User talk:SummerPhDv2.0/Archive 12

99 Red Balloons
Hi, Re: Wikipedia entry "99 Red Balloons". My edit/addition about the comments made by Uwe Fahrenkrog Petersen being disingenuous were described as an opinion. Yet what he says in the Wiki entry is precisely that. I must make my position clear here. I am the writer of the English lyric. The band and their manager Jim Rakete had tried many sources for an English lyric before receiving mine and when they received it they immediately recorded and released it. This makes a nonsense of the claim by Uwe Fahrenkrog Petersen about them being not happy etc. THEY choose my lyric and there is no way they would have recorded the song unless they were happy with it. I work in the same business and it is laughable to claim they would accept the lyric, record the song with that lyric and simultaneously disapprove of it. In fact they were so happy about it they invited me to Austria where they were working on an album. They had been so eager to record the song with the English lyric they (or more precisely their manager) failed to check who owned the copyright (my publisher). They assumed the copyright would be theirs and thus have control over allocation of royalties. By then it was too late as the record was released. The reason they now say what they say is this. An attempt was made to pay me a translator's royalty which initiated a dispute in court between the publishers. The attempt to credit me with a translation royalty (much less that a writer's royalty) was thrown out of court. (The High Court in London). The outcome of that court case was that they agreed to pay me a writer's royalty percentage of whatever version was used or sold- German or English. You must see the inconsistency here. On the one hand they tried to assert that the English lyric was a translation and on the other try to assert what Uwe Fahrenkrog Petersen says in the Wiki entry. Those remarks are simply a reflection of the fact that they were not happy having to assign me the rights bestowed to me by the court settlement. In light of this I think my edit was very reasonable and I would further suggest that the Wiki entry comment by Uwe Fahrenkrog Petersen be removed as it is false, ungracious and bad manners to boot. Thank you, Oisindubh (talk) 00:17, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * As a user edited encyclopedia, Wikipedia is not in a position to judge your claims about the situation, nor whether anything anyone said is "false, ungracious and bad manners".
 * We do not know -- nor do we pretend to know -- whether you are who you say you are or how you may have been involved in the situation. Instead, we report what independent reliable sources say on the matter. If you believe we are taking what someone said (e.g., Petersen) as fact, you may wish to discuss the issue on the article's talk page. An appropriate change might involve clarifying that someone said something. Such a change would be similar to changing "Richard Nixon was not a crook" to "Richard Nixon said he was not a crook". We cannot, however, add your personal analysis that their statements are disingenuous. If you are aware of independent reliable sources that discuss the issue, you may wish to bring them up on the talk page as well.
 * I have suggested that you bring these issues up on the talk page for two reasons:
 * 1) Other editors looking at the changes you wish to make may have other suggestions to improve the section and/or may be tempted to revert your changes for reasons similar to mine.
 * 2) As an editor with a strong conflict of interest here, you are much more likely to make lasting changes here by presenting your case on the talk page than by editing the article yourself. With this in mind, I am placing a standard comment regarding conflict of interest editing on your talk page to (hopefully) avoid some of the more common problems that sometimes arise in such situations. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 01:51, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I have suggested that you bring these issues up on the talk page for two reasons:
 * 1) Other editors looking at the changes you wish to make may have other suggestions to improve the section and/or may be tempted to revert your changes for reasons similar to mine.
 * 2) As an editor with a strong conflict of interest here, you are much more likely to make lasting changes here by presenting your case on the talk page than by editing the article yourself. With this in mind, I am placing a standard comment regarding conflict of interest editing on your talk page to (hopefully) avoid some of the more common problems that sometimes arise in such situations. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 01:51, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Pia Zadora
Sorry for the messed up comment but, the way it is now is what I meant :) Mlpearc  ( open channel ) 01:17, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note. It did strike me as odd, but it doesn't really change my opinion. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 01:21, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

My reply
Go ahead and delete it. If I do find sources for it, I'll re-create it.--Taeyebaar (talk) 23:09, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Tomboys: Lara Croft?
I didn't think it needed a citation, as it was common knowledge. --Studio 126 (talk) 06:15, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Reading through Tomboy, you will certainly find some characteristics that fit Croft. You will find others that do not. If we open up the list to characters that various editors feel are "common knowledge", the list would quickly balloon to an extensive, unsourced list of various editors' guesses and assumptions.
 * This would be no different than opening other articles up to "common knowledge". It is common knowledge that Fahrenheit 451 is about censorship. It isn't. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 13:24, 2 March 2016 (UTC)!

Non constructive removed
I wish to address (General note: Unconstructive editing on Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan. (TW))

My edits was that saying that in the UK, they own two airports and the UK national lottery to which has seen some controversy. You cannot have happy happy joy joy joy editions to certain pages, otherwise you might as well delete pages about the Kennedy assassination, and other World problems.

You are removing facts, especially facts that people outside of a certain Country may not know, it adds to people's knowledge.

