User talk:George Ho/Archives/2014/January

Fraiser
Regarding this edit:. Please go ahead and revert it in all of Wikis that you have changed the picture. There is no reason to use the cropped version. In most of those Wikis, using a logo such as Friaser is well accepted as a fair use. ThanksR0stam (talk) 13:35, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Do you know a difference between a stand-alone logo and a title caption? Also, do you know the copyright laws of countries using that language? --George Ho (talk) 18:31, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * About copyright laws, I know that you can't know the laws of all those languages. So, why are you changing them en mass? I know about 'fa' laws and it is permissible. R0stam (talk) 03:01, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Actually, maybe there should be a screenshot of the 'fa' version. The free English logo is better than the unfree English screenshot for the fa. Speaking of 'fa', what is it? --George Ho (talk) 04:22, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It is Persian Language. The issue is not important. I will probably change it to English Wikipedia's version. R0stam (talk) 08:07, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't see how it helps Farsi readers understand the show by looking at the English image. I still don't see how the unfree image is irreplaceable in Farsi Wikipedia. George Ho (talk) 08:17, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Your request for undeletion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that a response has been made at Requests for undeletion regarding a submission you made. The thread is. JohnCD (talk) 22:53, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

this discussion was at AE or somewhere else?
Hello, you added a comment that sanctions were lifted because of a discussion in AE, but I can't find the relevant AE discussion. I recall that titles were discussed a short time ago in some arbitration board, but I don't remember in which one. Can you link the specific discussion? --Enric Naval (talk) 12:31, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * This thread and the case. --George Ho (talk) 19:51, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Good heavens, those sanctions were lifted like a year ago? No wonder I couldn't find them on the archives of the past two months..... Well, ok, thanks for your reply. --Enric Naval (talk) 23:49, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I think you've misinterpreted that. The specific restrictions imposed by SarekOfVulcan were rescinded by the AE discussion, but the remedy in the case placing the page under discretionary sanctions remains in force until ArbCom rescinds it.  Since the page remains subject to DS, it would be best to leave the warning in place.  Kanguole 14:39, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Hum, it looks to me like Kanguole could be right..... --Enric Naval (talk) 01:05, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Your submission at AfC Paul Wayne was accepted
 Paul Wayne, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 20:07, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

WP:TV interview for WP:POST
Can you comment at Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/WikiProject desk/Interviews6.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:56, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Fish/Fez merge
Hey George, I saw that you removed the banners for the Fish/Fez merge, but the merge discussion was left open. Just wanted to remind you to archive the discussion, if that was your intention. czar ♔  23:39, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Saw the revert. Sounds good Eye close font awesome.svg czar  ♔  04:20, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for George Burditt (writer)‎
Orlady (talk) 08:02, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

New proposals at Pending changes/Request for Comment 2014
Hello. Several new proposals have been submitted at Pending changes/Request for Comment 2014 since you last commented on it. You are invited to return to comment on the new proposals. Jackmcbarn (talk) 01:14, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Gary Hart in a Cheers episode
I have seen that you work on a lot of Cheers-related articles. It says in the article on Gary Hart that he appeared in an episode of Cheers, Strange_Bedfellows_(Cheers). I thought you might want to work that into the episode's summary if you can find a reliable source, then link from the Gary Hart article to the episode summary. It seems notable enough to include in a brief episode summary. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:09, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd love to, Jonesey95, but Gary Hart's appearance doesn't belong to the season page. It's irrelevant to the story, and such irrelevance is discouraged per MOS:TV and MOS:FICTION. --George Ho (talk) 01:16, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Understood. Thanks. I added a link to the Gary Hart page for readers' convenience, but did not touch anything else. Thanks for all of the good work you do. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:22, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

The Lord bless you and keep you
... and give you peace. There's no need to post on Classical music, we have article alert for that. ... and give you peace, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:10, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, well... Such alerts are occasionally or often overlooked. --George Ho (talk) 18:13, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Vikramaditya VI
I don't like reverting long-established editors, but I reverted your change to the "lock" on Vikramaditya VI back to the text that the administrator put on it back in July. As he was the same administrator who downgraded the protection earlier this month, I'm going to assume his not changing the padlock text was intentional. Please consult with him to see if he wants the text changed. By the way, as long as you've been around, it might help the project if you asked for user-rights like autopatrolled and, unless you don't want it for some reason, reviewer. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)  18:44, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Oops, my error - There's no nice quick way of changing to down to semi and getting the right padlock as well in one got (unlike starting a semi from unprotected.). Now I'll have to find the other article that was done.  Ron h jones  (Talk) 20:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Liberace
Where the hell did that dreadful lead come from? How long has it been there? Cripes. I've got Pyron's book. Do you want to work on the article with me? Gareth E Kegg (talk) 00:37, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't know how to summarize the article in the lead. But I can give you advice: either put details into body and cite them, or erase challenging material. --George Ho (talk) 00:39, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Billy De Wolfe, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Medical discharge (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) 12:18, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Amy Garnett DYK
I have responded to your comments on Template:Did you know nominations/Amy Garnett and fixed the article.  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 22:29, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It meets the criteria doesn't it?  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 22:48, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Talkback (Ks0stm)
Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 15:34, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Your submission at AfC J. D. Cerna was accepted
 J. D. Cerna, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! the one  sean  17:42, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

