User talk:Grafen/Archive 2

No kidding
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ckatz --Thomaskh (talk) 11:34, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Hollywood Celebrities Converted to Islam
Did you know, the Hollywood celebrities are Scarlett Johansson, Gwyneth Paltrow, Sam Worthington, Anne Hathaway, Michael Jackson and Taylor Swift have converted to Islam that I saw on the magazine and newspaper. --Videogamer13(talk). August 22, 2010 (UTC).
 * I reverted your changes because you provided no evidence, and facts in Wikipedia have to be verifiable. Of course, if you can find reliable sources for any of them, you should put them back, with references. Grafen (talk) 13:32, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Go away
Do not interfere with my edits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.183.27 (talk) 21:52, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for removing vandalism from my user page! :) Best, Guoguo12  --Talk--   21:59, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism
How the hell did I vandalize the page? --173.12.139.209 (talk) 23:19, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Smoking
I hope the contoversy section in smoking can remain there as that is the only pro-smoking side on the page and it is valid and is not biased in any way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.114.37.167 (talk) 22:52, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Jiad
Don't try to offend my faith. I'm doing this for Allah. User 109.61.53.153 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.61.53.153 (talk) 09:24, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you
It's nice to see we still have users that actually review edits before reverting. Cheers, 71.155.236.183 (talk) 18:33, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Template:Catholic
I am going through the 4,500 catholic template entries changing the "no named parameter" and the "article=" parameter to "wstitle=" so that I can wrap it around Cite Catholic Encyclopedia which is wrapped around cite encyclopedia. I will do as you suggest for the rest of the articles I am changing that include cite. But I am only doing it for the worst basket cases, and I know that a lot more of them need TLC. If you want to see what I am aiming at take a look at 1911 which now looks like this: catholic will look similar (just a prescript and the use of cite encyclopedia). -- PBS (talk) 12:32, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Banned, No Aspergers So I don't Care
Pinch it, curl it, and lick it. Get a life.

Editing boldly and "having fun" according to Wikipedia directives at the top of this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.176.65 (talk) 08:38, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Hmm
Hi, I'm from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:92.17.219.150, No-one in my household made these edits and I only ever try to be constructive with my editing (which is usually only grammar and spelling corrections). I don't know who has done these edits, but feel free to block the IP if it occurs again, I'll request any changes that I see on the talk pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.17.219.150 (talk) 16:54, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

my last translation
Hi. When I translated the article I tought it would have been useful for Italian people to have the italian version (since he was an Italian nobleman ). You threated me like I was stupid. I'm new to Wikipedia world but I didn't mean to offend ur majesty. I will carry on translating what I like —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kateri87 (talk • contribs) 12:21, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I am sorry if I offended you. If you want to provide a version for Italian people to read, why don't you put it on Italian Wikipedia? It does not yet have an article on Official culture or on Francesco Caetani, 8th Duke of Sermoneta. So you could take the translations you have done (still available in the history of each page), and create new articles over there. If you do, please link them to the corresponding English pages and vice versa. Grafen (talk) 12:30, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Ok, sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kateri87 (talk • contribs) 12:33, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Vandal help
User:184.59.17.119, who u've dealt with recently, has been vandalizing the Teflon Don (album) article despite the warning on the user's talk page. Where can I go to solicit a block on this user? Dan56 (talk) 22:02, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

RFC for Man
Hi. In the light of the current dispute regarding the inclusion of an image in the article Man, and the heated exchanges that have led to the need to temporarily protect the article, I have started an RFC at Talk:Man. Please do add your opinion, and hopefully we can achieve a policy-based consensus. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:21, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Gloria Allred
greetings: you recently reverted to a version which includes the phrase "Gloria Allred has represented "run and dump" parties in various high-profile cases". I can find nothing about "run and dump" litigants... anywhere. do you know anything about this phrase? Badmachine (talk) 09:05, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * happy to help. i thought maybe it was legalese. Badmachine (talk) 09:49, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Eve Pollard
This isn't vandalism, and I'm unsure why you regard it as such. Candyflossy (talk) 19:44, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Media bias
Just wanted to stop by and say thank you for protecting us from those horrible conservatives!! I would really hate to see any conservatives whatsoever be able to edit Wikipedia without having brave heroes like yourself there at a seconds notice to change them back to our established facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.82.24.48 (talk) 16:02, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I think this must be about my reversion of this edit. It seemed to me a rather sweeping assertion that would need a good reliable source to justify it. Grafen (talk) 16:20, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Why would you bother responding to such an obvious troll? A quick look at his contributions reveals POV-pushing or plain vandalism. ---  RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive'  15:03, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

WP:GLOO
Why don't you try GLOO?  Wayne Olajuwon  chat   17:14, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

I appologize
My younger brother made the unconstructive edit to Tiliqua rugosa; i have told him why not to do that. --The Lord of the Allosaurs (talk) 15:47, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Please help!
My name is Carolina Vita and I represent Javier Mollo, an Argentinean independant movie maker. I´ve been having this issue lately: someone has been editing my text in order to defame him.