Regards

Mark — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.207.187.197 (talk) 11:22, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) Please be sure to sign in when you edit, . When you have an account but edit while logged out, it can come across as an attempt to avoid scrutiny.
 * 2) I removed your additions for several reasons:
 * 2a) You did not cite a reliable source for your addition.
 * 2b) Clearly, the investments of the Plan change over time.Your addition does not state when the Plan held those investments.
 * 2c) Your "incomplete list" of UK investments would be the only three investments listed. Why list these three? Why IK investments specifically?
 * 2d) Your heavily opinionated commentary on the lottery is completely inappropriate because it is your opinion and it is off topic. This artcile is about the Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan, not the lottery.
 * Moreover, your edits immediately before this were essentially an advertisement for your blog. Yes, Lustig is selling a book based on the absurd idea that playing the lottery is an "investment" rather than a way for governments to take advantage whose dreams override their common sense. Reliable sources cited in the article touch on this. Your blog is not a reliable source. Your opinion that a 3 in 1,000,000 chance is "near enough very easy", BTW, is laughable.)
 * Wikipedia is not a place for you to advertise your blog. Wikipedia is not a place for you to call attention to your displeasure with changes to a lottery. Wikipedia is not a place for you to wonder why a phrase means what it means. If you would like to do any of these things, the Internet has countless forums and blog sites designed for purposes like these.
 * Wikipedia, OTOH, is an encyclopedia that reports what independent reliable sources have to say about: an author selling a book, a teachers' pension system, a slogan used by racists and countless other topics. Editors' opinions on these topics do not have a place on Wikipedia. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 15:35, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Cartoons
Since you edit on cartoon pages and have that WP:KIDSTVDATES, thought I'd alert you to User:EvergreenFir/sandbox, esp. the Fireman Sam one. Just FYI  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 02:34, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Miley Cyrus
Sorry about the "Trump vandalism." I must have accidentally deletion that section by mistake. Thanks for leaving it open for me to add my original edit back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gruffduff62 (talk • contribs) 23:42, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * It was neither "vandalism" nor accidental deletion. In your first edit, you added material that seems to be OK, but also changed one "Trump" to "Drumpf". Your second try, supposedly "withoutthe deletion", re-added the material and changed "Trump" to "Drumpf" three times. There was no deletion. There was nothing accidental. There was no mistake. This was not "vandalism" it was vandalism. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 00:55, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

A gentle body check
Hi sweetie! Ya got me 👵 I'm referring to your gentle body check on the Sea Breeze (cocktail) Talk page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sea_Breeze_(cocktail)&diff=711027837&oldid=692999015

It was sweet of you to call it a revert of a good faith edit. I didn't expect it to be caught so soon. I'm such a big fan of that Angel TV show, I watch it over and over on the Netflix. I love watching that young man Andy Hallett and his beautiful singing, so tragic he was taken from us so young. I truly do go out on the anniversary of his passing to drink a Sea Breeze in his honour. I was hoping my shout out to his fans to join me would stick on that page at least until March 29, that tragic date. But from looking over your User and Talk pages, old and new, I see you're an erstwhile young editor with a robust sense of rightness and a beltful of handy power tools, as well as a fair command of Wiki law. And over 90 thousand edits! Gracious! I hope diligence is its own reward, because you are going above and beyond in my opinion. And I also noticed you don't go in for those tons of Wiki merit badges that adorn the User pages of some of the maniacal Wiki editors, who seem to have lost their way. I'm curious what your PhD is in, I was guessing Philadelphia History, but since I'm here I might as well ask you. So please, if you don't mind, what is your PhD area or discipline?

On another small note, I'm sorry you lost your password to your old Wiki account, the good Lord knows I have been there and done that sort of thing a few times. They tell you to hide your passwords and keep them secret, but then your computer dies, or they move you, and your access to old accounts just disappears over night. Forgetful. I'll tell you my little secret. I now write down all my passwords and pin numbers, and I keep that piece of paper pinned to the inside of my bra.

One more small thing: you misspelled "roughly" on your new User page. I thought you would want to know. Spell check dear!

Ornery Lesbian Space Pope is a nice touch. Oh, and don't worry about my Toast thing, I will find blogs and twitters I can post it on. I always do. When I do, I will leave you a note on here so you can go and check it out. Oh, and links too. If you're an Angel or Lorne fan, perhaps you will join me on March 29? At least in spirit, at your favorite bar or club or pub. Take care of yourself sweetie, and good future editing!

