User talk:Golgofrinchian/Archives/2011/March

Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Acalamari 22:49, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks !! 23:26, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Hold On To Strings Better Left to Fray
The source http://www.allaccess.com/alternative/future-releases specifically states the album name without the "ing" in the first word - the page is not being vandalized. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.107.88.40 (talk) 00:41, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

reflinks
Please take a look at what this actually does. On Wicca, it changed descriptive names, such as ref name="Hutton" to ref name=autogenerated1. Not an improvement. Yworo (talk) 17:14, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Shakira
Why not to divide the article into two, such as in Madonna or Michael Jackson's case? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Innano1 (talk • contribs) 21:55, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I left a note for you on your talk page. As it appears, the page is being repeatedly blanked (erased). Its better to do a huge edit in your sandbox and then pasting that edit on that page along with an explanation of the mass edit. Il leave any more roll backs for now, others might not catch this so be careful.  «Golgofrinchian»  talk  21:59, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Article help request
What's up? Totnesmartin (talk) 09:05, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Ovilus
If you're interested in saving the article, read these: WP:V, specifically WP:NOTRELIABLE, WP:FRINGE, and WP:NOTABILITY.

I don't have anything in particular against fringe articles as long as they're accurate, but you're going to need to show notability of the device according to the rules of Wikipedia. I didn't make the rules and I don't run this place so there's no point complaining about the system to me. ....  Guyonthesubway (talk) 14:39, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * This product has been shown in use on television by name in over 4 episodes of 3 different shows. It is mentioned in 3 published books by name. What more notability does it require. Regardless of your beliefs it does stand on its own as a notable product. «Golgofrinchian»  ∞talk∞  14:44, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Have you read WP:NOTABILITY? Does it fit?  Guyonthesubway (talk) 14:57, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Except for the sarcasm... "Maybe people should read the article ahead of time before threatening to remove it due to notability" I think you're on the right track.  Its not a vipers den here.  Its just that there are a LOT of ranty people often pushing a product they're connected with or pushing their own personal belief system.  Take a look at the homeopathy article some time, or any of the water fueled car related articles.  The Seth Material article is a great example as well.  Guyonthesubway (talk) 15:40, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I can appreciate that. Full disclosure: I am in no ways connected to the device other than seeing it in use, and I own one myself. I do not know the manufacturer other than I have used the product. I am not an expert in either the product or the field of study. I am just one of those "guys". «Golgofrinchian»  ∞talk∞  16:13, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Pasadena, California edits
Hello, you reverted my edits in Pasadena, California. I simply edited misinformation. A sentence in that article suggested that Hispanic is a race. In fact, it is not. See the articles: Hispanic Hispanic and Latino Americans, Latin Americans, and Mexican American.--76.95.192.150 (talk) 01:37, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * You may be correct but the tone suggested it looked like someone vandalizing. Just be sure to cite it and you should be fine! Thanks  «Golgofrinchian»  ∞talk∞  02:41, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Reply to revert - original research at Supreme crime
I started making those edits because the article is rife with original research and synthesis. Fdr2001 (talk) 01:44, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi there, just be sure you do all edits in your sandbox and then post them on the live page once all of the minor/major editing is done. Otherwise it looks to us that you may be vandalizing the page. I am sure you meant to do it in good faith, it just helps to get everything as perfect as it can be in your sandbox then plop it out on the page. Thanks and happy editing!  «Golgofrinchian»  ∞talk∞  02:43, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

List of tallest buildings in St. John's, Newfoundland
Why exactly have you reverted my edits to List of tallest buildings in St. John's, Newfoundland when it needs to be updated? Newfoundlander&Labradorian (talk) 03:31, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello, that was a clerical error, after I did that I did not revert another one. At the time I believe it happened due to a lag between the interface I was using and wikipedia. I had meant to revert a page that I looked at before yours but it did not catch up until I was on your page. All apologies  «Golgofrinchian»   ∞talk∞  11:55, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