Every text under the nick name caro_vita is correct. Every other text is incorrect (panagea22).

I perfectly know this is a public service, and everyone has the right to contribute and discuss. But I must enter the site every night to check the text haven´t been modified.

I decided I´d rather delete the hole entry in order to avoid this unpleasent unconviniences.

Looking foward to hearing from you,

Yours,

CarolinaCaro vita (talk) 09:05, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

GLOSS FM
Hi Grafen Sorry we seem to be at a misunderstanding, not helped by my newness to the ways of Wikipedia. I've only just worked-out how to "talk" to fellow editors!

Yes I am involved in this voluntary organisation, and I am the author/creator of the GLOSS FM page. It seems bizarre in the extreme to me that these two facts disqualify me from editing the page. There were numerous errors introduced by someone else, several controversial changes, and wholesale cuts of content that had taken me hours to assemble and write! In addition there were a number of changes which I agree with (we to 3rd person etc), and that on reflection some of my previous text might be considered as biassed (although still true!).

The main area of debate here seems to be around the level of detail. My angle is that I'd like lots of detail, you and one other person want less detail. The reason I think more is required is so that people can understand more about the operation and how it works. They may be local people who are thinking of volunteering, or they may be further away but researching setting-up their own community station. It is in our station ethos to be open and transparent and help other stations succeed by providing advice and support.

What is the reason why you want less detail? (apart from other station pages do not have it). Is there a rule or guideline which covers this? (apologies for my ignorance).

Fianlly can you tell me if we have tiered levels of control of Wikipedia? On one of the pages you wrote something which seemed to indicate you have some degree of "Moderator" control - that's to say some people are more equal than others. I'm not trying to be funny, just to understand the process - I fully appreciate there needs to be some kind of control to avoid anarchy on these pages.

Kind regards, Radiohead319 (talk) 11:49, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Actually one thing I've just noticed following your edit removing my category sections it is now saying the article requires additional categories!! If you are convinced my previous content is unsuitable, what sort of content categories would you recommend? Radiohead319 (talk) 11:57, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply on my talk page Grafen. This is all news to me and a little frustrating - kind of makes me wish I'd never created the page in the first place! I'll try my best to keep to the rules, but when I see things that are blatantly wrong it will be difficult to hold-back. Before I read all the documents you will see I removed both the template messages at the start of the page - for the reasons given in the history. I can tell you the pages that link-in to GLOSS if you want to know. I have also declared my affiliation to the station in the discssion page. 193.36.79.207 (talk) 14:46, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Help, I'm confused.
I've looked on numerous other town page and they all have media outlets listed along with their direct website. How is my magazines website any different when it compliments wiki's page on our two towns. We are the only lifestyle publications in the area that work only within the community to help support it's business owners, residents, visitors, and town as a whole. Adding our link to wiki would be a great resource to those researching our town and way of life.

I see other newspapers, radios, and magazine outlets all linked in.

Please help me understand.

(Piedmontpg (talk) 23:25, 20 November 2010 (UTC))piedmontpg
 * I have responded on your talk page. Grafen (talk) 00:27, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi there GRAFEN, VASCO from Portugal here,

many thanks for your help in my talkpage, reverting the human waste vandalism. Getting a bit tired of this pieces of garbage that: 1 - vandalize pages; 2 - get their stuff reverted (and if you check the edit history at Juan Manuel Lillo, i did not even insult the vandal); 3 - proceed to insult the well-intended users in their pages afterwards...sick "persons" indeed.

Thank you again, have a nice week, keep it up - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 23:18, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Eilean Donan
Hello. I thought you might be interested to see the query about the area of the island which I have raised on its discussion page. Best wishes, 45ossington (talk) 08:34, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Sunset/Sunrise edit wars
A new edit warring episode over the scientific explanation of the sunset and sunrise coloring has started, involving The Good Doctor Fry and Wanbli-g53, which I suspect to be his/her sockpuppet. You may be interested in participating in the discussion going on here. Regards, Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:12, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

UK Community Notice - IRC meeting
Dear Wikipedian,

This is the first of what will hopefully be a regular notice to help bring together the UK community so that you can be involved in some amazing things. To kick things off, there will be a UK community IRC meeting at 1800 UTC, December 7, 2010 to discuss the future growth and developement of Wikimedia UK. Without huge community support and involvement, the chapter cannot be successful and to get the most out of it, get involved.

