User talk:Technopat/Archive 5

Fuller
I'm not sure how to verify my information, when you click Robbins, Mr. Fuller will be listed as a resident. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robbins,_Illinois His address was 13500 Kedzie Bld. Robbins Illinois 60472, I lived at 3241 W. 135th Street, right around the corner,he was friends with my parents. I will follow your instructions for verification. Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unikorn1 (talk • contribs) 23:36, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 23:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Peninsular War, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Joseph O'Donnell (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) 11:41, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Why reverted?
The article I edited about RTVE was particularly biased, that's why I edited it - to make it more balanced. Why did you revert it? Zababba (talk) 01:15, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 05:31, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Reggie Johnson (musician)
This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Reggie Johnson (musician), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://inter-jazz.com/web/artists/reggie-johnson/.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 22:48, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Sigh!--Technopat (talk) 22:53, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Changes to nebula
It was perfectly fine you erased what I did. Maybe we can become friends. I just uploaded a new pic from sequoia. Post back!!!StarStorm482 (talk) 04:34, 11 August 2013 (UTC)StarStorm482

Buttar's
Buttar name blong to Jatt faimly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gurpreet buttar (talk • contribs) 14:49, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Indian Imperial Police, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Government of India Act (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) 16:03, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Fixed.--Technopat (talk) 16:06, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion about reference in Lyoness article
Dear Technopat,

After helping in a previous argument I hope you can give some guidance now as well. I am having a discussion with about a reference in the Wikipedia article about Lyoness. He is referencing articles in the December 2004 (Gier nach Geld) and January 2005 (Gegendarstellung) edition of the Austrian Magazine Kriminalpolizei. However these articles do not show up in the online archive of said magazine, which can be found here: http://www.diekriminalisten.at/krb/show_archiv.asp?id=55 (December 2004); http://www.diekriminalisten.at/krb/show_archiv.asp?id=56 (January 2005)

Lyoness expert claims that the articles used to be part of the archive but have been deleted. While I understand that this is possible - I have not seen them myself -, I see a problem with the verifiability of said articles, since the archive seems to serve the purpose to show everything that has ever been published in the magazine. Lyoness expert says, he was able to get a written copy of the article and now I wanted to ask you, whether he could upload an image of the article to provide a verifiable reference. As far as I am aware this should be possible under fair use guidelines. Can you confirm that?

For further information about our discussion please consult the talk page of Lyoness expert and myself.

Thank you for your time,

--LyoNewMedia (talk) 10:56, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Reply --Technopat (talk) 12:08, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Dear Technopat,
thank you for your reply and trying to shed some light on this matter. When asking about uploading an image of the article, I was thinking about this section here in particular: Template:Non-free newspaper image This could at least verify that the articles in question exist. But I understand your arguments and maybe an admin can provide further insight on this.

All the best --LyoNewMedia (talk) 12:26, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Dispute
Technopat, I just want to put a few things straight. I never said that I had a written copy in my possession; I merely said that I had been lucky to have seen a written copy of the article, and read it, which is why I was able to use it as a reference in the article. At that time, indeed, the article was still featured in the online database of this source too. Now, I am afraid I cannot upload a copy of the article, as that would violate copyright laws in many countries, as well as Wikipedia guidelines. As extensively explained to LyoNewMedia, anyone who wants to check whether the article exists, can contact the publisher/author and receive a copy.

LyoNewMedia very well knows that the article exists and the recent warning this editor's received about being to closely tied to the subject of the article, which LyoNewMedia did not deny, should perhaps raise some concerns as to why LyoNewMedia is so eager to have negative information about Lyoness removed from the article, even though the material is based on very reputable sources.

Also I do not appreciate that LyoNewMedia has taken this 'dispute' to you, without discussing that with me and without replying to my latest message in which I asked him to tell me which guidelines are violated by these references and which resolution and mediation options we could consider.

I agree that this general discussion should take place on the article's talk page and not here or on our respective talk pages, and I'll make an effort to make that happen.

Ps. I've posted a similar comment on the talk page of LyoNewMedia.

Lyoness expert (talk) 13:42, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 15:32, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

About Lyoness expert's reply
Dear Technopat,

about Lyoness expert's reply to my question I just wanted to post the reply I have left him on his talk page, maybe we can lay this matter to rest then:

"Dear Lyoness expert,

I am sorry if you have the wrong impression about me asking Technopat for guidance - and I cleary stated that I am just asking for guidance. I also never told him that we were having a dispute, I just said that we are having a discussion and that is all. If you consider me asking Technopat for input not acceptable then I cannot change it, but I never had any bad intentions.

Apart from that, you now mention that you never said you had a copy of the magazine but in your previous reply to me you left the clear impression you have one, since you just mentioned that uploading a scan would clash with Wikipedia guidelines but did not mention that you could not provide a scan anyway.