75.62.134.221 (talk) 03:19, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what part of "ornery" makes this guy think I'm his "sweetie" or "dear". - Sum mer PhD v2.0 03:29, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I had no idea that you could get a PhD in Philadelphia History. --kelapstick(bainuu) 04:26, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure. To get into the program, though, you have to draw Timmy the Turtle. The same fine school offers TV/VCR repair and gun smithing. In September, I'm starting work on my MD in Cheesesteakology. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 04:35, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Don't be haters. Check it out:
 * http://www.cla.temple.edu/history/graduate-program/dissertations-in-progress/
 * Dissertation Title: “PHLadelphia: The Economy, Geography, and Politics of Flight in (and above) Philadelphia, 1980-2010”
 * Dissertation Title: “The Franklin Women: Kinship, Gender Roles, and Public Culture in Philadelphia and Beyond, 1720-1900”
 * Dissertation Title: “In the Jaws of the Lion: The British Possession of Philadelphia”
 * Apology accepted. 75.62.134.221 (talk) 07:29, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Calling it "sarcastic elitism" is a personal attack.
 * Yes, for a PhD in history, your dissertation might involve Philadelphia. Much as my Draw Me! dissertation were on Timmy the Turtle and "Why I'm afraid of foreigners", my PhDs from Federal School of Applied Cartooning and Trump University Entrepreneur Initiative are in Applied Cartooning and Racist Pandering.
 * With your apparent degreeing Googleology, you could probably actually make legitimate contributions to the project instead of throwaway jokes on talk pages. Oh well. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 13:05, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I thought you and kelapstick were disparaging those who get degrees in the Humanities, something I see all too often in those with degrees in the hard sciences and technical fields. I won't stand for that and call it out whenever I encounter it. If on the other hand you and kelapstick were making fun of me and not my academic brethren and sistren, then so be it. I will accept your jesting at my expense. As for editing, I make anonymous simple edits to fix typos and grammar errors on Wikipedia, a neverending task as more foreigners edit here (i.e. those for whom English is obviously a second language). I have been doing this for as long or longer than you have, albeit with far fewer notches on my editing gun. Ninety-thousand is impressive. I'm sure I have far fewer than a thousand, but then I don't keep track. I occasionally revert obvious vandalism. I almost never edit content. I rarely engage with other editors. I sometimes weigh in on article deletion votes. Commenting on others' Talk pages is not anathema to me, but mostly I find it pointless, for a variety of reasons. Commenting here is over. 75.62.134.221 (talk) 15:56, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I thought you and kelapstick were disparaging those who get degrees in the Humanities, something I see all too often in those with degrees in the hard sciences and technical fields. I won't stand for that and call it out whenever I encounter it. If on the other hand you and kelapstick were making fun of me and not my academic brethren and sistren, then so be it. I will accept your jesting at my expense. As for editing, I make anonymous simple edits to fix typos and grammar errors on Wikipedia, a neverending task as more foreigners edit here (i.e. those for whom English is obviously a second language). I have been doing this for as long or longer than you have, albeit with far fewer notches on my editing gun. Ninety-thousand is impressive. I'm sure I have far fewer than a thousand, but then I don't keep track. I occasionally revert obvious vandalism. I almost never edit content. I rarely engage with other editors. I sometimes weigh in on article deletion votes. Commenting on others' Talk pages is not anathema to me, but mostly I find it pointless, for a variety of reasons. Commenting here is over. 75.62.134.221 (talk) 15:56, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Final warning
You discussion are not valid and are clearly WP:IDONTLIKE. If you feel you're reverts are in good faith please request your changes at Third opinion and see if any other editor agrees with you. Oh yeah, I saw you removed sources from Jim's Steaks, but that one is fine. It is fine to be BOLD, but I've already disagreed with fire needle (so did AfD) and Dale's and reverted which means you cannot revert without third party approval, better to have them remove it. I can't be more civil than this. Valoem  talk   contrib  00:18, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I cannot request a third opinion without having a second opinion. Please answer the question I asked here. You may also access the question at Talk:Dalessandro's_Steaks and scroll to the bottom of that section. Perhaps you feel you have already answered the question. If so, please take a moment to restate your response. Thanks. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 01:43, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Don't revert the edits, I've requested third party opinion already. If they agree ANI is next for you. Valoem   talk   contrib  02:27, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * So, by "request third party opinion" you don't mean a WP:3O, you mean you asked someone to come to bat for you. Nice. Did you tell them you have repeatedly refused to discuss the issues, blindly revert and have created rules for editing your articles? - Sum mer PhD v2.0 03:41, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * This one is a rather strange way to get a third opinion. Hmm, let's see. Where can I find an unbiased third opinion? I know; I'll pick someone who argued with them, lost and is probably bitter about it. Who could possibly be more objective? - Sum mer PhD v2.0 04:06, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * As usual, I have asked for discussion of the issue on the article's talk page. Please discuss the issue. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 04:37, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

The Nut Job
Hey, listen, I know what I did seemed inappropriated, but the officer's name is F. O'Malley. I know it seems unlikey but when I watched the movie, I read his name tag. See it for yourself.

24.190.31.12 (talk) 05:27, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * For actors/roles, Wikipedia uses screen credits. Those credits do not include a name. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 14:29, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

thriller sale
Thank you for your message. I'm 126.15.70.10. I'm sorry that I didn't provide a reliable source.But it is right that Thriller sold correctly 1,792,000 million copies in Japan. According to Oricon(Japanese chart magazine), the real sales figure of the album is between 1,747,000 and 1,792,000.