For information on the community IRC meeting please go here

More to come about:
 * Wikipedia 10th Anniversary Events
 * 1st Annual UK Wiki-conference
 * Trustee interest meeting - an event for those community members with even just a fleeting interest in becoming trustees of Wikimedia UK.

Many Thanks
 * Joseph Seddon
 * User:Seddon

Delivered by WMUKBot (talk) on 05:34, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

UK IRC community meeting
Just a quick reminder about the IRC meeting at 1800 UTC tonight to bring together the Wikimedia community in the UK to help the growth and success of the UK chapter and community activities. For information see Community_IRC_meetings


 * Many Thanks
 * Joseph Seddon


 * User:Seddon

Delivered by WMUKBot (talk) on 17:27, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Three Brooks Local Nature Reserve
In your edit here you reverted a large group of carefully made edits which I consider improved the article and which were all explained in edit summaries. Please be more careful - your edit summary of "replaced words removed, I assume, inadvertently" did not explain your actions. As there has been subsequent editing of the article I can't just revert your unhelpful edit, unfortunately. PamD (talk) 16:20, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * For example: I expanded the references, removed unnecessary parent categories, improved the text about the building of the town - you have wasted a lot of my time. Please explain your unconstructive edit. PamD (talk) 16:27, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Why dos a link to a site promoting the use of the technology not conform to Wikipedia rules
Consider the 'stereology' page. Only 1 of the commercial sites promotes information about the subject and that site does little. The Stereology Resource Center is the one. Why not delete all of those commercial sites since they offer nothing.

I am not affiliated with any of these companies. 74.107.173.27 (talk) 18:26, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I have removed all of the inappropriate links on stereology. Yes, there were a lot that violated WP:EL. --GraemeL (talk) 18:39, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

You also knocked off a blog that simply lists stereological information,. The blog lists information on recent issues and math, not day to day blather. That's OK I guess. The companies that have listed links there considered the links important free advertising. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.107.173.27 (talk) 18:44, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:ELNO #11: Being a recognized authority is an exception to that though. One would think that a recognized authority would have their own domain and not be using the wordpress domain. I have no objections to it being re-added and annotated as an authority if that is in fact the case. --GraemeL (talk) 18:49, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Little help
I see you gave a final warning to user:99.231.200.55 for vandalism a few months ago...and he's back at it again, the last (edit) he made was vandalism, and the two before that both included personal attacks ("JIHADI LOVING SCUM" and calling people "primitives"). I was hoping you would be interested in getting the editor blocked as I lack the experience and knowledge/patience for the bureaucracy surrounding the process. Thanks, Passionless (talk) 02:58, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I have warned the user about abusive edit summaries. But other than in exceptional circumstances, anonymous/IP users are blocked for vandalism only after a series of recent warnings and if they are active at the time of blocking. The warning and blocking process can seem bureaucratic but it does work. You may want to try out WP:TWINKLE, which partly automates it for you. Grafen (talk) 12:42, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Ant and Grasshopper
Thanks for sorting out the self-important recent change to the decriptive title of this fable. There should have been something on the Discussion page first, but people usually aren't used to WP procedures. To be precise, the English title is generally "The ant and the cricket/grasshopper" and people in the English-speaking world aren't often aware what a 'cicada' is. However, in Babrius (the earliest Greek source for the fable), the word used actually is cicada = tettix. If you can read Greek, you'll find it here http://mythfolklore.net/aesopica/babrius/140.htm. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 14:59, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Just a quick note to say thanks for reverting the vandalism on my archive page!--5 albert square (talk) 01:03, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Conflict
I don't contribute very often, I used to in the past (with atleast 4 different ips) but I (very faintly) recall back then it was against policy for a company to edit their own article (I think it was NPOV and something about advertising). Does this still apply? If so, you might want to take a look at Sanuk. 76.121.138.201 (talk) 09:13, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

