to know which saunas exist today? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.8.60.51 (talk) 14:31, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks....
No idea what happened here - I don't think I messed it up that bad without technical assistance from the database engine. Thanks for fixing it! --Stephan Schulz (talk) 22:08, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The database engine is always so helpful! :D  EvergreenFir (talk) 22:09, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Quick thanks
Thank you for doing the leg work of well sourcing the commonality of the term on the abortion talk page! I appreciated that and thought it warranted a quick thanks! Nickmxp (talk) 03:51, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * No problem. Was getting really annoyed at the WP:IDHT and wanted to support the general point you were making.  EvergreenFir (talk) 04:11, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Re: Mass moves
There are bots that can do mass moves. Check with the bot department. The Transhumanist 20:28, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. Can you point me to the bot department? This is for Wikia, not Wikipedia, btw. Thanks again! EvergreenFir (talk) 22:35, 2 February 2014 (UTC)


 * WP:BOTS The Transhumanist 02:30, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 41st Annie Awards, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages The Walt Disney Studios, Star Wars: The Clone Wars and Frozen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Bushmen
Sorry, but coming immediately after pejorative terms like "Hottentot", it would be weird to object to "Bushmen". Both are appropriate in context. BTW, "San" is also an exonym and also offensive. — kwami (talk) 18:41, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your input. I was not aware San is an exonym.  But if the page was moved to San, I don't see why the article shouldn't reflect that.  Really we should discuss this on the article's talk page.  Honestly, I don't have a strong feeling one way or the other about this though.  EvergreenFir (talk) 18:45, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
 * The original names should remain until we decide. But the names Hottentot and Bushmen go together historically, as do Khoikhoi and San.  It would be very odd to say Hottentot and San.  If we want to clean up racially offensive words, we should do it across the board (and Hottentot is far worse than Bushman), but if anywhere, an article on racism is where you might expect words like this.  — kwami (talk) 18:49, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Inio Asano
Okay, so I clearly screwed up here. Thanks for the correction! In my (perhaps unnecessary) defense, I was acting in a reviewer capacity and didn't read the entire article, because I was only reviewing for vandalism. I checked the quoted source and did a quick Google Image search. Obviously I found the exception to the rule! Curious though, in this case the user changed a gender pronoun that exists in a printed reference. Per MOS:QUOTE, we typically remain faithful to the original text, and only modify quotes for minor grammatical/spelling conformity. In matters related to gender identity, are we to refactor quotations, or should brackets be employed a la, "Leonard Maltin said of Lana Wachowski, '[she] has an enviable, optimistic vision of the future'"? (quote is made-up). Or alternatively, should we edit the quotation to use only the relevant portion, a la: "Leonard Maltin wrote that Lana Wachowski has 'an enviable, optimistic vision of the future'"? If you have any info about this, I'm eager to learn. Thanks Evergreen. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:24, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey there! No worries at all.  I didn't know she was a transwoman until I came across the article as a reviewer.  Had to dig into Google near the bottom of the first page of results to find for sure what she identified as.  I'm not sure about quote/identity... that's a tough one.  Perhaps we remove the quote and paraphrase instead and sidestep the whole issue?  The brackets would work too imho.  Maybe asking an admin for input, or the Teahouse?  EvergreenFir (talk) 05:37, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I think maybe snipping past the pronoun might be a good way to go, because we'll still get the positive criticism without the baggage. I'm not sure where to go to get long-term clarification, though. Maybe WikiProject LGBT studies? I'll take a snip at the article in the interim. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:42, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
 * UPDATE: Okay, geez, why am I not paying attention tonight? The pronoun is deep inside the quotation so I can't snip around it. I'll do brackets and see what the response is at an appropriate LGBT project. I'll keep you posted. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:44, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey, I posted a question here Hopefully the community has already figured this out! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:11, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

