User talk:JTBX/Archive 4

Collaboration of business corporations and fascist regimes
I appreciate your contribution to the Fascism article. It is true that fascist regimes have had close connections with business corporations especially in the arms industry. However I do not believe that this is unique to fascist regimes, nor that it is connected to fascist ideology. Business corporations have typically been willing to collaborate with governments regardless of their political system and ideology. For instance, private enterprises have collaborated with the government of China, but this does not mean that because of this collusion that communism as an ideology is associated with collaboration with business corporations. This is not an isolated exclusive case in communist-led states, Henry Ford and the Ford Motor Company collaborated with the Soviet Union dating back to the 1920s and Henry Ford and Joseph Stalin held a friendly relationship with each other and Stalin publicly praised Henry Ford and the Ford Motor Company for assisting in the development of the Soviet automobile industry.. Also just as IBM produced computers for Nazi Germany as you mentioned, IBM also produced computers for the Soviet Union during World War II at the same time it produced them for Germany and continued to sell to the USSR through the Cold War in spite of IBM residing in the "capitalist camp" of the Cold War. However scholars do not associate communism and Marxism–Leninism with close collaboration with business corporations. Business corporations are focused on profit-making will deal with any government, capitalist, communist, or fascist if they are allowed the opportunity.--R-41 (talk) 04:24, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

December 2011
Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Albert Einstein, as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. ''If you feel strongly about re-wording the sentence, please discuss it on the Talk page, first. Thank you.'' &mdash; UncleBubba ( T @ C ) 01:09, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Criticism of Islam sidebar
Template:Criticism of Islam sidebar has been nominated for merging with Template:Criticism of religion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you.

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited The Godfather, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Legitimate (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) 11:38, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 18:26, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Hitman: Codename 47, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Triad (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) 10:28, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited World in Conflict: Soviet Assault, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The West (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) 10:58, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 7
Hi. When you recently edited Batman Begins, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bhutanese (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) 10:29, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 17
Hi. When you recently edited The Patriot (2000 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chris Cooper (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) 10:40, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

The Dark Knight film
I agree with some of your edits on this article that are being disputed. Please contribute to the discussion here so we can get them implemented. Thanks. ArtistScientist (talk) 10:03, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 6
Hi. When you recently edited The Patriot (2000 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American (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) 10:18, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

The Godfather
Hello,

I just wanted to tell you how pleased I am with your editing of the Plot summary in The Godfather article this afternoon (I'm in the UK... where are you?) and to let you know that I have put the paragraphs back as they were to facilitate comparison with earlier edits. This may help to avoid hysterical reverting of your excellent work. I have also made a few minor edits. Have a look! All the best, Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 18:22, 17 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Just doing my job. I trust you know better about this in terms of why you changed the paragraphs back etc. JTBX (talk) 19:17, 17 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes I now understand why you moved them, kinda tired, sorry. I am also from the UK. Thanks again JTBX (talk) 19:30, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello again!

 * Do you remember this (above)?


 * You seemed to be "hell-bent" on brevity then, only two months ago.

We watch with great interest. Kind regards, Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 10:14, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Brevity
I still am, and still go around plots making sure they are concise and tidy, but this film is of course different, and very long. If you have read my draft please consider it, as way too many details were being left out at the expense of sacrificing notable information. --JTBX (talk) 13:57, 18 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Sure. I was ahead of this last night, but thought you were going to wait until you had some response to your posting on the article's Talk page.  Then I found my friend Ring Cinema was on the case.
 * I am sure we three can work well together. Cheers,  Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 14:08, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Your draft

 * Hi! Thank you for your congrats.  Your draft version is excellent.  Glad you approved my small intake.  What do you expect to do with it now?  -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 07:44, 21 April 2012 (UTC)