February Disambig challenge
Greetings! I've challenged my fellow disambiguators to help knock out more than a thousand disambig links a day for the month of February, and every bit helps. Please check out the list at Disambiguation pages with links and see if you can get in the game for this month. Cheers! bd2412 T 03:37, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Indonesia
"Indonesian Archipelago" is a legitimate phrase and likely to be actually used in sources that back up the info. Please don't remove it or "disambig" it just to fit in with wikipedia. IN my view, there is nothing wrong with it going to a disambig page, but do not replace it - especially the text one reads - with something else. As a minimum, you should pipe the link with "Indonesian archipelago" remaining visible. thanks --Merbabu (talk) 20:07, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice. I am generally leaving the text as "Indonesian Archipelago" as you suggest, but I am trying to distinguish between occasions (eg zoological) where it is clearly being used as a synonym for "Malay Archipelago", and those (eg political) where it is clearly restricted to the islands of Indonesia. I think on Wikipedia we should disambiguate to fit in with Wikipedia. But do let me know if you think I am getting it wrong. Grafen (talk) 20:14, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * What about redirecting all links to Indonesian archipelago to the list of islands. Then, fixing those that don't quite fit that redirect? Would that work?--Merbabu (talk) 20:22, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * It would work. For as long as all the links were still fixed, it would be identical for the reader to the approach I was taking (ie clicking on "Indonesian archipelago" would take you either to the list of islands or to "Malay Archipelago" as appropriate). The main difference would be that as people created new links without checking, they would all go to the list of islands rather than to the disambiguation page. I am not sure which is better? Grafen (talk) 20:29, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Either way, I guess your disambig work is still needed. I'll get back to the question later. thanks --Merbabu (talk) 20:39, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

List of fictional cats
I never vandalised the page :( I just quoted the legend that is Meowsy McDermott. You gotta be kitten me that it was edited back. As for the cats on The Simpsons, animals dying is very sad, I can't believe someone would be cold-hearted enough to accuse someone of malice by being upset about a cat dying :( I mean look at the outrage when one gets put in a wheelie bin. D: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julianassangeftw (talk • contribs) 23:54, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Request
You recently contributed to Big Chuck and Lil' John. I am requesting your input on the article's discussion page at Talk:Big_Chuck_and_Lil'_John. Thank you. Levdr1 (talk) 19:32, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Rabbits
Grafen

If you could explain why you think my amendment to the rabbits section was not helpful rather than arrogantly deleting it that would be nice. I was attempting to correct the misconception that kitten is the correct term for the young of a rabbit. Traditionally the young was called a rabbit and the adult a coney. This is considered by many to be archaic but there is no universally accepted replacement. If you would care to word the article your way taking account of this information then please do so. Otherwise I shall just leave it as another wikipedia error.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.110.248.190 (talk) 18:07, 12 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I do not think it is an error to say that the young of a rabbit is called a "kitten", "kit" or "bunny". It is a couple of hundred years since "rabbit" meant the young of the animal, and a similar period since the animal was known as a "coney". The article should reflect current meanings.


 * If you think that the history of the words is worth including in Wikipedia, I would suggest trying to introduce it to the Rabbit article, which currently does not have a terminology or etymology section, rather than European rabbit. But I would make it clear that it was a purely historical point. And if possible you should provide a reference.


 * You are right that I should have included a more useful edit summary explaining my reversion. Sorry about that. Grafen (talk) 18:29, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Anon IP
Hi, you seem to have blanked my user warning for vandalism on this IP talk page, was this an oversight or did I miss something? Cheers Fæ (talk) 10:28, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I meant only to undo my own warning. I should know better than to rely on the Huggle "undo" button without checking. Sorry about that. I have now reinstated yours. Grafen (talk) 10:31, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

A Weaver on the Horizon
Hi, thank for doing a minor edit on A Weaver on the Horizon. Can you help me take another look at it further, to see more clean up is needed?--NeoBatfreak (talk) 23:19, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Vandal IP
That IP vandalising Cain Velasquez kept it up at Iron Man after a level 4 warning from ClueBot, so I reported them to AIV. Regards, 220.101 User talk:220.101.28.25\ 09:05, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked for 31 hours (and edits rolled back) by :) - 220.101 User talk:220.101.28.25\ 09:18, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Wow, you were fast. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.240.133.143 (talk) 16:32, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Not spamming
You edited lots of articles wich I made changes external links changes; i actually had a user name before (wich i dont remember) but i just add them because they are reliable sources that contain information about the subject; but as you know the topic is large and there's lots of articles related i'M NOT TRYNG TO SPAM anything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GOAL08 (talk • contribs) 23:08, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I suggest you look again at the two sites you were persistently linking to. They have almost no content, and one of them is mainly trying to sell books. They still look like spam to me. Grafen (talk) 23:17, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

why did you did that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.94.95.184 (talk) 05:20, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Hummmph!
Poor Brunelleschi! All these years that there has only been one of him! And now he's expected to battle it out over rights to his name with some revolting teenage mutant ninja turtle! I 'spose you have to disambig the mighty Mick for the same reason! Amandajm (talk) 22:54, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I entirely agree. I think the better solution is a Brunelleschi -> Filippo Brunelleschi redirect with a hatnote reference on the latter to Brunelleschi (disambiguation). But rather than engaging with whoever thought differently, the quick fix seemed to be to pipe all the 80 or so Brunelleschis through. Grafen (talk) 07:22, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Major modifications to Orthogonal Convex Hull article
Dear Grafen,