DYK for Wave (Deraniyagala book)
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:13, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Tiger vs lion
Hi I am aware that you are a contributor of tiger vs lion and I appreciate some help. Golden Prime just returned to the same article after his 2nd release from a block and he has reverted part of the article to his own preferred version that was reverted by a few contributors many times with clear reasons during the two previous edit warring he involved. Given his track record on that article I believe he wants to restart edit warring again. I have just reverted his change. Is it possible to apply a longer page protection? Thanks. BigCat82 (talk) 11:50, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I would advise filing WP:DRN request if talk page discussion was done and didn't work. Actually, he believes that list format is better for content than prose one. --George Ho (talk) 12:04, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the suggestion. Discussion didn't work as you can see from his talk page and the article talk page. As a matter of fact, while he may think the list format works better, he had no consensus to remove everything which has remained more or less the same (i.e. consensus) in all the accepted or protected versions in the past few years and putting up his own list. Besides some accounts in his list had been added by some other contributors throughout the edit history but were later removed by others due to one or more of the violations (mostly misrepresenting sources, unreliable sources, not a specific account but a summary of repeats, not relevant to the topic, etc). There are a lot more adult tigers killing lions in 1 on 1 accidental fight accounts from reliable sources and it is meaningless to put up a long list there - as I mentioned in the talk page the few representative examples there should roughly reflect the proportion, which was the case in the original version before his edit. I am watching that page and will file WP:DRN request if necessary. Thanks. BigCat82 (talk) 16:38, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
 * If the issue is between two of you, try WP:3O request. Otherwise, do the DRN first if you have time. George Ho (talk) 18:51, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Reply: Lion vs tiger
Hello George ho, no consenses was even done to accept anything on the subject in the first place, the talk page has already pointed out that Bigcat82 has only pro-data, cherry picking, erasing without reason, editing beyound wiki-limit, consistant and persistant in sabatoging, ect ect.

Bigcat82 is a master mind conspiracy manipulator, I don't need his entire bio of the countless of sites his been a part of that proves it as wiki doesnt promote people reveling their idenity, but I will gesture his wordings and opinions, contradicts his intentions, or atleast his cloaking/hideing of it. Example, he just said, there are more records of tigers killing lions yes?

I ask for a humble request, go back to the contributions and look at what I provided, and tell me that what he said is true, I bet my bottom dollar it ain't, you can count the occaisons yourself, it is not Bigcat82's decission to make up rules in what is allowed or acceptable via age, gender fairness of the fight, the world is entitled to know the truth regardless of its content, and the highest credability should be verified for each one, for he already is hypocritical to his own guidelines...so please, take a look at the data before anything is accepted from bigcat82's request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Golden Prime (talk • contribs) 19:33, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

I simply seen it as a unfair gesture that wiki promotes this type of behavior, and simply tryed to keep the article un-bias, after all it went unchecked for over 4 years, that to me is un-exceptable, I mean look how much things wikipedia has contributed, it has around 10 million different topics that cover mostly everything, and yet now on a simple subject it is beyound poorly constructed with ill'y moderated profoundancys? C'mon, no consenses of any one with knowledge on subject woud accept what is current now on the Lion vs tiger subject, so it should be properly adressed, removed or other wise, since look whats being compared, all the data on tigers on what wikipedia already has as the tigers bio hugely contradicts whats in place now on the L vs T topic.

I simply just dont like the fact, that wikipedia is contradciting its own sources and promotes its core ethics as a place where a bias person can re-write history in his insecure manner.

Since you have been notifyed by bigcat82, I encourage you to look into atleast the basics, it should take no long reading longer than a few minutes to spot the flaws, mis-haps and putred stench that radiates from bigcat82.

I encourage a consenses in atleast a 10 way streak, atleast 10 people properly examine whats in place by checking for verification and fairness, then decide what is and what isn't reliable and fair...I dont think thats asking much. But anyways, I think I might be done, as this person is relentless in twisting facts and I can't stand the very thought of being lied to from a insinuator, and have the system manipulated with him in the same conjunction ...so I'll leave it be and just once again ask for a consenses be set in motion by others as well, not just from him.

