User talk:Flat Out/Archives/2014/July

The Signpost: 02 July 2014

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:23, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Help on Siberian Tiger article
Hi mate do you remember me? I am writing to ask for help on our Siberian Tiger article. 3 accounts, one registered and 2 IP addresses (one IP editor appears to relate to the registered one as they talked about the same Asian elephant article unrelated to Siberian tigers), continued to change the article to give readers a false impression that bears usually dominate tigers by selectively substituting or omitting the adverbs of frequency of occurrence and removing certain adjectives that define the conditions of the animals (e.g. age) from the sources. So common incidents became rare, rare incidents became common and incidents that have never happened appear to have happened after their problematic edits. Almost all existing sources in that article said otherwise (see talk). Also they gave undue weight to unimportant exceptional information about bears in the article. I raised that in talk but they don't listen. I just reached 3RR so would you please look into the issue and if possible put a semi-protection on it? I am one of the major contributors that work collaboratively to bring our tiger article into GA standard. Thanks! BigCat82 (talk) 23:22, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi BigCat82, sorry but Im going to leave this one to you. I'm choosing my battles carefully :) Also please read WP:CANVASS  Flat Out  let's discuss it  06:58, 10 July 2014 (UTC)


 * it's okay man, they just stopped as one registered user agreed on what i said and stopped, and more other ip editors came to revert those obvious biased edits. I asked for help because some editors rewrote the Siberian tiger interspecific relationship section in such a way that bears dominating and killing tigers as an intro, an obvious biased and misrepresented information as all sources there said otherwise. It is now okay and problem resolved as most good editors noticed the problems. I have followed various wikipedia big cat articles, and unfortunately most tiger related articles were under heavy vandalism. Take our main tiger article for example, during the review and editing process for GA nomination, almost all the misinformation there identified undermined tigers (e.g. a range of hunting success rate was given by the sources but the lowest possible rate was put in the article; the source quoted clearly stated tigers generally dominating adult elephants in tiger-elephant encounters but the article said elephants dominating tigers, etc). On the other hand, our featured lion article contained lots of exaggerations and misrepresented information that favors lions before I corrected them (e.g. no mentioning of lions scavenging in the main article before my edits while according to reliable extensive research data, scavenging constitutes 53% of African lions' overall diet; no mentioning of lions scavenging on hyena's kills while certain regions of African lions rely mostly on scavenging hyena's kills; there was a lengthy statement saying lions specialized in taking down adult elephants and gave such an example while the source quoted said lions killed an elephant baby while his mother flee and escaped, and no single case of lions taking down healthy adult elephants is found in the literature and from a 15 years of extensive lion hunting statistics - all this misinformation was on our featured lion article before I corrected them, can you believe it?). Thanks and I will keep an eye on all articles that I am knowledgeable at. BigCat82 (talk) 13:29, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 July 2014

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:54, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Duplicate listing on WP:PNT
I'm puzzled that you reverted my change at WP:PNT. Did you feel it was important to have Hola soy german listed twice? —Largo Plazo (talk) 12:49, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * This was my mistake. The creator of the article removed the maintenance template and when I reinstated it was listed a second time; the reversion of your edit was an error.  Flat Out  let's discuss it  23:07, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Re: Surveying - Local attraction Merge
Local Attraction is another term for magnetic deviation, Compasses aren't used much in modern surveying, although If I find a decent source on that sort of thing I might expand a bit on compass techniques.

TBP25 (talk) 11:27, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks TBP25 for the heads up - I'll suggest a redirect then :)  Flat Out  let's discuss it  03:24, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 July 2014

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:26, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Re: Current news of india
you said that " I haven't been able to find any reliable sources on the subject though there may be some non-English sources I can't identify."

can you help me to improve this, what reliable sources and non-English sources you found? if any other suggestion than "Welcome" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonu5650 (talk • contribs) 08:54, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi Sonu5650, I'm sorry but I haven't found any reliable sources for this subject.  Flat Out  let's discuss it  12:01, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Sergio Busquets
The text removed contributes nothing to the article other than a bias outlook on an solitary incident that really is irrelevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panhead2014 (talk • contribs) 23:18, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Panhead2014 that is an opinion you can discuss on the article's talk page, seeing as it has a reference you shouldn't delete it simply because you disagree  Flat Out  let's discuss it  23:21, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Whether it has a reference or not, it serves no purpose other than to defame a person regarding an incident that is simply not necessary in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panhead2014 (talk • contribs) 23:24, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Panhead2014 you have now removed the same section three times without entering into discussion. Please read WP:EDITWAR. I have started a discussion on the article's talk page page for you, you can put your case there if you wish. We edit by consensus here and there is already an extensive discussion on the talk page about this section.  Flat Out  let's discuss it  23:37, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

I don't understand what exactly needs to be changed, can you fix the parts that need to be edited, then? --95.246.156.159 (talk) 23:19, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Sergio Busquets and Míchel Salgado
Hi there FO, AL "here", can you tell me exactly what is wrong with the Sergio Busquets section that was removed (you seemed to be against it being removed, now you are FOR it being removed, as you did to that anon user)? Where does it need to be reworded, i'll do it? Same goes regarding Míchel Salgado, that user Panhead is really being annoying in my humble opinion. Attentively --AL (talk) 15:09, 23 July 2014 (UTC)


 * For trying to help out (i am not pro/anti Juninho/Salgado/Motta/Busquets), was called a vandal and accused of having an agenda. Just like you last week, i was accused of stalking the aforementioned user. To show i wanted to work as a team with him, i even removed the Juninho incident in Salgado's page altogether and added more refs and a "neutral" storyline (since the last one was "biased" according to Panhead), served exactly the same, i am not even allowed to do anything in said articles other than removing the Juninho incident, other than that i'm summarily reverted.