DTR
Hello there. Please don't template the regulars. Instead assume good faith, and leave a personal message on the user's talk page, like the one above. Thanks, 117Avenue (talk) 05:03, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Userpage
Hi, just saw your message. I put a bit of hidden stuff (using "magic words") in my userpage to stop it being copied to other people's userpages because there was a sockpuppet who would directly copy everything on my userpage and talk page and basically pretend to be me. So that stopped them doing it. I didn't think that people would actually try to copy the layout of my page for their own pages. I can probably get rid of it all now as the sockpuppet has stopped. – anemone projectors – 23:08, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I feel terrible. I am really bad at any coding so I wanted the look of your page to fit within mine. So in my happy copy paste I accidentally did a CUT paste. I then went back to mine to look and it was exactly the same, "What is up?" I then realized ( where my heart sank into my stomach) that I had saved your page and just left mine! Sorry about that.... really didnt mean it! Thanks for being a good sport about it. «Golgofrinchian»  ∞talk∞  23:11, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh I think I misunderstood what you did. You edited the page in my userspace. It's ok. I thought you meant you had copied parts of my userpage and it came up with a speedy delete/sockpuppet notice ;-) – anemone projectors – 23:14, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I did not see that notice. If I did I might need an AED :0... «Golgofrinchian»  ∞talk∞  23:17, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Phew! If you had copied my actual userpage, it would have said you were a sockpuppet! But not now, I've changed it all – anemone projectors – 23:53, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

By the way, you don't need the " " part because that's all my "magic words" stuff, and you can also change every  to one of these | – anemone  projectors – 23:58, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * See I have NO CLUE what is going on. I am happily hacking my way to a big mess that is for sure. You want to help me straighten this mess out pleas by all means have at it.  «Golgofrinchian»  ∞talk∞  00:06, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * See you fixed that | thing faster than I could. By the time I did half of it you had fixed it all LOL thanks! «Golgofrinchian»  ∞talk∞  00:11, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Burlesque
Hello :-)

There was a problem with the source of the gross of Burlesque... i edited the url but you said i shouldn't do it because it was against the rules?..didn't get it! i wrote the right url of the source! Box office mojo is the source but i don't know why amazon.com was there.--79.103.16.132 (talk) 21:50, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi there! I use a program to manually scan through changes in articles. I have to actually make it roll back an article. What it appeared to me was that the url stayed the same but only partial URL of Amazon was replaced with the first part of the one you put in. So if the url was www.amazon.com/movie/abcdef/12356/movie.html; all it appeared to me was you changed it to : www.boxofficemojo/movie/abcdef/12356/movie.html. In my opinion it seemed unlikely that the website you linked to would have exactly the same URL path as Amazon. I could have been mistaken, but it appeared that way at the time I rejected it. By all means if you have a good url to put in that is correct feel free to do that! Thank you!  «Golgofrinchian»  ∞talk∞  22:03, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Savannah State Tigers
Oh oh oh my goodness, I am so very sorry Goldilocks. I will definately make sure to make edits and bury them in my sandtrap next time (about one minute). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.20.203.9 (talk) 15:52, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello there!


PrincessWortheverything has given you a Hershey Bar! Hershey bars promote WikiLove through chocolately goodness and hopefully this one has made your day better. Hershey bars are wonderfully delicious! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a Hershey bar, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of Hershey bars by adding {{subst:Hershey Bar}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

PrincessWortheverything (talk) 17:34, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! I a barnstar is on the way!  «Golgofrinchian»  ∞talk∞  17:57, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Western Sahara protests didnt started on March 5, 2011
Please stop manipulating the Western Sahara section of the Arab world protests.--80.58.205.104 (talk) 18:43, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I am not manipulating anything. I reverted a SINGLE edit by you that was a charged statement that had no citation. There are several other editors that are reverting your statements maybe you should read: NPOV.  Golgofrinchian  ≤TALK≥  21:18, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