This is the most reliable sourse. A Japanese chart enthusiast has been keeping the site.

http://slms.sakuraweb.com/million/millionalbum.html

スリラー:thriller

マイケル・ジャクソン:Michael Jackson

売上(万枚):sales(10 thousands)

He is afraid of infringing the copyright of Oricon, so I provide no reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.15.70.10 (talk) 17:02, 27 March 2016 (UTC) Thank you for your responing soon.That isn't a blog.If you doubt of that sourse,I provide another sourse.
 * This seems to be a blog or other type of self-published source. As such, it is not a reliable source. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 17:16, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * This seems to be a blog or other type of self-published source. As such, it is not a reliable source. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 17:16, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

http://entamedata.web.fc2.com/music/all_album.html

I would like you to see 98位(rankig no.98) of the list.The sales figure is 179.2(万枚:10 thousands). Correctly it's a type of self-published sourse, but the site is used as references of "Year-end charts(1983 and 1984)" in Japan now. http://entamedata.web.fc2.com/music/music_a1983.html

http://entamedata.web.fc2.com/music/music_a1984.html

March 2016
Do not post on my talk page. I warned you before about this. Let me be very clear to you yet again since you have problems understanding. You are not welcome on my page. That means I do not want to hear from you at all. I am not interested in communicating with you. I do not like you. Is this understood? Stay off my talk page.  Caden  cool  20:48, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Consider this your second warning for personal attacks. Yeah, I know, you only implied it. I assume, of course, that there will be a third warning as you seem to want to "prove" something. Knock yourself out. That's discussing contributors.
 * You got upset when I removed your synthesis (see "You Keep Me Hangin' On", above). So, you came back to "get" me (see "Do some actual work"), demanding that I do the "simple" task of finding a source for someone else: I couldn't find it; you either couldn't or didn't bother trying (disproving your supposed point). Now someone canvassed you as an attack dog when discussing content didn't seem to be doing the trick. You took the bait. You threatened AN/I over a maintenance tag, then had absolutely nothing to say about the actual issue. It seems you were there as a petty act of revenge. Now your feelings were hurt by a warning to knock of the personal attacks.
 * Boo. Hoo. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 21:55, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Dalessandro's
Edits which help expanded articles are highly approved by me. Thanks, I intend to write one Joe's Steaks next. Valoem  talk   contrib  05:05, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Thomas & Friends: The Great Race
Hi, Summer! I was just curious if we had enough coverage for a separate article for Thomas & Friends: The Great Race? --ACase0000 (talk) 03:57, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Future films are not notable until there s substantial coverage in independent reliable sources and independent reliable sources confirm that principle photography has begun. I haven't seen that. There certainly no rush. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 04:57, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, Thank you! Btw, what about all the international news coverage from NY Times, NBC News etc.? --ACase0000 (talk) 05:19, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I haven't seen that. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 11:41, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Here are some links: NY Times, NBC News and here is a link for theatrical release in England --ACase0000 (talk) 17:26, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
 * The NYT and NBC links say precious little about the film, as they are focused on the expansion of the toy line. The primary source (a theater chain promoting a screaning date nearly two months out) doesn't add much. I personally don't see material that can't be included in the redirect target. (Actually, I don't see much that isn't there already.) - Sum mer PhD v2.0 19:47, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Watch the trailers on the official Thomas & Friends YouTube channel and you will see who speaks in the movie with the YouTube videos as proof. --ACase0000 (talk) 01:52, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

what do we do
with reviews such as this? [[[User:Carptrash|Carptrash]] (talk) 15:27, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
 * "Critical response" sections are typically limited to professional reviews. That said, the film style guide does say "Detailed commentary from reliable sources of the critics' consensus (or lack thereof) for a film is encouraged. Individual critics can also be referenced to detail various aspects of the film. Professional film critics are regarded as reliable sources, though reputable commentators and experts—connected to the film or to topics covered by the film—may also be cited."
 * So, I guess it's two questions: Is this a "reputable source" and, as always, WP:WEIGHT. For weight, we have several "reputable commentators and experts" comments in the article. Other than the claims that this film is the absolute unvarnished Truth, I'm not sure what this would add
 * More concerning is the "reputable" question. The Chalcedon Foundation has been listed as a hate group. I don't doubt that the KKK or Stormfront (website) might have had something to say about 12 Years a Slave or similar films. I rather doubt, though, that we'd include their opinions. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 16:30, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I found the film in a discount bin somewhere and bought it because (1.) I am an amateur sculpture historian and (2.) I have an interest in religious propaganda and revisionist history, (3.) I'm a history-in-general sort and (4.) it was dirt cheap. The movie was dreadful, to call it a joke would be to suggest that inhere might be something funny and there is not.  That its advocates turn out to be hate groups seems about right.  I was not changeling you with my question, just interested in your opinion. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 18:40, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Disneyland Monorail Refurb
I just made an account with Wikipedia. I've been updating some of the Disneyland attractions refurbishment statuses before making an account. The Disneyland Monorail, for example, will be closed for refurbishment according to the following website, starting from today until April 19. You can tell by going through the calendar. It may change but as of now the re-opening date is April 19 if you check this calendar. I have re-updated the refurbishment status of this attraction. Wedfan10 (talk) 05:10, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Regularly schedule maintenance, such as this, is not something we include. Please see WP:NOT. As a rule of thumb, if it isn't covered in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it simply does not belong here. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 12:00, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