Thank you for your time. Golden Prime (talk) 19:22, 26 January 2014 (UTC)


 * WP:DRN would do if you already did talk page. Alas, your comments in article talk page were reverted as unhelpful and insult to editors. You can alternatively try WP:3O, but third-person opinion may not be adequately helpful, and it may not apply because there were other editors with similar issue. George Ho (talk) 19:29, 26 January 2014 (UTC)


 * However, make comments on edits, NOT editors. Commenting on editors there won't help your case, and makes you look bad and vindictive. George Ho (talk) 19:31, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply George, the bottom line is, I do see some bad vibes being emited from me was necessary, since propaganda can evolve out of mis-information or bias tendancys, so I guess that explains my rude behavoir so far, its not personal, its just I'd like some common decency to be shown before piles of information is removed and a false lucrative and bias intention is being held un-checked. Again, this isnt rocket science, a brief examination can be seen to alot is being tampered with here, as guide lines are being contradicted, and pro-data is being promoted.

I do understand this is not a forum, but this is a site where some basic eithics on authority/moderation should be up-held, I mean...c'mon, at-least the bacis, comprehension would have absolutely no one un-bias leave that topic as is, again no consenses has been done, so erasing what supports the lion is completely different in what people were saying in terms wikis constructiveness and or rules, I am not against having information/data that supports the tiger, in fact I encourage it, but at-least have a consenses of what is factual and logical, I dont want to partake any further hand in the topic specifically on here, just because how wiki carryed its self for this long, but I will gesture others look into it and atleast assest it properly or not at all. This is not an attack, I'm just stating the facts.

To keep a long story short, do you know any member to appoint to high level'd mods and admins who I/we can request a consenses be don'd on the lion vs tiger...if you'd be so kind and ask any you might know...it would be of much help and no more warring, and bias propaganda will then be emited by a sole individual.

Thanks again George Golden Prime (talk) 20:26, 26 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Look, keep me out of the dispute, okay? As I advised you before, try either WP:DRN or other alternatives mentioned at WP:DR. George Ho (talk) 20:40, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Fiorenza
Thank you User:George Ho, :) .  ibensis     (What’s the Story?)   02:47, 27 January 2014 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ibensis (talk • contribs)

Constance Peel
Ok, firstly, I do not appreciate this. I can't believe you thought I might. Secondly, while I am certainly using information from the The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, I feel that I am neither copy-pasting nor closely paraphrasing- if you disagree, could you please identify sections which you feel are problematic? J Milburn (talk) 20:58, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Most of the article actually: Early life, Career and marriage, and Later life and legacy. --George Ho (talk) 21:00, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Right. Give me some examples. I am a human being- could you please speak to me? J Milburn (talk) 21:31, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Look at the phrasing in first paragraph of "Career and marriage" section, like "began career in journalism". Compare it to something about the start of her journalist career in that source, which is now inaccessible after a few visits. George Ho (talk) 01:26, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Their paragraph:

"Constance's journalistic career started after her family moved to Twickenham. Inspired by her sister, who was illustrating articles for The Queen, she won a competition for a dress article in Woman. Despite her poor education, she went on to write for most of the popular magazines and newspapers of her time, her earnings giving her an unusual amount of financial independence. Arnold Bennett, editor of Woman, told her that she did not know how to write and arranged for her to have grammar lessons from a board schoolteacher. She learned more, however, from Bennett's skilful editing."

My paragraph:

"Bayliff began a career in journalism when she and her family moved to Twickenham. An older sister was producing illustrations for a periodical called The Queen, and Peel won a competition to write for Woman. Arnold Bennett, then editor of the periodical, arranged for Peel to receive tutorship from a schoolteacher, and she also learnt from Bennett's editing."

Do you feel that this is too close? I wouldn't have said so. J Milburn (talk) 10:22, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Well... the facts are not protected by copyright. Aside from missing one sentence, I can see resemblance. But if you disagree, I won't stop you. Let's hear someone else's opinion. --George Ho (talk) 02:15, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I think the second para is a fair summary of the source and not a copyvio. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 02:45, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree, it isn't a copyvio; essentially the same ideas have been conveyed using different words. 92.40.248.126 (talk) 04:10, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Jamie Foxx
I don't understand what you mean, since the pending changes I added is still active. Could you give me more details about what you'd like me to do? Nyttend (talk) 03:51, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Ally mcbeal cast 1997 original season 1.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ally mcbeal cast 1997 original season 1.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:45, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Ally mcbeal 2001 season 5.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ally mcbeal 2001 season 5.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:46, 31 January 2014 (UTC)