By reviewing the revision history of the Orthogonal convex hull article, I noticed that you made some modifications. Right now I am restructuring and expanding the content of this article, and I would like to know if you are willing to help in its improvement. I have added some templates to the original article, and have an under construction version in my sandbox. This is my first time editing an article, so any comments would be greatly appreciated.--Carlos Alegría (talk) 19:03, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Minor edit checkbox
Please read WP:MINOR - your recent edit at Game of Thrones was not actually minor. For future reference, any edit performed on article text beyond typo correction is not considered minor. Thanks! --Lexein (talk) 00:23, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The addition I reverted seemed so unrelated to the article that I reckoned it should be treated as vandalism. And, as you will know, the seventh bullet of WP:MINOR is "removing vandalism and graffiti". Let me know if you think I got it wrong on this occasion, and thanks for keeping an eye on things. Grafen (talk) 09:18, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Aha! Hoist by my own petard. Never noticed that bullet, which seems to conflict with the second "nutshell" point. Mumble. --Lexein (talk) 13:03, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

question
How can I talk with NovaSkola ? Thanks.

I have used it because his page is empty. There is only an "archive" but I can't post there. Let me know. Thansk ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by OlympicFan (talk • contribs) 13:02, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Michael L. Brown
Why is there unsourced and poorly sourced information on this page? I thought I am doing the right thing by removing unsourced data. How do you properly do this? --Red-necked Grebe (talk) 22:22, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt response.

1)The section "Academic work" it states "Brown has served as a visiting or adjunct professor at the following schools:" The list has no sources whatsoever. Can you remove the statement and list? --Red-necked Grebe (talk) 22:50, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

I will post the unsourced and/ or poorly sourced information here one by one. Please remove what you think is appropriate.

2) Degrees and positions - Brown graduated from Queens College in 1977 with a B. A. in Hebrew, and earned his M.A. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures in 1981 and his Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages in Literature in 1985, both from New York University. His doctoral thesis was "I Am the Lord Your Healer": A Philological Study of the Root rapa' in the Hebrew Bible and the Ancient Near East. (No Sources)

3)His writings have been translated into more than a dozen languages (No Sources)

4) Brown is best known for his five-volume series Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus (2000-2010). (No Sources for "is best known")
 * Thanks. I think this discussion should take place at the Michael L. Brown talk page, and so I have copied it there and responded there. Grafen (talk) 23:28, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

My links
Could you please tell me why my external links were removed (from Hey Arnold! and 90's Are All That)? You removed them. I didn't think I was spamming and thought the sites I added had good content about the topics. I'm not trying to be rude or antyhing, I just want an explanation that way I know what to do and not to do. Roger Klotz (talk) 22:18, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
 * External links, besides those used as inline references, can be included in an article if they contain accurate information on the topic that for some reason cannot be included in the article itself. We do not aim to provide a comprehensive set of links to all the interesting material related to a subject that might exist out there. The links you were inserting do not seem to provide supplementary and well-founded information. Rather they all seem to be parts of a discussion forum.
 * I suggest you read the guideline on external links. In particular, the section on links normally to be avoided lists the sorts of links we do not want to include. You will see that number 5 includes discussion forums as one of the types of links that are to be avoided. Grafen (talk) 22:44, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Accidental error

 * I have a feeling you have warned the wrong person. My only contribution to the Javaris Crittenton page was to revert some vandalism, back to a version last edited by you. Grafen (talk) 22:32, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * It looks like a small error, sorry dude ;)

note: I am the beginner in Huggle script, so it takes some time to learn all. (Sometimes other users be more rapid, my persistently clicking only makes things even worse. And sorry again. Alex discussion ★ 22:36, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Michael L. Brown
After some attempts at trying to delete parts of the article Michael L. Brown, user Red-necked Grebe is trying now to delete the whole article. See here. Now sure how to proceed with this since the template says not to remove. Basileias (talk) 00:27, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Red-necked Grebe has now been tagged as a single-purpose account and I really doubt he/she will get anywhere from this discussion being started. Calabe1992 (talk) 01:44, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

I was starting to feel like
Buffy the Vampire Slayer, tracking down the serial vandal Dairymade (or something) and was delighted to discover that you were getting to some of his (seemed like a "him") handiwork ahead of me. Life is good. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 20:05, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

 * Thanks very much for the baklava. But I am not sure I deserve it. So far as I can see, the only edit of yours I have reverted is this one to the Burgess Shale article, when you added a paragraph reading "Whatever...". That didn't seem to be a useful contribution.