 * The 1945 to 1946 change was mine following a rewatching of the film last weekend ... I missed the "almost" you are correct! Right now I'm waiting for the proverbial to hit the fan.  -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 08:13, 21 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Changed "should" to "would" on The Godfather Talk page ... isn't that what you meant? -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 11:11, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 22:07, 21 April 2012 (UTC) Oh, so it was an edit summary ... I don't know why he couldn't/wouldn't tell me that. I agree with you. The article is what matters, and it will continue to be a work in progress. You have done a sterling job, and deserve a big thank you. I am anxious that this does not get acrimonious ... there is far too much of that on Wikipedia. -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 00:13, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit summaries please
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to General relativity does not have an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! - DVdm (talk) 10:28, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 21
Hi. When you recently edited The Godfather, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Las Vegas (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) 09:52, 21 April 2012 (UTC)


 * ✅ -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 09:35, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Don't be alarmed!
Don't be alarmed! It is all still on my page – up near the top – next to earlier Godfather material. Been deleting 'stuff' I don't want. Can't be bothered with archiving – who would bother to trawl through archives? Wanted to speed up access to my page. I had reached 324,759 bytes on April 19. Still more to discard, but def. no Godfather or Sopranos. Read El Dude's page earlier this evening (he helped me out earlier this year on The Sopranos, so he's on My Watchlist) Cheers! -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 22:52, 22 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't really use email for communication I'm afraid, unless its business/organisation related so I don't how that system works on here. But yes I am going through to adminstrator resolution now. I have a copy of the draft saved in Word which I edit offline incase its never lost. JTBX (talk) 00:58, 23 April 2012 (UTC)


 * No, I understand that. It can be useful though if you want say something sensitive and not be seen by any person on Wikipedia. Don't be alarmed! – everything is still there in the history.  -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 10:08, 23 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I have just posted on El_duderino's talk page (got a tb from him too) Cheers,  -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 06:01, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

The Godfather Effect
I'm a little uncomfortable with so much emphasis given to one book and one aspect. Many people have said a lot of insightful things about this film, and the conclusion that ethnicities in America rediscovered themselves in the aftermath of this film seems to require some empirical support. Coppola saw the film as a general indictment of American culture (as it implies) and that is more easily supported. Since America has always had strong ethnic identification among its polity, it is somewhat more difficult to make the case that, say, Irish-Americans took The Godfather to heart and realized they felt a bit of the shamrock. When did they not? So, do we strike the right balance? I am undecided. --Ring Cinema (talk) 14:25, 20 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I have been re-reading your posting for the second time and still not clear what you are after. When you write "...one book and one aspect" ... are you referring to all three film articles, or just The Godfather article? Explain, please.  On the other hand, I would like to contribute, but not sure that this 'Brit' has the qualifications to dare venture into an American ethnicity issue like this.  Can you comment please.  -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 16:30, 22 April 2012 (UTC)


 * The section so entitled refers primarily to one book on the subject. So, just on general principles, I question that much emphasis, given the size and scope of the subject, on one book. There are many things written about this movie. That's what I am thinking about. That, and a lack of skepticism about the book's claims. --Ring Cinema (talk) 08:27, 23 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, I am with you now. I tend to agree with your argument.  I must check out the history appertaining to this section.  In my mind right now, if asked, I would say that it was born out of some of the WrathX-187-no-edit summaries-débâcle of April 1 to April 2.  I shall check that out today.  -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 10:40, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Talkback: New message
Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 15:37, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Your complaint at the edit-warring noticeboard
Hello JTBX. You've posted a rather long complaint at WP:AN3. It does not appear that there is any 3RR violation. If it's a complaint of long-term warring you need to be extremely clear about what the violation is. Large explanations of your content changes will just confuse the admins, and they are not supposed to take a position on content anyway. Consider revising your complaint to make it shorter. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 21:12, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Sorry JT, but I have to agree with EdJ. I haven't read the report carefully because of time constraints at the moment but I will later. In looking for the 3rd and 4th revert, I did notice your use of the term 'bait' which you should also try to avoid in framing it like that. It could be used against you. another reason why I suggested composing a draft for E.A.R. El duderino (abides) 21:56, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Talkback: New message
Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 21:21, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I have put all my Godfather postings together in date order (all from Section 76)
 * Please have a look!
 * The last one is from the admin you have involved. I have replied to him.

With best wishes, -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 01:53, 25 April 2012 (UTC)