I also never said that there is a clear violation of Wikipedia guidelines, I just wanted to discuss the problem with the verifiability of the reference. I have laid out my arguments about this, you have laid out yours and I thought Technopat might be able to add to this. If you read my message to him/her, you should see that I also told him/her to look at both of our arguments.

Getting to your reply on Technopats page. I do not know that the referenced article exists, how am I supposed to know that if I cannot find them?

Regarding your accusations of bias, I have left a message on the talk page of Cnilep, so I have taken a stand on that. Apart from that I really do not appreciate being accused of certain things - I guess you feel the same."

All the best --LyoNewMedia (talk) 14:17, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

G8 article
G8 is based on national net wealth.Russia is inside just for political reasons.Russia is a fly as net national wealth.They report GDPs that are useless in these meetings.It seems an article written by a boy 4 y.o.151.40.125.50 (talk) 12:23, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 12:43, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It's lost time helping Wikipedia.Anyway you've been kind.151.40.125.50 (talk) 14:20, 14 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 16:02, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
Dear Technopat,

Thanks for the lengthy message you left on my talk page. I do understand that this is a complex issue and it is not your 'task' to deal with these problems, but indeed, your insights do help us along.

That said, I'd like to stress that the balance and objectivity of the Lyoness article are at all times my priority. Therefore, it stings a bit to see very important information removed from it, based on technicalities. I personally think that print sources should count as a valid reference (at least) as much as online sources, and that link-rot isn't the problem here, but rather the dispute about whether a print source which does not feature certain content (any longer) on the internet should be viewed as a reliable source. In my opinion, it should. Much like academic text books, academic journals, etc. certain magazines do not feature all its content online, because the material is copyrighted and these sources need to make money too. I don't think this should deteriorate the value of a source for a Wikipedia article. As said, everyone who wishes to verify the existence and content of the article in question can either perform an elaborate Google search or contact the Kriminalpolizei themselves. Thus, the existence and content are verifiable.

By the way, I'm starting to doubt whether link-rot is in fact what happened here. As LyoNewMedia pointed out, it's quite odd that both the Arbeiterkammer Vorarlberg (Chamber of Labour of Vorarlberg, Austria) and the Austrian Criminal Police have a long list of documents and articles from the same period available online still, yet not the ones critical of Lyoness. Then again, indeed we must assume good faith.

Also, the point about LyoNewMedia contacting you directly was no biggy, and nothing upsetting, yet I think it could be nice to inform each other of such things, so that it will be easier to work towards consensus on such matters. A little politeness can go a long way...

Thanks again, and have a nice day.

Lyoness expert (talk) 20:29, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Fascism
Hi,

Yes I made a change in Fascism.

See the Edit History for my explanation. I wrote a long note to everyone explaining what is wrong with the entry as it stands and proposing a new version of the opening section that would make it more in line with existing encyclopedia entries on Fascism.

We need to redo the section. It is tendentious and inaccurate.

Mryan1451 (talk) 13:31, 15 August 2013 (UTC)mryan1451
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 13:45, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks and yes, will do
Thanks for pointing that out.

Yes will do. Just did in fact.

Mryan1451 (talk) 14:35, 15 August 2013 (UTC)mryan1451

August 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=568999164 your edit] to Jazz at the Philharmonic may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:47, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * the 1970s, Granz kept the spirit of the JATP alive on his many jam session style records for his Pablo label (founded 1973), also used for previously unissued JATP concerts. In
 * Fixed.--Technopat (talk) 23:03, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=569289379 your edit] to Wrey Gardiner may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:21, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
 * anthologies published by Grey Walls Press, the first two of which were edited by Alex Comfort and [John Bayliss]. Orwell, George. [http://books.google.es/books?id=HhqgzbA50UUC&pg=RA4-PA19&
 * Fixed.--Technopat (talk) 22:32, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=570036167 your edit] to List of events of the Peninsular War may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:54, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * | Carpio Battle of
 * Fixed.--Technopat (talk) 20:03, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Testing 123
Just making sure following message doesn't get transcluded...--Technopat (talk) 09:34, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Bárcenas affair (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to OHL


 * Gull (record label) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Seventh Wave


 * Outland (Gary Numan album) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Bill Sharpe


 * Sadao Watanabe (musician) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Buddy Williams

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:34, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Les Folies des Lasalle
What little French I know is left over from a visit to Paris in 1989, but I think you are correct sir! I did try possible Italian variations like "Vadrizzone", to no avail. Overall, it was a very interesting edit. The Prussian campaign was the best, with Lübeck still belonging to the Hanseatic League (which folded in the 17th century), Frederick the Great attending the capitulation ceremonies (despite having been dead for twenty years) and Lasalle ordering his men to cut down trees and paint them black to look like cannons (which, if I'm not mistaken, really does come from Munchhausen.)