 * Thanks again. Grafen (talk) 09:54, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

confused
I have undone your delete of my work because i think you were mistaken. I removed my email address and the picture boxes that weren't working. I don't want any confrontation so if you could let me know if there is going to be an issue i would love to talk it over as i am new to Wikipedia editing and do not know the rules of engagement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattwc04 (talk • contribs) 07:07, 9 September 2011 (UTC)


 * What you added to the Mpemba effect article was not information, but a theory of your own. Wikipedia is not the place for posting our own new theories. What we want here is information that can be verified by reference to reliable published sources. And we specifically do not want original research. I suggest you take the time to read those linked policies/guidelines before you do any more editing. Grafen (talk) 07:11, 9 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your clarification but everything i said is simply stating the facts in a more obvious way than i have ever seen. Furthermore, everything else on that section of that page is an individual theory be it from an old scientist or not. Wikipedia is a place to share knowledge and facts and you can't deny that what i posted was illegitimate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattwc04 (talk • contribs) 07:20, 9 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I cannot agree that your idea that faster-moving molecules will find their place in the lattice faster is simply stating the facts. As you said in your edit, it is a theory of your own. If you get that theory published in a peer-reviewed science journal, that might be the time to include it in the Wikipedia article. Until then it is just your own original research.
 * A couple of other points of advice. When editing, do not include any spaces or tabs at the beginning of paragraphs. If you want to indent a paragraph put one or more colons at the beginning. And please remember to sign your name on talk pages by typing four tildes. Thanks. Grafen (talk) 07:34, 9 September 2011 (UTC)


 * would it be possible for me to edit it so it does not reflect as an opinion or a theory at all? Mattwc04 (talk) 07:46, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
 * also, i just accidentally put my edits back on the mpemba page and dont know how to undo it.. sorry Mattwc04 (talk) 07:50, 9 September 2011 (UTC)


 * you can f*ck off. you are a narrow minded liberal piece of shit.. suck it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattwc04 (talk)


 * Mmmm. You should perhaps also read WP:Civility. Grafen (talk) 07:03, 13 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Wow! O.o Cripes! I mean, wow! --  fg T C  23:21, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Huggle
Don't take offense but Huggle reverted you instead of realizing that there was a conflict. Nasnema  Chat  10:55, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The effect of what you have done is to blank three pages: Singapore Grand Prix, Canadian Grand Prix, and German Grand Prix. Can I leave it to you to fix them? Thanks. Grafen (talk) 11:07, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * hmmm. Yes leave it to me.  Nasnema   Chat  11:09, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

"Tender" removal
I understand the intent behind removing "tender" from "tender age" -- it's a bit of a fluffy way of putting things -- but can you please take a closer look when you're removing it from articles to make sure it's justified? On Blerim Džemaili you removed it from a direct quote, where it's completely acceptable to use such a term; after all, quotes need to be reproduced verbatim. I realise this probably wasn't your intent, but thought I should give you a heads up nonetheless. Cheers, Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 12:53, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * You are of course correct, and I had skipped the direct quotes that I spotted. Sorry I missed this one. And thanks for catching and fixing it. Grafen (talk) 22:10, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Of course, happy to help. Thanks for taking note :) Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 07:07, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

At the Beginning of Glorious Days
I'm surpised that this article still considered to be unreferenced, even though it does have it in every sectrion?
 * At the Beginning of Glorious Days--Mishae (talk) 18:45, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * There are certainly untagged articles that don't have two relevant sources. But the two here (IMDB and RUSCICO) are a bit thin. It would be good to find something that talks about the reception of the film, or its influence. In particular the assertion that it is considered to be a "classic of Russian historical cinema" is not supported by either of the sources quoted. Grafen (talk) 20:17, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Bartleby, the Scrivener
My apologies for writing this here but I couldn't find any other way to contact you. You recently reverted my post about Bartleby, The Scrivener and classed it as vandalism. I studied the work of Helman Melville during my English Literature course at university and have deeply analysed and researched said book. The additions I made to the article were entirely correct but for some reason they keep being removed.