oak park
like, oak park bloods is the full name of the specific bloods gang i was speaking of in mozzy so leaving just the oak park part was kind of confusing. im not gonna fix it cause i don't words, but if you want to go back and proper english the thing, than that'd be cool. oh and there's another article in ref. about the oak park bloods, but i don't remember how much it said about the rappy rappy shooty shooty so... it'd be cool if you just fixed that too.JonCruz14 is fluent in valley girl 21:52, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Before my change, the article said "...of an Oak Park Bloods Member, and Mozzy associate...". The source, however, does not mention the Oak Park Bloods set. In fact, there is no mention of Bloods whatsoever. The section of the source that mentions Mozzy says, "...a reported member of Oak Park rapper Mozzy’s crew...". So, I changed the text to reflect the source: "...an Oak Park Mozzy associate...". I suppose we could say "...an associate of Mozzy's from Oak Park...". Would that be better? - Sum mer PhD v2.0 01:02, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

that's better than anything i could figure.JonCruz14 is fluent in valley girl 21:52, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 02:06, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

it's neighbourhood
it's also colour, and centre JonCruz14 is fluent in valley girl 21:50, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:ENGVAR. As he was born and lives in the U.S., this article uses American English: neighborhood, color and center, along with capitalization and punctuation which are standard across varieties of English. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 01:44, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

You may be right in this sense, but american english is wrong. Seeing as I'm powerless to the sitch, whatevs you cool.JonCruz14 is fluent in valley girl 21:50, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Presumably, you feel American English is "wrong" because it is a variant of another variety. What variety? Isn't that variant also "wrong" as it is a variant of numerous earlier languages? Is Italian "wrong" as a variant of Latin?
 * Whether you prefer to fill your car or auto's tank (near the trunk or boot) with petrol or gas by the gallon, liter or litre is entirely your business. For articles, we have a guideline, WP:ENGVAR, to help prevent disputes. Long story short: Articles with strong ties to one particular nation (such as Mozzy's country of birth and residence) will use that country's variety of English.
 * (Translation: yo, i gets u man but stay cool arright? american english be mos def on the upright at the wiki. check it: WP:ENGVAR. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 21:57, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

ummm... okay...? i think my fav part was the mocking slang, but then again, there was that inaccurate metaphor, i keep trying to end my comments with 'you chill', but i was really offended by that, you damaged ma feels breh.JonCruz14 is fluent in valley girl 15:40, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Caillou has cancer.
I think he has cancer. I get that he was a baby in the original books, but I call bullshit on that. Why would his parents shave his head if he wasn't undergoing chemo? I think the most likely explanation is that he died, and the entire show is told through flashbacks. That's why it is narrated by the grandma, and the entire show is shown in a dream cloud. We need to gather sources to support this theory. Edmodo23 (talk) 15:33, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 * The most likely explanation is that you are here to have some fun and will end up being blocked again. Feel free to prove me wrong. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 15:35, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Check out my edits to East Noble High School, Wayne High School (Indiana) and Donald Trump. All constructive. Thanks for making that assumption though. I'm just a 54-year-old web design teacher trying to edit in his spare time. Edmodo23 (talk) 20:16, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Edmondo23 was indefinitely blocked on April 12, 2016. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 04:46, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

The Pirates Who Don't Do Anything: A VeggieTales Movie
Could you please weigh-in at ? It appears that an anon who insisted on shorting the plot, and got blocked for it, has created an account and is now shorting the plot. If I'm wrong, feel free to tell me. If the other editor is wrong, feel free to mention it. If it's just a stupid thing to have a protracted edit ware over, please let us know that as well. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:53, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

184 times?!
I was just clicking "random page", and I ran into your user page. I looked at it and I need to ask: How on earth did you manage to get your user page vandalized 184 times? I personally would never do something like that, I'm just curious. Dude00007, Ph. D., Sc. D. (talk) 22:49, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * In a word: Volume. If you tell enough people "you need a source for that", "the source doesn't say that" or "don't edit war over unsourced divorces/plot details/genres/etc." you're bound to run into people who figure "Oh yeah? I'll make an easily reverted change to your user page. That'll teach ya." - Sum mer PhD v2.0 11:57, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

A Farewell to Kings
The edit to A Farewell to Kings regarding Robert Charistgau's dislike of progressive rock is not original research or vandalism in any sense. A reliable source was included (a source also cited in the Robert Christgau page). That the source does not refer to this specific album is irrelevant, the edit and source point to the information that he generally does not like progressive rock, the music genre in which this band performs, and that is relevant to his review of the album. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.179.137.241 (talk) 15:55, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
 * This is a fairly common misunderstanding. The source says Charistgau does not like prog rock. If the source is reliable, it might be relevant to add to an article on the critic or (less likely) progressive rock. However, that statement by itself is not relevant to this album until it is connected to the album in some way.
 * The source you provided says he does not like prog rock. Let's call that source A. Other sources say the album is progressive rock. That's source B. The statement you wish to make is, essentially, "Of course he didn't like it; it's progressive rock and he doesn't like progressive rock!" That's C. A + B = C. That is WP:SYN. The claim is not verifiable unless you provide an independent reliable source that directly supports the statement.
 * If you disagree, please raise the issue on the article's talk page or on the NOR noticeboard. Thanks. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 19:54, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Hey Listen
Listen!