My warning for Hoe-farming
That page is being vandalised by various IPs - looks like some form of mass attack. My edit removed one piece of vandalism, but there was still some left. Due to the large number of IPs it is hard to remove all the vandalism. 10metreh (talk) 17:40, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Yea it seems to be several people attacking it. I cannot keep up and because of the mass changes I accidentally reverted some of your edits. After that it had you listed as a vandal and every edit of yours was also rolled back. Its a mess maybe we should do a RPP on it?  Golgofrinchian   ≤TALK≥  17:42, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * It's been protected already by Zzuuzz. 10metreh (talk) 17:44, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Yea I tried writing a nice RPP for it and it was already done o.O...  Golgofrinchian  ≤TALK≥  17:46, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Jess Cooper
Hello Golgofrinchian. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Jess Cooper, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article indicates significance by (for example) noting coverage from the Daily Telegraph. Thank you. -- Lear's Fool 12:16, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, you received this notification because you re-added the template with a Huggle revert. Please ignore it.  Thanks!  -- Lear's Fool 12:18, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Not a problem at all! With all the edits it is tough to keep up sometimes.The previous editor nuked the AFD and all of the comments. So I put it back... Have a good one!  Golgofrinchian  ≤TALK≥  14:29, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Woodpecker
Yeah, that woodpecker user who vandalized the Talledega Nights page did it again. I reverted it, but seeing as how he ignored your warning, I take it that he is one of those people who just lives to vandalize. Perhaps a second warning, but just to save you some time, I'd block him.--Valkyrie Red (talk) 01:22, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Matthew, Mark, Luke, John
I can't help noticing that Salbrena(sp) seems to have contacted you to undo an edit he made deleting a section on the possible Catholic origins to the Poem Matthew, Mark, Luke, Johh. Since this is actual a catholic poem, this seems to be unusual. Can you explain this? As it now stands, there is no reference at all to the Catholic origins of this children's prayer in the page. I thought that this constituted vandalism according to Wikipedia - removing sources with no reason. Please respond if there is some problem with putting that section into the article about the Catholic origins or removing the innacurate quotes. MaxKen (talk) 02:14, 16 March 2011 (UTC)MaxKen
 * Actually no one contacted me at all. When we review edits done to pages it compares the old with the new (diff). When reviewing the changes you made it appeared that you deleted current information and put new information in. To do this you need to cite all sources and on the talk page explain why your edit supersedes the work done by others. If I was the only editor to roll back your edits I would question my motives. However, 2 other editors caught these edits independent of one another. So it is important to work this out ahead of time on the talk page, come to a consensus and then make the edit. I am not vested in this edit in any way at all. I am only looking at it from a level of change to the article and its impact to it as a whole. So, I think what you are trying to do is justified, you just need to have all of your ducks in a row to pull it off. Get plenty of evidence of the claim your making. Put all of this on the talk page. Make the edit change and in the notes say SEE TALK PAGE so that roll back editors will see this and check there before changing (or should). Good luck!  Golgofrinchian   ≤TALK≥  02:56, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

This seems somewhat doubtful, as everything I have changed has been discussed on the talk page. There doesn't seem to be any reason therefore to do what you did to me when I corrected a citation that was wrong, an author that didn't exist, and added information about the Catholic origins of a catholic prayer (of all things! I can't keep that section in.  Why is that?)  That isn't vandalism. If there is an editing dispute, it should rely on the actual sources used, which is what this boils down to. MaxKen (talk) 03:09, 16 March 2011 (UTC)MaxKen

AN/I Notification
Informational note: this is to let you know that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Regards,  Doc   talk  05:12, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you Doc, I had no idea.  Golgofrinchian  ≤TALK≥  12:29, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem :> Doc   talk  17:13, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar!
Aww shucks.... THANKS! I love the animation :)  Golgofrinchian  (talk)  17:11, 17 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Not a problem. Just spreading the Wiki-love :) Bped1985 (talk) 19:13, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Removing my edits
I would like to know why you are removing my edits that are fully factual on a subject that you probably know nothing about if you are sad enough to spend your time moderating this website you fascist bastard —Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.121.246.161 (talk) 21:50, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Excuse me?
Hi Golgofrinchian, I'm sorry but your reversion of my edit is incorrect - the verb 'to hang' declines as 'hung' when used to describe hanging up a coat. The method of hanging someone declines as 'hanged'. It's a nice oddity of English, please refer to the OED for more information. Thanks. 80.189.153.161 (talk) 22:07, 17 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, English can be tricky with present past participles. They can sometimes dangle which left me hanging. ;). I restored your edit.  Golgofrinchian  (talk)  22:10, 17 March 2011 (UTC)