I would like to know why, thankyou. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IBartleby (talk • contribs) 23:58, 5 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I reverted your addition that made the remarkable claim that the character Bartleby's real name was Deidre Batley. There is no suggestion of that in Melville's text, and it is hard to imagine where else the information could be. In future you should try to support additions, especially remarkable ones, with references to reliable sources. Grafen (talk) 07:39, 6 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I looked for proof, but it is difficult to find a reliable source, albeit ANY source, which proves this on the internet due to how the old the book is. I can direct you to publications which contain original copies of Melville's notes about the stories if you'd like, which prove this statement, but unfortunately this publication isn't easy to find online. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IBartleby (talk • contribs) 14:58, 6 November 2011 (UTC)


 * There is no requirement for reliable sources to be available on line, though obviously it is good if they are. I'd be interested to hear what the source is. Perhaps if you find the reference you should post it now on the article's talk page? Of course, depending on what it says we might have to discuss whether an author's private thoughts about a book that didn't make it into the text are facts about the text, but I am sure there would be a way of handling that. Grafen (talk) 21:15, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Excuse me?
Why on earth did you revert my edits to Etiquette in North America? What exactly do you consider non-constructive? Disagreeing and being non-constructive are two different things. I have reverted your edit as mine were completely constructive. If you have a disagreement with the specifics of my changes please discuss them on the talk page and do not dismiss them out of hand. 74.102.174.35 (talk) 20:01, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * You are quite right. I reverted and warned in error. Sorry about that. Grafen (talk) 20:03, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. 74.102.174.35 (talk) 20:06, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry if this isn't the right place to post this (I never use TALK on wiki), but I'm just annoyed right now. I have a site (cholinergicurticari.net). My link has been in your cholinergic urticari article for over a year or two.

I am the ONLY person to have started a website entirely dedicated to this topic. I have made nearly 1000 forum posts to members in my support forum, and have written almost 200 pages on this topic. This is a rare disorder, and people don't have a lot of info on the topic.

So someone removes my link, which was on topic, informative, and even cited by major medical publications. Yet they leave about.com in the links? What's up with that. My wife's website (registerednursern.com) was also removed. Her site is an authority on nursing, linked to from authority nursing sites & organizations, and even to be promoted and cited in a government publication coming out in the next couple of months.

I'm not sure what incited people to suddenly remove EVERY link and edit I've ever done as if I'm some cheap fly-by-night spammer, but it was totally inappropriate. My information is not spammy on my website, and is quality and informative content. Yes, I run advertisements, but so does all of the other sites--for one thing because I have a dedicated server, pay writers sometimes, and have other costs.

This was totally inappropriate. I hope everyone is happy now. Because it would be different if I was spamming or using inappropriate materials. But all of my websites are high quality, authority, relevant, and useful. Again, less than 10 links total in wikipedia from my sites. Compare that to "huffington post" or other sites with THOUSANDS of links.

Oh well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BP7865 (talk • contribs) 00:44, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 12
Hi. When you recently edited Prince Ferdinand Philippe, Duke of Orléans, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Prince Royal (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) 10:31, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 30
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Orphans (1998 film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Gary Lewis and Frank Gallagher


 * British films of 1998 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Gary Lewis

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:47, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Back Window (film)
Do you think this is a candidate for speedy deletion under G12 and A7? The article's author still hasn't responded to your questions or (to my knowledge) released the copyrighted material for use. As well, the IP editor has thrice removed the maintenance tags, left a mildly uncivil comment on my talk page, and blanked their own talk page instead of responding to the concerns raised. I don't want to seem too bitey, but I still haven't seen any cooperation from them. --Drm310 (talk) 18:36, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I do think it should be deleted, unless there's a sudden flurry of coverage in independent reliable sources. And I have the feeling it should be deleted for its inherent lack of notability, which probably can't be fixed, rather than the copyvio which could be. But I don't know that we can go for speedy on notability - A7 is for individuals, animals, organisations and web content, and specifically not for creative works. We could try a PROD, but they would probably remove it, so there may be no alternative to the WP:AfD route.
 * For the time being I will keep it watch-listed and wait to see if any action is taken as a result of the notification at WP:Copyright problems. Grafen (talk) 22:44, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Milk the system for all it's worth
Removing misplaced apostrophes is laudable, but I have reverted your recent edit as the apostrophe in "milk the system for all it's worth" is not incorrect and was used in the reference – it's an interesting phrase that is gramatically correct both with and without the apostrophe.