How come VeggieTales: The Gink, the Prince and the Princess hasn't been yet? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ceb1031 (talk • contribs) 1:47, April 18, 2016‎
 * Because, like all of your additions, it does not exist. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 01:49, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Ceb1031 has been indefinitely blocked. In addition to some connection to Special:Contributions/2602:301:77A0:90:30B0:BE38:C2DA:5A37, he has socked at Special:Contributions/5.28.164.103. Likely The UPN Vandal again. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 14:15, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Rapid date changes
Hi SummerPhDv2.0, I just noticed the comments you had left here and I wanted to let you know about a couple of similar edits I've seen recently. Edit series such as this and this do not target 80s songs, but they seem to be very similar sorts of rapid unsourced date changes. This is a long-running problem at Wikipedia and actually just this morning I requested some help with this issue here (at the Edit filter noticeboard). I'd be interested in your thoughts on my request. -Thibbs (talk) 03:08, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I know virtually nothing about our edit filters. FWIW, I've offered up some of the data that I've collected. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 03:26, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I appreciate it. And I like your idea about manually tagging problematic accounts like this to keep track of them. I may look into doing something similar. -Thibbs (talk) 11:44, 23 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Well I've been inspired to create WP:VIDEOGAMEDATES. Basically it's a straight copy of your KIDSTVDATES, but focused instead on video games. Let me know what you think and please feel free to add a "See WP:VIDEOGAMEDATES" note to anyone's page who you think fits the pattern. Also I know of a few Children's TV editors who fit the pattern and I'm wondering if it's OK with you if I were to add a "See WP:KIDSTVDATES" note to their talk pages. At the top of my list are 24.4.254.10 and 76.103.171.69 both of whom I reported to ANI back in 2012, but there are others. I'm interested in digging a bit to see what I can find. -Thibbs (talk) 01:09, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I've made a mental note to use WP:VIDEOGAMEDATES. I didn't really review it, but if it's a copy of mine, I'm sure it's brilliant. As for applying WP:KIDSTVDATES where it applies: please do.
 * Let me know if you find any patterns. I haven't really spent much time on it,but nothing is leaping out at me. I was expecting something obvious to scream an answer at me. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 02:19, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Complete Peanuts
You recently undid an edit over at Complete Peanuts, changing who was going to be featured on the spine of Volume 25 from Rerun to Truffles. Thing is, whoever had made that change turns out to have been correct; I've got a copy in my hands, and it has Truffles on the spine. So you may want to undo your undo; use the book itself (ISBN 978-1-60699-913-4) as a reference if one is needed. --Nat Gertler (talk) 00:57, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * It's a forthcoming book so I can't see it to cite it. Please see the related topic I've added to the talk page. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 02:19, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

April 2016
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In your recent edit to Meghan Trainor, you added links to an article which did not add content or meaning, or repeated the same link several times throughout the article. Please see Wikipedia's guideline on links to avoid overlinking. ''If you (or others) are planning on adding articles for the red links, feel free to undo my edit. Thanks.''  Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  02:07, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I think you may have reverted the wrong edit. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 02:16, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * You're right. Must've been something with Twinkle, or maybe just my stupidity. It's been fixed. Sorry for the trouble. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  04:34, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Thompson Valley High School
Hello, We recently updated the Thompson Valley High School page. we are current students and the information we added was accurate. We would appreciate it if you would cease your editing of this page. Thank you. Bjjohnson96 (talk) 13:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC) Bjjohnson96
 * Your edits are very basic vandalism. People who grew up in other parts of the country did not commute to Nowhere, Colorado to go to your school. There was not an outbreak of bubonic plague. Feel free to go back and provide a reliable source for your claims or find something useful to do with your time. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 14:02, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Bjjohnson96 has been indefinitely blocked for vandalism. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 14:10, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Mark blocked
Hi Summer, do you have this tool installed?

