User talk:RA0808/Archives2016/April

Invitation to WikiProject Malta
Best regards, Subtropical -man   talk   (en-2)   00:11, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Re: Uncle Grandpa
I am wondering why you reverted my changes I made to 'Uncle Grandpa' a few months ago. I just got around to checking this site again, and noticed that you reverted my CORRECT changes to the article. In fact the reverted changes were in fact incorrect while mine were correct. It appears now that somebody else made the same changes I did in their name, and are applied to the site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.253.238.165 (talk) 16:03, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Checking now I can see that this was a mistake on my part, apologies for the misplaced warning. RA 0808  talkcontribs 04:48, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Re: Lyme disease
Hi RA0808 -- thanks for your note on the Lyme's Disease page; how can I help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.182.72.27 (talk) 20:47, 25 March 2016 (UTC)


 * You can help by taking discussion to the article's talk page (Talk:Lyme disease) to work out your disagreement with the other editors. Communicating by edit summaries can be inefficient and doesn't allow for long-form, well thought out opinions to be expressed. I should note that with your last revert to the page you have now crossed the threshold of the Three Revert Rule and may be blocked from editing if you continue in this vein. Please discuss on the talk page and try to work toward consensus. RA 0808  talkcontribs 20:52, 25 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi RA; thanks for your note. As you can see, the page is evolving well. Please be sure to assume good faith, and please do not accuse others of edit warring. Also, please do not revert other users without good reason. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.182.72.27 (talk) 20:55, 25 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Please at least pretend that you read my message, best of luck with evolving well. RA 0808  talkcontribs 20:57, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Re: ESET NOD32
You claimed I made some editions to a random article I've never even ESET NOD32 visited before; I think either something went wrong or you made a mistake buddy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.252.148.31 (talk) 21:43, 25 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi there, you saw those warnings because you are currently using Wikipedia as an unregistered user which means your "account" is tied to your IP address. If you check your account's contribution page (here) you'll see that someone using the IP address that is currently assigned to you did make edits to ESET NOD32 in 2015 when those warnings were issued. Don't worry, you personally are not in trouble for those edits. Wiki editors know that IP addresses are often reassigned to different subscribers based on the policies of the Internet service provider that owns the addresses, so warnings from that long ago won't negatively affect you. If you'd like to avoid this issue you can register an account to ensure that you only receive messages that are meant for your personally, not for anyone who might be assigned that IP address. Hope this clears things up! RA 0808  talkcontribs 22:00, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Re: Robert A. McDonald page
Greetings -- I made significant changes to Robert A. McDonald's page, updating it to outline the significant work he's been doing at VA.

You noted that you found it one-sided / opinionated. I was actually careful to make sure I only included items that were specific quotations or that objectively described the initiatives at VA. The page, as it was, was pretty anemic, and the one section on Controversy was incomplete (I was going to include, for instance, McDonald's confrontations with some members of the House of Representatives during the course of some of his testimony).

I would very much appreciate it if you could restore the page to the updated version and allow me to lay out the significant work that McDonald has done / is doing at VA. These are facts, not opinion. I don't think you'll find anywhere that I opined about an initiative being good or bad.

Look forward to discussing.

Thanks,

ed — Preceding unsigned comment added by RuthlessWriting&Editing (talk • contribs) 18:09, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I reverted your edit for several reasons not necessarily because you were opining but because of the tone, especially because it seemed to have a one-sided promotional tone re: McDonald's record. From my scan of the edits, much of the content you added to the article was already present in the previous revision in a much more concise, neutral form. Further, your removal of the well-sourced section without specifying a reason gave the impression that the intent behind the edits was more concerned in presenting McDonald in a positive way rather than imparting information objectively. If that was a mischaracterization then I apologize. I congratulate you on wanting to be bold in your edits but this is something that should be done incrementally by improving what is already there. You can access previous revisions of the page in the page history (click the "History" tab at the top of the article) if you wish to refer to them in future edits. Cheers, RA 0808  talkcontribs 20:59, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, RA0808. . . my first time editing / updating a Wiki page. I'll go back and work more incrementally, though I must say that a great deal of what I added was not actually already there, though my adds did build, generally--save but for the deletion of the section on Controversy--on what was there, but perhaps too swiftly? My objective is simply to capture, objectively and in some detail the initiatives McDonald has put forward as Secretary, as a historical record. Will give it another shot. Thanks, again, Ed.RuthlessWriting&#38;Editing (talk) 11:23, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Re: MacEwan University
Hello, Regarding the edit you reverted on the MacEwan University page: thanks for looking out for the page and making sure only legitimate edits get through. However, I removed the "Controversy" section as it was created to detail one individual's workplace complaints. This individual's personal blog was the only source cited, leading us to believe he created that section himself to air his grievances, rather than objectively detail the university's history. In his blog he admits that no academic association or government official he approached found the situation to be worth investigating, and there has been no media or public interest in this story, making the use of the term "controversy" questionable at best. The "controversy" section of an encyclopedia generally details serious and newsworthy issues that affect or upset the public. I don't think one person complaining about an unhappy work experience fits into that. Thanks for looking out!

--MacEwanMedia (talk) 21:21, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for clarifying. Please also see the note posted to your talk page about Wikipedia's policies on usernames that indicate shared use, and declaring conflicts of interest. Cheers! RA 0808  talkcontribs 02:52, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Git @ meh brah
--174.89.41.235 (talk) 05:52, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Re: I didn't make an edit..?
I got a notice that I had edited something? But - I have no recollection of this event.

Could you give me specifics on time and date this happened, please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.180.92.67 (talk) 05:56, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi there, you saw those warnings because you are currently using Wikipedia as an unregistered user which means your "account" is tied to your IP address. If you check your account's contribution page (here) you'll see that someone using the IP address that is currently assigned to you did make edits to Asterism (astronomy) in 2013 when that warning was issued. Don't worry, you personally are not in trouble for those edits. Wiki editors know that IP addresses are often reassigned to different subscribers based on the policies of the Internet service provider that owns the addresses, so warnings from that long ago won't negatively affect you. If you'd like to avoid this issue you can register an account to ensure that you only receive messages that are meant for your personally, not for anyone who might be assigned that IP address. Hope this clears things up! RA 0808  talkcontribs 21:27, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

RE: User talk:107.199.150.229
Your message: Hello, I'm RA0808. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Maximum Ride, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. RA0808 talkcontribs 19:30, 30 September 2015 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:107.199.150.229&redirect=no

Thank you for contacting me. I am sorry but as this involves the Maximum Ride series the edit must have occurred quite some time ago. I have attempted to find the information but, please excuse me but I am having a great deal of difficulty using this system; I can not locate it in the revision history. I am quite surprised that you could not find a citation. Any such edit information would have been taken directly out of one of the books in the series or from interview statement made by the author James Patterson. I am sorry for your inconvenience but there seems to be nothing that I can possibly do after so long a time. Again, thank you for you notification. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmka1 (talk • contribs) 18:28, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


 * If it was you that added that content in 2015 (which was when that message was posted, so it is far out of date now) then please remember that it is not the responsibility of other editors to cite information that you, or any other individual, adds to a Wikipedia page. Under Wikipedia's policy on Verifiability "the burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds... material", and that includes providing a reliable source. Cheers, RA 0808  talkcontribs 21:25, 18 April 2016 (UTC)