 * No problem, it's definitely strange. Thanks! 80.189.153.161 (talk) 22:14, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Barış Falay
Hello Golgofrinchian, I noticed that you proposed this article for deletion because it was written in another language than English. Please note that this alone is not an automatic reason for deletion. Articles in a foreign language should be tagged with notenglish and then listed at Pages needing translation according to the instruction on the template message (this is important because without listing it the translators won't know about a new entry). If such a page has still not been translated after 14 days it will be proposed for deletion by the PNT crew. I've therefore removed your deletion tag and listed the page for translation. Regards, De728631 (talk) 18:45, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Not a problem at all. I was patrolling with Huggle and the software package does not contain a specific tag you listed. It might be there but I am still a new user for Huggle. Thank you for fixing it. I did not want to make it seem harsh so I did not do a speedy delete. I was unaware of the translating services. Learned something new! Thanks again!  Golgofrinchian  (talk)  18:49, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome :) Happy editing, De728631 (talk) 18:53, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Menarch
Hello Golgofrinchian. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Menarch, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''Not patent nonsense. Consider proposed deletion.''' Thank you. -- Lear's Fool 01:51, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I can appreciate that, however, Menarche is also known as a woman's first period. The article also has references to 'nardburns' which insinuates burning of the testicles. It has since been revised but it still has an aire of either outright silliness or just being obtuse. I will do an AfD and mention it should be merged into the Paul Menard article at least.  Golgofrinchian  (talk)  02:42, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I think the "nardburns" are his (rather intimidating) sideburns. From the look of the Facebook group, I think this is just a fangroup trying to get an article, although I agree it does sound silly.  If you don't send it to AfD, I probably will.  -- Lear's Fool 02:53, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I threw it up for AfD to allow some others to be involved. It appears to really fit into the main article for Paul Menard . Thanks for the heads up!  Golgofrinchian  (talk)  02:56, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Check this out
November Hotel Romeo Hotel Sierra Two Zero One Zero  ✈  04:16, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey NHRHS2010, My pleasure. Thank you very much for the Barnstar! Patrolling regular WP mainspace is cool but when I find a userpage being vandalized... well you know. Again thanks for the recognition!  Golgofrinchian  (talk)  11:56, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

CSD notification
The page Raghav Sharma looks like it may be a valid CSD, but I prefer not to delete a page unless the creator has been notified. I understand that sometimes automated tools fail to do the notification for some reason. Not sure if that was the case, but could you make the notification? SPhilbrick T
 * Thanks for the heads up! Huggle crashed just after I nominated the article. I saw it post the speedy and thought it had got his user page too. I manually added one to his talk page. Thanks again!  Golgofrinchian  (talk)  13:16, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * NP, I'll go take care of it now.-- SPhilbrick  T  13:19, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Karen Sagle
Hello Golgofrinchian. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Karen Sagle, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Salvio Let's talk about it! 13:51, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello Salvio, Not a problem at all. The page as I saw it made no notability claims. It appeared at that time to be just be a bio page about a non-notable person. Since I posted the CSD they have provided a reasonable amount of citation. Good catch, thanks!  Golgofrinchian  (talk)  13:56, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * My pleasure! Please keep up the good work! Cheers.  Salvio  Let's talk about it! 13:59, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Smowtion
Hi. I've removed your speedy deletion tag on Smowtion. The article makes multiple credible claims of notability. Cheers, Pichpich (talk) 15:53, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi there, I am AfD nominating so that I can see if my initial speedy was faulty. It appears that an advertising company placed an ad on wikipedia and used other advertising companies rankings to assert WP:NOTE. Thanks  Golgofrinchian  (talk)  16:02, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I hate to insist but you don't need AfD to see that the speedy was incorrect. The criteria at WP:CSD are not ambiguous: if the article indicates why its subject is important, then it shouldn't be tagged. The Smowtion article claims that the company has 100,000 clients and has won multiple awards. The article may end up being deleted at AfD but that won't mean that your speedy tag was correct. Aggressive CSD tagging is a real problem with real consequence on newbies so when in doubt, you should go for AfD or PROD. Pichpich (talk) 16:15, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Here is what the CSD says about the tag I placed:

'''G11. Unambiguous advertising or promotion. Pages that are exclusively promotional, and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic. Note that simply having a company or product as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion.'''

At the time I placed it the page made assertations of notability but did not provide reasonable citations to back it up. I could write a page that said "Company X is amazing and lots of people say so, check out these videos showing them saying they are super duper", The citations, at least to me appeared to be trade citations from fellow advertisers mentioning them in a list of customers. It is hardly an independent source. Since the CSD was placed the article has improved. However, all the author needed to was place a Hang On tag and they could have continued to fix the page up. I cannot judge how a page will look in 2 hours when at the time it does not pass the standard that it is being nominated against. I was hardly being aggressive. Thanks :)  Golgofrinchian  (talk)  16:43, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * You're rewriting history. The tag you placed was not G11, it was A7. Furthermore, the article did have two references that are independent sources. Reliable? That's very questionable. But the CSD policy is quite clear: The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source. The page was written by a new editor who may or may not be a spammer (his contributions suggest he isn't). The CSD policy is designed to minimize the risk of discouraging good faith editors and you should respect that. Pichpich (talk) 17:52, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Whoops! Thanks for fixing that!  Golgofrinchian  (talk)  21:44, 21 March 2011 (UTC)