It's awesome! It marks blocked users with a strikethrough in edit histories. This is immensely valuable for spotting sock operators and other patterns of disruptive behavior across articles. For example, if you install the tool and then look at this edit history your mind will be blown by how many people are stricken through for socking. I thought of mentioning it to you as I was looking at the edit history of Dink, the Little Dinosaur. If you use it, lemme know if you wind up liking it. Have a good rest of the weekend! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:30, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Now that is a useful little tool. Thanks! - Sum mer PhD v2.0 23:54, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Enjoy! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:58, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

My edit to "I Wanna Go Back" (in the "Eddie Money version" subsection)
Hey SummerPhDv2.0,

Fair enough, regarding my edit to "I Wanna Go Back." I could have referenced the "More Images" link in the Can't Hold Back entry on Discogs, which shows the liner notes and where no drummer is credited on "I Wanna Go Back," but even then, I realize that doesn't necessarily mean Mike Baird is indeed that uncredited drummer (although the drums in this song have the same basic sound as the other tracks on the album, all of which credit Baird). Anyway, part of my adding that content into the Wiki entry was to show another element that distinguishes the sound of Eddie Money's version from the synthpop style of the original. Perhaps I could just add back the part about how there is a rolling drum intro, without even mentioning/getting into who actually performed it (uncredited) on the album? Please let me know. Thanks!--RockNWrite82 (talk) 22:33, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab
What are you doing with Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab? Im open to a change if it needs to happen, but the version you are reverting to doesnt even make sense. The sentence "His movement is today often known as "Wahhabism", although many adherents see this as a derogatory term coined by his opponents, and prefer it to be known as the Salafi movement' becomes "Although many adherents see this as a derogatory term coined by his opponents, and prefer it to be known as the Salafi movement." without the reference to Wahhabism, the first portion of the sentence is a fragment, with the 'this' referring to nothing. Also, why take out the movement = Wahhabi movement section?  There is no doubt he founded that movement, no matter what it is called.  Bonewah (talk) 19:50, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Hmm. I'm not sure. I don't know much about the topic and only got there in the first place as part of an on-going project to remove a bad source (see WP:IBP).
 * It looks like I had the page open to review the most recent edit and accidentally hit the rollback button. Sorry! - Sum mer PhD v2.0 23:08, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Cool, thanks for the explanation! Bonewah (talk) 15:21, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * It looks like I had the page open to review the most recent edit and accidentally hit the rollback button. Sorry! - Sum mer PhD v2.0 23:08, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Cool, thanks for the explanation! Bonewah (talk) 15:21, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Millie the Helper on The Electric Company and Millie Helper on Dick Van Dyke
You deleted my edit on The Electric Company (TV Series) where I noted that Millie the Helper was named after Millie Helper, the neighbor character on The Dick Van Dyke Show, claiming I didn't add a reference. I don't have any articles with quotes from Electric Company's production staff to support the claim they were referencing the Van Dyke show. I think the Electric Company character's name is too unusual and too close to be a coincidence (kinda like J. Arthur Crank). If you simply meant some acknowledgment of the original Millie, I've added a link to Wikipedia's list of the Van Dyke show characters.Just1thing (talk) 16:08, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * You "think (it is) too close to be a coincidence". One possibility is that it is a coincidence. Another possibility is your guess. A third possibility is that they are both named after a third source. Consider two movies made 15 years apart with very similar plots and identical character names. Is one clearly based on the other? Couldn't they both be based on the same book or a third earlier movie?
 * Additionally, as a general rule, if reliable sources don't discuss a fact, it is generally trivial. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 16:18, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Additionally, as a general rule, if reliable sources don't discuss a fact, it is generally trivial. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 16:18, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

SalemHanna sock

 * See Sockpuppet_investigations/SalemHanna. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 12:08, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
 * === intentional vandalism of stats with resources ===
 * Stop hand nuvola.svg You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at [].
 * Mandarin050 (talk) 09:47, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
 * === constant vandalism of info for no reason. ===
 * === Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion ===
 * Ambox notice.svg
 * Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring.   Thank you. Mandarin050 (talk) 10:06, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Mandarin050 has been indefinitely blocked as a sock of SalemHanna. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 12:46, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Ambox notice.svg
 * Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring.   Thank you. Mandarin050 (talk) 10:06, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Mandarin050 has been indefinitely blocked as a sock of SalemHanna. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 12:46, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Jamesjoekok
Hiya. I saw that you noticed 's vandalism and reverted quite a bit of it. See the latest report at Sockpuppet_investigations/Никита-Родин-2002 for the context. ~ RobTalk 05:37, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