P. J. Patterson
Remove the restriction. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:P._J._Patterson#The_TCI_Court_Order_and_Hate-Mail.28Paul_Azan.29_Lawsuit_are_not_related — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.30.49.19 (talk) 16:30, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Thomas Ferrick
Hi, I freely admit I often do not understand the inclusion/exclusion logic on the "Deaths in ___" pages, so apologies if I'm missing something. But I added Thomas Ferrick the founder of the Harvard Humanists on January 23, with an large featured obit in a major newspaper. You removed it in this edit saying his bio had been deleted as not notable in 2009. Could you dig up a link to that AFD discussion, as I cannot for the life of me find it in the AFD archives. I'd like to see what was discussed at that time. (And if you can clarify the policy on deaths for me, that would be cool too - it seems like 7 days isn't very long to give anyone a chance to create the guy an article. And its entirely possible the notability argument in 2009 would not be the same in 2013). Cheers. --Krelnik (talk) 18:53, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi there! I removed it because after a month if a name is still redlinked we remove it from the list.  More of a housekeeping thing really.  As for my explanation about his bio, I went to Thomas Ferrick and it says that "22:37, 9 June 2009 PMDrive1061 (talk | contribs) deleted page Thomas Ferrick (A7: Article about a real person, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject)".  This means there was no discussion; it was speedily deleted by an admin.  So you could create the page, see if anyone questions its notability, and then add Thomas Ferrick back to the Deaths in December 2013 list.  Hope that helps!  (PS - sorry for the late reply.  I'm at an academic conference this weekend.) EvergreenFir (talk) 06:57, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah thanks. Two things: first, although the man died in December, the obit wasn't added to that page until it appeared in the Boston Globe on January 23. So really we haven't waited a month.  The second thing is that I have found in the past that it is very hard to tell from a speedy delete message whether the article even referred to the same person.  There are a couple other Tom Ferricks in Wikipedia already, it seems like a pretty common name for an American.  So that speedy delete could have been for someone else entirely. I figured writing the article and adding the obit back would make sense, I may well do it but just haven't had time yet. Cheers. --Krelnik (talk) 21:31, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Good point about the disambiguous problem with the name. It could have been for another person.  Best of luck writing the article! EvergreenFir (talk) 05:45, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Mariusz Pudzianowski (Personal Records)
Hi EvergreenFir i have alot of facts about the Personal Records of Mariusz, i think we must more beliv the Wall of Pudzianowsis wall than a post writen by someone else (maybe it was a post from an fan) here facts that the current info on Personal Records are fake http://www.pudzian.pl/mariusz.php     http://www.pudzianowski.dzs.pl/biografia/mariusz-pudzianowski/      http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=4919853       http://portalaktywni.pl/aktualnosci/zawodnicy-mma-mariusz-pudzianowski/     http://gwizdek24.se.pl/inne/pudzian-jeszcze-nie-koncz_71974.html         http://sdspietrzykow.republika.pl/mariusz-pudzianowski.shtml     And specially here an interview with Mariusz saying that he could deadlift max 415 kg when he was on strongman (Not 430 like the current fake info ) http://www.sportfan.pl/artykul/mma-koniec-kariery-pudziana-jezeli-przegra-to-zobacz-20274   i can find you 100 other websites with the same  info. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.19.228.6 (talk) 12:59, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