Thank you for your support and encouragement! At some point, I may compare what's left with his article in the current Encyclopedia Britannica...but first a breather. WQUlrich (talk) 23:56, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * At least I was able to figure out who painted that picture of him in his red breeches. It's in the Musée de l'Armée (doh!) WQUlrich (talk) 19:29, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Akhal-Teke
Thanks for looking into my edits. I have updated them now, trying to provide reliable sources that back up the statements sufficiently. Semillana (talk) 08:55, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

John Moore
This was a bad edit. The old disam was the standard, and John Moore has several other "soldiers" - enough to hold a Confederate reunion. Please reverse it. Johnbod (talk) 14:13, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 18:25, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

RTVE (again)
Both left and right political sides have tried to staff RTVE in the past, the article only mentions the right doing it. In fact the left had much more success. The original article is highly biased only mentioning the right (PP) attempting to influence RTVE. Again only mentioning Ana Pastor's removal is biased - it is selective facts that bias the article. The fact is RTVE has had a problem maintaining neutrality for years (forever) - THIS is what should come out in the article. My edits simply redress the balance somewhat. Quite possibly I am not used to the way one needs to make edits on Wikipedia, hence the rejection. The fact remains this article is highly biased and needs some redress to make it anything more than left-wing propaganda (I am politically neutral BTW). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zababba (talk • contribs) 12:06, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 12:20, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Chronology of events of the Peninsular War (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Siege of Badajoz and Basque Country


 * Don't You Worry 'bout a Thing (album) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Gary King


 * Jacques-Nicolas Gobert (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Jaén


 * List of French general officers (Peninsular War) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Siege of Badajoz

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:29, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Fixed. --Technopat (talk) 17:55, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

(Low priority) comment re: your user page
You give no indication of which time zone you are in. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:18, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Ernie Freeman
This edit - why? Do you mean sub-headings, or something else? Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:09, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Oggy (character) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Oggy (character) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Oggy (character) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Yann98 (talk) 11:21, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

List of French general officers (Peninsular War)
Goodness gracious! You have been busy!! I admire your diligence. I would offer to help, but I'm afraid my knowledge of the subject matter is indistinguishable from "none". Therefore, the best I can do is compliment you on your good work, and wish you well. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:23, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Reverts to G. K. Chesterton Article (Weiner Library Support)
Hi there; you reverted my edits to a G. K. Chesterton article which includes an urban legend related to support for him from the Weiner Library. As British writer & journalist Oliver Kamm says here, this is a myth:

https://twitter.com/OliverKamm/status/373859363490103296 https://twitter.com/OliverKamm/status/373859363490103296

I've no wish to waste my time in an edit war as I've given up caring about Wikipedia based on incidents like this. If you want the article to be inaccurate, fine by me.

P.Paul Moloney (talk) 13:42, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 14:26, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

John Coltrane Bayoumi's edit
Technopat, I did leave an explanation in the Edit Summary in regard to why I deleted the Bayoumi passage. On the album A Love Supreme Coltrane repeats the title of the album in refrain clearly and articulately. Bayoumi's claim that "A Love Supreme slides easily into Allah Supreme" is not relevant to Coltrane's religious views. The fact that one author states that the chorus of the song "slides easily" into other words is wholly unrelated to the song and John Coltrane's religious views. It serves as a point of confusion in the religious views section. Coltrane stated time and time again in print that he believed in all religions. The other passages in the religious views section mirror this fact. The Bayoumi passage is completely out of place. Referenced of not, would you agree that John Lennon's religious views section should not contain an entry that says: John Doe has been cited as saying that the sentence "I heard the news today, oh boy" slides easily into "I herd the Jews today, oh boy." The fact that a single person thinks that the structure and prosody of a refrain could accommodate a different set of words does not deserve mention. Please read that section carefully, the Bayoumi passage is not only absurd, it has nothing to do with John Coltrane's religious views. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.118.54.247 (talk) 14:13, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 14:39, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Reverting translation. Real Academia Española.
I did my research, saw the 2009 motto of the day discussion (quite lame and limited with no focus on Spanish grammar - they were mixing in gerunds where there are none), and added a valid citation to the source of this information; the actual history page of La Real Academia Española. Terse interpretation of an adjective as a verb is an insult to the language, our work for the community, and further, makes no sense in English. It sounds like a soap commercial. It cleans, sanitizes, and sweet smelling too!

Limpia, fija y da esplendor.

