User talk:Rrburke/Archive 13

Disambiguation link notification for December 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Magnesia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Achaean. 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) 09:57, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Satyananda Saraswati
Just checking if you wanted to be invoved in the talk section of this article again. Some other editors keep using a non objective view to avoid new information Totocol (talk) 12:49, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reminder. I had forgotten about it. -- Rrburke (talk) 16:47, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for adding your thoughts on it. Hopefully agreement can be reached without scalating Totocol (talk) 20:19, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

I loved your work!

 * Um, thanks. -- Rrburke (talk) 16:51, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

No idea what you are talking about
I just got this message when I came on wiki: 'Hello, I'm Rrburke. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Zoe Sugg with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. -- Rrburke (talk) 17:22, 8 April 2014 (UTC)'

I think you have the wrong person, as I had no idea who that was until I clicked on the link in that message! Please don't contact me again as I only use wiki for information, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.156.191.52 (talk) 01:37, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Vandalism on Audiosurf 2
To my knowledge no one under this network has edited the page. Thank you for being polite and removing that edit. I'll consider a personal account in the future.

(I apologize if this is the wrong format for this sort of thing) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.67.181.172 (talk) 04:33, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Final warning
Could I please contest the final warning for SR 113? I simply put the junction list before the alt. route so as to not confuse users. -RObin207$$mercury203 — Preceding unsigned comment added by RObin207$mercury203 (talk • contribs) 16:24, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Rrburke
You have removed the very declaration of Sant Kabir on his own origin, Mission and Goal which I included for clarity, His statement has rightfully replaced the confusing parts added by others on himself, you choose to remove the change instantly. please clarify your standing on your preference/ understanding. Who was sant Kabir and what is his Ideology and mission. and your intention on retaining confusing statement Truth shell prevail. Being new let me learn from your response. Warm Regards  Sathyam111 (talk) 16:35, 28 October 2015 (UTC)Sathyam111 Sathyam111 (talk) 16:35, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

'Bold text''

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Reason for change in pseudoscience list
Hi Rrburke, you left a message on my talk page I suppose it's called, about an edit I made on List of topics characterized as pseudoscience. You said that I had not explained why but if you look at the talk page for the article (section 1) I had given the reason and in the change itself I had given the reason "correction". I can see how the latter might not tell much at first. Do you think this should have been longer to do a change? --NumericalWarfare (talk) 12:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, NumericalWarfare. Thanks for your note. When I'm doing vandalism patrol, I'm using WP:HUGGLE, a semi-automated tool that makes quick reversions to edits that seem like vandalism. Sometimes it's hard to distinguish vandalism from constructive edits like yours when the edit summary is very brief. This was my error for not checking the talk page, but if you want to avoid similar reverts in the future, consider using more fulsome edit summaries.  Single-word summaries accompanied by substantial removals of content can look to vandalism patrollers like unconstructive edits. Happy editing! -- Rrburke (talk) 14:46, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User talk:Vrenterprises


A tag has been placed on User talk:Vrenterprises, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Cahk (talk) 08:43, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Creatine - Third opinion
I was wondering if you would be able to have a look at Talk:Creatine - Just want to double check if I am wrong to say that the secondary sources that I believe are reliable are not as other editors seem to allege. Thanks a lot Totocol (talk) 04:44, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Police Misconduct
When using this computer, I saw a message saying that an "edit" someone had made was undone. I checked it, and I saw that someone used this computer to say that police misconduct referred to "MY DING A LING." I'm going to assume that police misconduct is not "MY DING A LING," but rather, a much more serious issue.

Anyways, I came to write this (and I don't know what good this does you, but...): this is a school computer in Tulsa, OK. Of course, it's used by many freshmen and middleschoolers, so the corrections may not always be as profound as the one on police misconduct.

Something to consider if there's a lot of repeat offenses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.179.123.236 (talk) 19:09, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

DCMA
what do u mean by constructive — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.255.244.65 (talk) 15:14, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Sorry about the link!
Sorry about the link. I appreciate the feedback

A — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aromellc (talk • contribs) 22:32, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Hey Rrburke! (Edit mistake)
Hey Rrburke! I apologise for the edit that I made on the "English People" page, I was in the process of editing a sentence in the article when I went to do something else, and came back and forgot what I was doing (I'm forgetful like that), and decided to select another line for something else I was going to make a change to, and without paying attention I pressed back space and erased that particular part of the article. I basically hesitated because I didn't know what to do, so I just saved the changes without saying anything because I was embarrassed, and also afraid that I was going to get into trouble, because I only just started my account. But thank you for reassuring me with your message saying it had been restored, again I'm very sorry for the mistake I made.