Jim Craigie (talk) 03:20, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * You are of course right. I made two mistakes: thinking "it's worth" had to be a possessive, and changing a direct quote. I agree that it's interesting that the grammar could work either way, though I think "it's" is better - I think that's the way it goes if you change tense or number. It wasn't obvious to me that it was a quote, as it is not marked as such. I wonder what the copyright status of all those synopses lifted from the BBC site is?
 * Anyway, thanks for spotting and fixing my mistake. Grafen (talk) 06:38, 22 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Copyright: actually the synopsis is from here where the BBC has given copyright release – notice in this case the synopsis is longer than the one in the reference.


 * Jim Craigie (talk) 08:15, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks again. Grafen (talk) 21:24, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Diacritics
Hello. Protege is perfectly good English without the diacritics. See http://grammarist.com/usage/protege. You should not be replacing it with the foreign diacritics. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:21, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I had been relying mainly on my own taste and my paper dictionary (Chambers 2011). I don't know anything about the grammarist.com site, but doing a bit more research now, I find there are some perfectly respectable style guides that agree with you. I can't imagine ever using protege myself, but I will stop replacing it with my preferred version. Thanks again. Grafen (talk) 07:03, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

AWB
AWB keeps removing the small tags in the epidemiology section. I would like to ask people to stop. Thanks. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:48, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

James T. Thompson
Regarding your comment at User talk:Ethanagray; I don't think the user was a vandal; he was a new user, not understanding our collaborative editing process and how it was applied to an article he'd just started. Given our difficulties with editor retention, please consider how we might differentiate between confused newbies (however frustrating their actions may be) and deliberate vandals, and how you can help the former to become productive editors. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:36, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I have looked at the evolution of the James T. Thompson page, and I can see that you are right. Apologies for being hasty, and thanks for spotting my mistake and pointing it out to me. Grafen (talk) 19:44, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Which reference seemed inappropriate?
Why could you not of just deleted the one reference that seemed inappropriate instead of reverting the whole article I worked on for over an hour!? I just turned that article from a stub into a proper article!! What was the innapropriate reference? I added other referemces yesterday but apparently it wasn't a reliable source. Her name is Stephenson. Please reply on my talk page. Thanks, K. (talk) 20:03, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

February 2013 disambig contest.
Greetings! I'm giving a prize of up to a hundred dollars to the winner of the February 2013 disambiguation contest, and lesser prizes to the rest of the top four. Of course, the conditions of the contest will make it quite a challenge to win the full amount, but I hope to stimulate competitiveness with a little extra incentive. Cheers! bd2412 T 20:59, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Article notability notification
Hello. This message is to inform you that an article that you wrote recently, Kavõldi, has been tagged with a notability notice. This means that it may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Please note that articles which do not meet these criteria may be merged, redirected, or deleted. Please consider adding reliable, secondary sources to the article in order to establish the topic's notability. You may find the following links useful when searching for sources:. Thank you for editing Wikipedia! VoxelBot 14:32, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

June 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=561026701 your edit] to John Hutchinson (footballer) may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"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) 07:01, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
 * John Hutchinson has today been named Captain of the Central Coast Mariners. | Goal Weekly] He is currently the second most capped Central Coast Mariners player, with 200 appearances for the
 * //www.aleaguestats.com/ALeagueStats_16PlayerAppearances.html ALeagueStats Player Appearances]

Disambiguation link notification for September 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Luigi Giura, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nocera (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) 11:08, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation
Your upload of File:Angel of zimbabwe.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:01, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

May 2014 disambig contest: let's do it again!
Greetings fellow disambiguator! Remember back in February when we made history by clearing the board for the first time ever, for the monthly disambiguation contest? Let's do it again in May! I personally will be aiming to lead the board next month, but for anyone who thinks they can put in a better effort, I will give a $10 Amazon gift card to any editor who scores more disambiguation points in May. Also, I will be setting up a one-day contest later in the month, and will try to set up more prizes and other ways to make this a fun and productive month. Cheers! bd2412 T 18:48, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 19 June
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:36, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * On the Adjuvant page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=613615930 your edit] caused an unnamed parameter error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F613615930%7CAdjuvant%5D%5D Ask for help])

Northern Michigan
Your recent edit summary here seems to be inaccurate. It would be helpful if these were closer to what you actually did. Happy editing. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 12:49, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * (clean up, replaced: it's → its using AWB) seems reasonably accurate to me. I would be happy to hear what you think would be more helpful, though, as I may well be making similar changes in the future. Grafen (talk) 13:50, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't mean to be technical. Clean up with AWB was accurate, I suppose.  Could not actually find "it's ==> its"  It came to my attention because I noticed you had done a lot of changes (# of bytes) and the change of it's and its wouid have been minimal.  Best to you.  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 14:02, 22 June 2014 (UTC)