User talk:188.223.187.130
Users, even IPs, are allowed to blank their own talk pages - it's taken as confirmation that they've read it. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:25, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * PS: "Same ornery Lesbian Space PopeTM, new user name." genuinely made me LOL ;-) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:32, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * This is not about them being an IP. This is about them being a confirmed sock. Any edit they make may be reverted without further explanation. They are certainly welcome to log back in to the master account and ask for their block to be lifted. Other than that, they are not welcome here. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 12:51, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * That is not a way I've ever seen policy implemented. Anyone blocked (sock or not) but with talk page access not revoked is still allowed to edit their talk page, so editing their talk page (eg by blanking) is not in itself block evasion. If it were the case that block evaders were not even allowed to edit their talk pages, they would surely have talk page access revoked automatically, wouldn't they? I can seek clarification at AN if you'd prefer. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:00, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * There's sometimes a question of the "spirit" of a law/rule and the wording. Here, I see no conflict. The spirit of the rule allows the indefinitely blocked user to discuss the block and request an unblock on the master's talk page, which is not what is happening here. Instead, they are continuing to use the IP (as the end of the shared IP block approaches) to expunge the ipsock notice.
 * Another reason for talk page access is to allow collateral damage editors using that IP to ask what's going on and how to handle it. (The ipsock notice also helps here.) Were it not for them, the IP would be indefed along with the master.
 * Next up is the wording. WP:USERTALK and WP:EVADE would seem to apply. Yes, IP editors are generally allowed to remove content from the IP talk page, except for "templates and notes left to indicate other users share the same IP address and/or to whom the IP is registered, although very old content may be removed." It seems to me that ipsock|MariaJaydHicky is similar (on an IP which may be shared or reassigned) to a school block notice. "Hey, why can't I edit? Oh, it says this IP has been used by someone who is blocked."
 * This brings us to EVADE: "Anyone is free to revert any edits made in violation of a block, without giving any further reason and without regard to the three-revert rule. This does not mean that edits must be reverted just because they were made by a blocked editor (obviously helpful changes, such as fixing typos or undoing vandalism, can be allowed to stand), but the presumption in ambiguous cases should be to revert."
 * The prolific block evader seems to have no problem changing IPs and having the ipsock notice on an extensive list of user names and IPs (at least 60, though there are certainly more). Why is this one different? Well, it would seem they are sticking with this one. If they intend to stay on the IP long term and want to keep that as "their" talk page, I imagine we could do them the favor of extending the block.
 * This talk page should not have been needed. It was created to further track this prolific block evasion and ensure that this editor is not allowed to further disrupt the project. They used the IP in direct defiance of their de facto ban. They are continuing to edit in a way that makes it more difficult to enforce their ban. That is helpful to their on-going desire to evade the ban. It is detrimental to the project. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 13:58, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * The ipsock template provides useful information to anyone else who may use that IP.
 * You seem to be investing a lot of effort in justifying your edit warring to prevent an editor from blanking their own talk page based on your unconventional interpretation of policy (and I see nothing in the EW exceptions that allows you do to that). I'm not going to join you any further in this waste of time, but I just ask you that if you wish to continue to interpret Wikipedia policy in this unique manner after it has been disputed, you please get a consensus for it rather than edit warring over it. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:14, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * "Edit warring" is a rather strong term for something that cannot run afoul of 3RR. What's to discuss? If you are saying it is unambiguous that I should not be reverting, your wording is curious. If it is ambiguous, "the presumption...should be to revert." - Sum mer PhD v2.0 14:44, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * The resolution is just add the template, but someone may remove it. I don't want to conduct edit wars and end up being blocked for the secound time. KGirlTrucker87talk what I'm been doing  15:53, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * It is, of course, the sock's non-right right to edit the talk page they shouldn't have in any way they please. This non-right is sacred, so as to protect their right to continue socking. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 17:25, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 01:30, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Page protection
Could you resubmit your request please. I had to do a big revert after Cyberbot I messed up the formatting. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 13:07, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Resubmitted]. Thanks. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 13:35, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

My edit (and revert) to your old talk page
Hello Summer! I made an edit to your old talk page, which was an attempt to alleviate an issue which I will explain (I reverted because it didn't work).

The redirect at the top of User talk:SummerPhD causes (I think) unintended behavior in the "What links here" area for all articles links on that talk page. For example, spin-off should have only about 295 incoming links from all namespaces. Instead, it has over 13,000 incoming links because of the 12,845 pages that have a link to User talk:SummerPhD (all of the various pages that you left your signature on before changing accounts). The issue is that for those of us that use semi-automated tools, all of those extra incoming links cause the page to load much slower than it normally would.

Since my one attempt to fix this didn't work, I'm now going to ask at the Village pump for assistance. Hopefully someone there will have an answer. -Niceguyedc Go Huskies! 06:25, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I've commented there. Thanks. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 13:37, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Occam's razor
Could you please look at the talk page comments Talk:Occam%27s_razor. Being that I am a philosopher, my actions would seem self-serving or that in some way I approve of that article. I see nothing constructive there. Thanks, BlueMist (talk) 19:20, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help! BlueMist (talk) 22:16, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

GoGos Beauty and the Beat page.
Thanks for the message. Yes, I corrected a title, but forgot to change the order of the release of the two singles. The previous entry listed a single not actually from this album ("We Got the Beat" recorded for Stiff Records). The song was re-recorded for this album, and it was that version that was released by I.R.S. Records. The Stiff Records version should not be listed as a single from this album as it pre-dates it and is not the same.

I'll try to get over there and clean it up.

Kyle — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.252.137.205 (talk) 22:17, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Super Bass
Can you keep an eye of the page? 115.164.215.103 (talk) 15:16, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Why? - Sum mer PhD v2.0 15:58, 26 May 2016 (UTC)