Srwhatwhat (talk) 20:59, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Your opinions
Why would anyone trust info retrieved from wiki when people, such as yourself, include your opinions in the info? Much of it as a matter of fact is clearly opinion biased info, which means it's worthless. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.140.117.248 (talk) 00:24, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

ticket #2008030310010794
Hi Rrburke, does OTRS ticket #2008030310010794 at https://ticket.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom&TicketNumber=2008030310010794 allow more uploads of images from IndiaFM / Bollywood Hungama? Does it allow any image satisfying the conditions at commons:Template:Cc-by-3.0-BollywoodHungama to be used with Cc-by-3.0? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:32, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, basically yes, but I have to say I would've preferred a more fulsome statement of consent from Bollywood Hungama. On 26 Feb 2008, the representative of Bollywood Hungama (formerly IndiaFM) approved the license as set out at User:Riana/IndiaFM in an email with the single word "Approved". I presume this means he read User:Riana/IndiaFM and approved of the terms of the license. In the ticket User:Riana (the OTRS agent) gives User:BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ (the user corresponding with IndiaFM) instructions about what to tell IndiaFM about what it means to license CC-BY-SA-3.0, but the correspondence between User:BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ and IndiaFM is not included in the file. The only input from IndiaFM is the word "Approved". Nevertheless, I suppose we can assume that User:BOLLYWOOD DREAMZ told IndiaFM what the implications of licensing CC-BY-SA-3.0 are and that IndiaFM read User:Riana/IndiaFM and approved. -- Rrburke (talk) 11:18, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification. That page says "all images from IndiaFM must be verified, individually or in small batches, by OTRS".  So has that actually happened?  Are there more approvals apart from 2008030310010794 for uploaded sets of images? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:51, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
 * there are about a hundred tickets referencing Bollywood Hungama or IndiaFM: some are for individual images and some are for sets. The latest one is from 2014. But it appears that the method for approving licenses for Bollywood Hungama files is simply to add the tag, which in turn adds the  tag with a link to ticket #2008030310010794. There's a field in the template that requires that either an admin or an image reviewer verify the image by checking at bollywoodhungama.com. Until the file is reviewed, it is placed in the category Commons:Category:Unreviewed files from Bollywood Hungama. -- Rrburke (talk) 12:28, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:TEGH logo.png
 Thanks for uploading File:TEGH logo.png. 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. --B-bot (talk) 02:25, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Physaria arctica, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stem. 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) 09:44, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Deletion of Smear campaign section
Hi,

Regarding your deletion of the section the the Donald Trump article regarding Smear campaigns, can you please explain why you believe it is inappropriate to include smear campaigns in this and similar articles. Smear campaigns are just a campaign tactic. It is helpful for young readers to understand that this tactic is commonly used.

I make no comment regarding the accuracy or validity of the allegations against Mr. Trump.

In addition, you did not attempt to improve the section, you merely deleted it. I made the effort of balancing the section by noting Bill Clinton has been subjected to similar attacks.

I believe the issue of smear campaigns is important and it is important to link articles in Wikipedia as readers can become informed.

Isn't it better to let readers decide for themselves on whether this is a smear campaign?

Thanks, WSDavitt (talk) 18:03, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

You deleted the following:


 * The public allegations of misconduct against Donald Trump is an example of a smear campaign. Other politicians, such as Bill Clinton and Gary Hart, have been the target of the same campaign tactic.  Smear campaigns are associated with yellow journalism which is a type of journalism that presents little well-researched news and instead uses eye-catching headlines, scandal-mongering and sensationalism.  For example during Gary Hart's 1988 presidential campaign, the New York Post reported on its front page big, black block letters: "GARY: I'M NO WOMANIZER."




 * Hi, WSDavitt. I deleted the section because you included no reliable published sources that characterize this episode as a smear campaign, and as such the section is original research. I deleted it rather than trying to improve it because, as original research, it has no basis for inclusion in the article. Moreover, it is also original research to refer to these events as a campaign tactic, because there are no reliable published sources that can, with any credible degree of likelihood, point to the Clinton campaign as the source of these allegations. -- Rrburke (talk) 13:17, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Rrburke,

Do you think the information I put on that page would be useful on another page such as Food and dining in the Roman Empire? Cannon98 (talk) 17:28, 28 October 2016 (UTC)Cannon98

Bennett Miller
U realize that Bennett's full name is Bennett Altman Miller right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.198.54.214 (talk) 21:09, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Hedley Mitchells
No problem with this speedy delete - there was an error in the original dead link. Sjoh0050 (talk) 16:31, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

St Dominics, Cornwall
not the only uncited comment on this page - i will log in later and update again  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.176.15.181 (talk) 15:53, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

