User talk:Kodiologist

On Mr. Hands
Actually, right before your edit, I had also added in the reference, but the exclusionists like User:Delicious_carbuncle as always want to keep the site "Family Friendly" and it was removed. --TIB (talk) 09:27, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Odd. At least there's a link now. —Kodiologist (t) 13:03, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Luc(as) de Groot
That was a good question ("why the parens?"). I web-searched for "Luc(as) de Groot" name, found him quoted on it in an interview, and supplied that. --Thnidu (talk) 01:38, 9 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Nice, thanks! I spent a few minutes searching before leaving the template, but clearly, I wasn't persistent enough. —Kodiologist (t) 13:01, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

BLP problem
Your inclusion of the journalist's name in the Mark Taibbi article is a blp violation. It's clear that the exile article on the incident was not a reliable source, but rather an attempt to shame the journalist. The Vanity Fair article mentions the horse sperm but clearly did not verify it - how could they? This is right after VF described the exile folks as "children, louts, misogynists, madmen, pigs, hypocrites, anarchists, fascists, racists, and fiends." VF also say that they went too far, with taibbi agreeing. VF also describes MT as "a full time heroin addict" and describes an attack by MT on the VF writer. In short the VT article gives no validation to the "facts" reported - quite the opposite. So how can we repeat the exile's victimization of the journalist without violating WP:BLP. Please leave that nonsense out of Wikipedia, or I'll take it to BLPN. Smallbones( smalltalk ) 15:08, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * My understanding of Wikipedia policy is that we do not require a reliable source to have done some kind of extra verification, only that it be a reliable source, which I think Vanity Fair is. Please create a BLPN entry so we can get some outside comments. —Kodiologist (t) 15:14, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * It's not that I'm trying to require that VF do extra verification, it is that VF does *not verify* the claim - rather they cast considerable doubt upon it. Your citing them is essentially cherry-picking.  BLP does not allow cherry-picking. I'll remind you the WP:BLP states "Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced – whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable – should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion."

and

"Remove immediately any contentious material about a living person that:
 * 1) is unsourced or poorly sourced
 * 2) is a conjectural interpretation of a source (see No original research)
 * 3) relies on self-published sources, unless written by the subject of the BLP (see below), or,
 * 4) relies on sources that fail in some other way to meet Verifiability standards."

and that the 3-revert rule does not apply.

Smallbones( smalltalk ) 17:12, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I made a BLPN entry. —Kodiologist (t) 17:32, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Ronald Reagan

 * De nada. —Kodiologist (t) 20:45, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Terminology
You're going to get pushback re: your edits to the Sims article. Please read this Chicago Tribune column. DS (talk) 12:20, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh, for sure. The war between euphemizers and anti-euphemizers has been going on for decades and isn't ending soon. —Kodiologist (t) 12:39, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

"Bimeasurable function" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Bimeasurable function. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 11 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 13:09, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

"Green Mario" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Green Mario and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 12 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 22:34, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

"Adult use" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adult_use&redirect=no Adult use] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Toddst1 (talk) 16:27, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

"MLP G5" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MLP_G5&redirect=no MLP G5] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. 2NumForIce (speak  &#124; edits) 02:28, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hi Kodiologist. Thank you for your work on Algospeak. Another editor, Klbrain, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Klbrain (talk) 07:34, 8 June 2024 (UTC)