I repeat, for wanting to help i got this --AL (talk) 16:20, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Well this is all very cosy. Busted! Panhead2014 (talk) 16:25, 23 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Busted? And what's the penalty? And you accuse other people of stalking... --AL (talk) 16:37, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Absolutely gutwrenching idiocy, he's totally and uttely convinced i am stalking him. I have started a discussion at WP:FOOTY and notified him also per WP rules (please drop a line here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football#Sergio_Busquets_and_M.C3.ADchel_Salgado). --AL (talk) 16:47, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

You can still partake in the discussion of course, but i'm leaving after eight years. Too bad i had to leave on this note, but the insults and the aggravation were just too much, no kind words, only belittling and akin. Keep it up, happy vibes. --AL (talk) 19:02, 23 July 2014 (UTC)


 * AL there are discussions on the article talk pages of the articles in question that would be a better place for discussing the content in question. I reverted my own edits at Sergio Busquets based on discussion at AN3 which showed there was an issue with a section that Panhead2014 had removed and I had reinstated. I am happy with where it was left and that is why I haven't been back to that article. I was also having trouble getting a discussion on content rather than the contributors so I moved on. In terms of the Míchel Salgado article I made an edit - it was reverted and I'm also happy with where that is at. If you believe there is a case for rewording the sections then please put up a proposal on the article talk pages and seek consensus. I don't know enough about the subject to make a good call about whether the reference was being given undue weight or not, so I left it alone.  Flat Out   let's discuss it  00:15, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 July 2014

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:30, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Question
HI, I am returning you message regarding the tag on the Page SCAN Spanish Contemporary Art Netwrok. Could you please explain why it might be erased? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SCAN-ARTE (talk • contribs) 10:56, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
 * SCAN-ARTE it's an advertisement, not an encyclopedic article. See WP:ORG. Your username is also promotional and not allowed.  Flat Out  let's discuss it  11:00, 26 July 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't understand. See this entry for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARCO, an oil company. Is this not promotional? The page you are about to erase is a NON COMMERCIAL NON PROMOTIONAL iniciative and aims inform about culture and Knowdleg. SCAN is not a company, not an organization, is an cultural iniciative widely vetted by experts in the field. I will have a very clear and different view of this encyclopedic source if an OIL company like ARCO has a place and an important art iniciative. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SCAN-ARTE (talk • contribs) 11:28, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
 * SCAN-ARTE - ARCO is an article that details what independent, secondary, reliable sources have to say on the subject of a notable company, yours is an article on what SCAN says about itself. If SCAN has been "widely vetted by experts" then you should write about what those experts said and use those sources rather than your own website. Also read WP:42 and conflict of interest  Flat Out   let's discuss it  11:35, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Flight 772 BLP?
Forgive me for sounding stupid, but how was that a BLP violation? That's the actual name of the passenger as listed in my sources. DaL33T (talk) 13:29, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi DaL33T, its covered at WP:BLPCRIME. Cheers  Flat Out  let's discuss it  13:31, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. Sorry. DaL33T (talk) 13:32, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

QME
Can you explain what I did wrong? Earlier QME had a single meaning, now two meanings occur in Wikipedia. It seemed reasonable to turn the redirection into a disambiguation page. What should I have done? Ann1573 (talk) 14:32, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
 * your edit is fine and I have reinstated it, thanks for the question. I'd explain but I'm on a mobile device.  Flat Out  let's discuss it  06:38, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

bouchinto
hello flat out, can i ask a question? Wtbm — Preceding undated comment added 11:12, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Wtbm how can I help you?  Flat Out  let's discuss it  11:18, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
 * thank you flat out, how can i talk to you? email? whatsapp? viber? is there any solotion to ask my question in private? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wtbm (talk • contribs) 11:41, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Wtbm you can ask me here.  Flat Out  let's discuss it  11:44, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
 * ok, thank you, i want to create an article about my brand? i have several refrences about my brand, but i'm sure when ever i create my article it would be deleted, because its about a company. but in wikipedia are thousands of company articles. can you show me a solotion that what i have to do before creating my article? thank you so much.
 * Wtbm the article needs to meet this standard WP:CORP and because you have a conflict of interest you shouldn't be writing the article.  Flat Out  let's discuss it  11:52, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
 * ok mr flat out, you are right. but a part of my company is educating, ( i educate jewellery designing with software). can i create my article just abut this part of my company, because i saw in CSD A7. that educational institutions are not eligible under this criterion. thank you for your kind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wtbm (talk • contribs) 12:05, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Wtbm it isn't an educational institution.  Flat Out  let's discuss it  12:14, 27 July 2014 (UTC)