IP on Polyenetian's page
I don't quite understand why you reverted the IP on Polyenetian's page as a "troll". They're obviously quite nationalistic, but compared to Polyenetian themselves in that regard, they come across as quite civilized. Bishonen &#124; talk 12:48, 11 November 2016 (UTC).
 * The IP editor was engaging in personal attacks, viz. "you stupid fucking idiot", "Lol what a moron idiot" etc. -- Rrburke (talk) 12:55, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
 * IMO Polyenetian themselves were engaging in worse, and were being very threatening. I've removed the entire section, semi'd the page, and warned Polyenetian. Bishonen &#124; talk 12:59, 11 November 2016 (UTC).
 * Hi, Bishonen. It would appear that Polyenetian is now editing from an anon-IP. If this is being done to avoid scrutiny or to mislead then it constitutes sock puppetry. I have placed a warning on the user's talk page and am informing you to keep you apprised of this unwelcome development. -- Rrburke (talk) 13:10, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Arghh. There's also a likely related IP, 59.189.112.120, (same /22 range) editing the same pages. And another thing: the edits both by Polyenetian and the IPs are in suspiciously sophisticated English, considering the way Polyenetian writes on their own page. I think it may all be copyvio. But I found such a confusion of hits on Google that I'm having trouble telling who is copying who. Tell you what, I'll take the whole mess to ANI. The topic area is uncharted waters to me and I'm no whizz kid with Wikipedia mirrors either. Bishonen &#124; talk 17:46, 12 November 2016 (UTC).
 * Done. Bishonen &#124; talk 17:56, 12 November 2016 (UTC).

Hi again, Bishonen. I just had a look at the user's talk page history and now see I misread what was going on. The IP editor did indeed restore some offensive comments, but they were authored by Polyenetian, not by the IP editor. Sorry for the mixup. -- Rrburke (talk) 13:38, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Artistic Marketing
Hi Mr. Rrburke, I edited the information. Is it okay now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KarissiaC (talk • contribs) 16:19, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi and welcome to Wikipedia. Please have a look at the speedy deletion tag on the page to understand why the page has been nominated for speedy deletion. At present the article makes no claim of notability, and doesn't cite any secondary sources to establish that notability. -- Rrburke (talk) 16:22, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Anamika Khanna
Hi I don't quite understand why you are objecting to changes in content update of Anamika Khanna page. The reference is cited through news portals and official website of "Anamika Khanna" Could you please make me understand why the objection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apixelhouse (talk • contribs) 11:37, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Undone. I misunderstood the edit. Thanks for pointing it out. -- Rrburke (talk) 11:41, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apixelhouse (talk • contribs) 11:44, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Krytox
Hello, You recently removed a link I had placed in the Krytox article. The link sent them to an article on my website with more information regarding the lubricant. The link: http://www.miller-stephenson.com/krytox/ Provides the reader with more information regarding the lubricant. The company I work for creates a lot of literature regarding Krytox. They can be found here: http://www.miller-stephenson.com/articles/ The goal of these is to educate the reader on PFPE (perfluoropolyether - the chemical composition), based lubricants. The external link into our website gives readers greater understanding of the lubricant than what wikipedia offers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zayyanc (talk • contribs)
 * Hi and welcome to Wikipedia. External links are generally not placed within the body of an article, but in a separate section entitled "External links" (See External links). Feel free to create such a section and add the link, provided the content you're linking to is not promotional in nature (See LINKSPAM). -- Rrburke (talk) 11:51, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Aleksa Dundić
Hi, Rrburke.

Thank you for your interest in this topic.

I initiated that page more than 10 years ago, but I haven't visited it for years. Several days ago I found it tottaly vandalized and devastated!!

My father was a mathematician from Croatia, who (in 60's) went to post-doc to Moscow (Lomanosov University).

He was a big adorer of Russian/Soviet culture, literature and history, and had the entire Great Soviet Encylopedia (ed. 1972) in his private library.

He told me how Soviets solved the mismatches of his origins in thair encylopedia, and that's how I initiated that page.

Regarding the citation "Strength of lion, soul of child", atributed to Budenni, that's what I heard from my father.

Since he died two years ago, and I moved to another city, it is very hard for me to check that source, at least at this moment.

However, I will do my best in future about that subject.

With regards, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.53.45.10 (talk) 15:13, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Big Game
Hi Rrburke, I Googled the topic for you. It takes as much time to add a cite yourself as it does to remove someone else's edit – might not be a bad thing to try. http://www.stanforddaily.com/2013/11/19/cal-bear-bearied-impaled-again/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.111.104.85 (talk) 16:46, 21 November 2016 (UTC)