User talk:Horologium/March 2012

Ship Names
For information, Ship names are usually written in the format HMS Conqueror, not HMS Conqueror. This is in regards to this edit. Regards, Wee Curry Monster talk 13:16, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:DaytonaBeachSeal.gif
 Thanks for uploading File:DaytonaBeachSeal.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 12:27, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Pink slime
Dude it's cited, this is literally shit food and that is cited based on the source, why won't you talk about it or reword it? Put a little effort into life man.LuciferWildCat (talk) 13:50, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Also your edits ruined the citations for 8 other statements that were based on the mother citation for the content you removed and damaged the citation for another item. Anyways I edited the sentence about fecal matter to address your concerns and best reflect exactly what the citation states but it does clearly state that the pink slime is taken from near the hide which is highly exposed to fecal matter. And in good faith, I honestly wonder, did you not see that part of the article?LuciferWildCat (talk) 14:04, 31 March 2012 (UTC)


 * (E/C) No, it's NOT cited, at least not in what you presented as a source. That ABC article very specifically states: The low-grade trimmings come from the parts of the cow most susceptible to contamination, often close to the hide, which is highly exposed to fecal matter. What you wrote was that the trimmings were exposed to fecal matter, which is wrong. You obviously don't care about factual accuracy and NPOV, but I do.  Horologium  (talk) 14:06, 31 March 2012 (UTC)


 * My first response (above) should make it quite clear that I did see that part of the article. I have removed your new version as well; it's grammatically clunky (and looks as tacked-in as it is) and no longer terribly relevant, particularly in the lede, which already discusses "contamination". You need to mind NPOV; your jihad against this substance is way over-the-line, and as I noted on the AN/I thread, I don't think a topic ban is unreasonable for you at this point.  Horologium  (talk) 14:15, 31 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Horologium - it looks like we edit-conflicted with your deletion of Pulverized cow anus and my RfD of the redirect at Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 April 1. Should I remove that RfD, or leave it be? I support your deletion of it. First Light (talk) 15:28, 1 April 2012 (UTC)