"Unconstructive editing"
Can you explain me how did encyclopedia became place where academic criticism is not acceptable, but charlatan criticism from blogs and broken links is acceptable? --109.165.136.137 (talk) 05:56, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Only one of the references was dead and I'll fix it. You are being disruptive by edit warring, refusing to reach consensus, etc. Already reported for edit warring. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:07, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I edited article in encyclopedic manner and you simply removed version with sources and restored childish propaganda which also contains original research. --109.165.136.137 (talk) 06:14, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
 * 109.165.136.137 (talk) - Other users have found your edits to be controversial. Therefore, you must gain a consensus of other editors for your contribution to be included. Repeatedly reverting to your preferred version without gaining a consensus could result in you being blocked from editing. Please participate in the discussion, and wait for other users to weigh in instead of being disruptive by repeatedly reverting to challenged content. —Josh3580talk/hist 06:19, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Kitty Wells
Hi! You accepted the article's pending changes, but the edits are copyvio. As for this one, the addition, More than that, it repositioned the image of women in country music and inspired countless female singers and songwriters, including Patsy Cline, Loretta Lynn, and Dolly Parton. is a copied sentence from the source. And this one, the addition was all copyvio. Please be careful when you accept pending changes. BTW, the IP user and user:Goodiiez are the same person. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 09:55, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Mariusz Pudzianowski (Personal Records)
Sorry for the late replay, look i really don`t know what is so hard for you to understand here you have the Official web of mariusz, and you can read there hed bio he has a 415 kg deadlift 380 kg squat and 290 kg bench i have even messaged mariuszs on his personal fb, i have the mesages of him, if you want to ask me somethink feel free https://www.facebook.com/egzon.darknod.7 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.19.228.6 (talk) 13:41, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
 * As I've mentioned before, the offical page you keep citing as conflicting information. And Facebook is not considered a reliable source.  I asked for an outside opinion on the matter. EvergreenFir (talk) 21:23, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Tagging of Nord Anglia International School Dubai
I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Nord Anglia International School Dubai. I do not think that Nord Anglia International School Dubai fits any of the speedy deletion criteria I request that you consider not re-tagging Nord Anglia International School Dubai for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. DES (talk) 21:06, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for reviewing the page. At the time I added the template, it was a direct copy-paste of the linked page in the CSD.  The creator added more info after the template was added.  I didn't want to remove the template though as, to the best of my knowledge, only admins are supposed to remove CSD templates.  Cheers! EvergreenFir (talk) 21:21, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Anyone except the creator of the article/page may remove a CSD template if the editor in good faith does not believe that the specified criterion applies. WP:CSD says: "The creator of a page may not remove a speedy deletion tag from it. Only an editor who is not the creator of a page may do so." I am sorry that I didn't check the version tagged more carefully. Thanks. DES (talk) 21:27, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply and the info! EvergreenFir (talk) 21:29, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Personal Records
Look at the info that is right now its on year 2007, pudzian.pl was created in 2011 its , so its just a copied info or something like that...

Look man i`m really geting tired of this, i swear in god and in my family i`m trying nothing else to do only trying to set true info here, ok i will not edit but if its possible ask someone else and find the true info in 1-2 days cuz people shoulld not bee disinformed right? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.19.228.6 (talk) 10:41, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Accept Revision grayed out bug
There is a discussion at Village pump (technical)/Archive 123 regarding a strange bug in the reversion system.

Pages listed at Special:PendingChanges sometimes list pages that don't work right. When things go wrong, what happens is ClueBot NG reverts a change and leaves it in "pending review" state. The situation can persist for many minutes or even over an hour, with 5 properties: (1) the page continues to appear in Special:PendingChanges; (2) the "Unaccept Revision" button works; (3) History shows the latest change is pending review, but, (4) the "Accept Revision" button is grayed out and (5) if I attempt to edit the page, there is no checkbox for "Accept this version (includes 2 pending changes)" as would be normal.

Until you approved the changes a few minutes ago, it was happening at Disaster and Huntington's disease. I would like to know if you saw anything different from what I saw. Did you get to Disaster and Huntington's disease from Special:PendingChanges? Did you approve the change on "Disaster: Difference between revisions" page by clicking on "Accept Revision"? Or did you do something else? Same for Huntington's disease?

If you have ever seen, or ever see, the bug where the "Accept Revision" button is grayed out, I encourage you to comment at Village pump (technical)/Archive 123.

In the interest of helping diagnose this bug, do you mind if I notify you on this page whenever I post an "It's happening now" item at Village pump (technical)/Archive 123? In such cases, the request would be to report there what you see that's different from what I see, which is conditions 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, and to hold off on Accept Revision so others can see as well. —Anomalocaris (talk) 20:43, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, the "accept" button was grayed out and I've seen this quite a few times now. I got there from the Pending Changes page.  What I did to get the bug to go away on Disaster and Huntington's disease was to "Unaccept" the revision and then immediately "accept".  Unaccepting it un-grays the accept button (which makes sense I guess).  I did not go into the history of the page or anything.  And no, I don't mind if you notify me.  I'll be sure to comment over at the village pump (though I admit I know next to nothing about the technical workings of this).  Thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) 20:47, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

3RR
I speak from prior history when I remind you that you are bordering on WP:3RR. This isn't worth warring over. I've nominated the article for deletion, so lets see where it goes from there. Rusted AutoParts</i> 05:48, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I see your AfD and am writing a reply. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:50, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Talkback
Cheers! —Unforgettableid (talk) 06:32, 19 February 2014 (UTC)