In my opinion these words are Adjective, Adjective, Verb. For 'Limpia' to be a verb, it would be in the Affirmative Imperative mode; as in "You, clean!" La Real Academia Española does not CLEAN. The Spanish language does not clean. La Real Academia Española IS clean (purity of language). The Spanish language is to be kept clean.

She (RAE or the language) is clean. Ella es limpia. She is clean. Adjective.

Ella limpia. She cleans. Verb.

Fija - is not saying "she fixes" as in "to fix the broken"... Fija means, in this sense, fixed. (firm, stable, quiet, inalterable, invariable, ummovable, steady, even, balanced) Adjectives.

The Academy strives to stay in a FIXED state. ...a fixed or set direction or stance.

"Su propósito fue el de «fijar las voces y vocablos de la lengua castellana en su mayor propiedad, elegancia y pureza». Se representó tal finalidad con un emblema formado por un crisol en el fuego con la leyenda Limpia, fija y da esplendor, obediente al propósito enunciado de combatir cuanto alterara la elegancia y pureza del idioma, y de fijarlo en el estado de plenitud alcanzado en el siglo XVI."

Also, da in Spanish is 'gives' as in gives off, irradiates, glows. Not casts which seems pretty dark. I believe exudes is more appropriate when referring to splendor.

My suggestion is Clean, fixed or set, and exudes splendor.

Do what you wish with my thoughts and research. Perhaps you could suggest an appropriate course to possibly allow other Spanish contributors opine? Thanks and regard.

MT Michael (talk) 04:49, 3 September 2013 (UTC) Michael (talk) 02:05, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 11:58, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 11:58, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Cádiz Cortes (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Third estate


 * First Siege of Badajoz (1811) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Gazan


 * Googie Rene (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Willie Smith


 * List of French general officers (Peninsular War) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to DoW


 * List of Portuguese general officers (Peninsular War) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Portuguese


 * List of Spanish general officers (Peninsular War) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Siege of Badajoz

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:43, 3 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Fixed. --Technopat (talk) 12:04, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

User_talk:142.161.181.41&oldid=566548190
My apologies, I didn't realize that my entry would need a reference or citation. Plus I don't know how to do that. I saw the DC 3 weather/wind vane at the Whitehorse Yukon Airport when I visited Whitehorse last May. As for references, numerous images are available on the web,

I didn't log in as I have forgotten my password. (and maybe my username too) I asked for a pw reset but nothing has shown up in my inbox. 142.161.181.41 (talk) 19:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 21:26, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

reversion of good faith edits
Hello, Technopat: the claims that I deleted were incorrect and misleading. In essence, they suggest that the existence of roguish characters within a work by itself makes this work picaresque or reminiscent of the picaresque, whereas literary genre is not defined by the nature of its characters alone (as the definition of the picaresque novel at the start of the article makes clear). For this reason as well, I replaced two references that mention the picaresque in passing -- their principal interest is something else -- with a far more authoritative source of information centered on the issue dealt with in this section of the article: the sources and nature of the early picaresque. I did not think it appropriate to explain the deficiencies of the references that I eliminated, since this could be misinterpreted as an insult to their authors. I do not mean to imply that the sources eliminated are worthless, but instead that they are not well-balanced or relevant to a discussion of the sources of the picaresque novel. I trust that you understand. Regards, Blandote (talk) 14:55, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 16:22, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Administrator intervention against vandalism
Unfortunately, I find that a good many administrators apply what I regard as a pedantic and unnecessarily narrow interpretation of guidelines and policies at Administrator intervention against vandalism. For example, (1) "this IP address has not been warned, so it can't be blocked", even when it is abundantly clear to anyone with a grain of intelligence that the person has been warned, and it doesn't matter in the least whether the warnings were given at the current IP address or not, (2) "this IP has received no warnings in the last month", even when the editor has returned to exactly the same editing that he/she has been warned about and blocked for, and so does not need to be warned again, (3) etc etc ... numerous o0ther examples come up all the time. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:55, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your feedback (& for being out there). One of the ARV options at Twinkle (which is what I used for reporting at AIV) is "Evidently a vandalism-only account" which seems, at least to my common-sensical way of seeing things, to correspond fully with the corresponding Wikipedia policy (Vandalism: "While editors are encouraged to warn and educate vandals, warnings are by no means necessary for an administrator to block." and "When warranted, accounts whose main or only use is obvious vandalism or other forbidden activity may be blocked even without warning."). As far as I'm concerned, a Wikipedia policy prevails over the instructions given in a guide (Guide to administrator intervention against vandalism) or, for that matter, at a noticeboard (Administrator intervention against vandalism)... Regards, --Technopat (talk) 22:20, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
 * FYI, "Evidently a vandalism-only account" is disabled when ARV'ing IP addresses. Jackmcbarn (talk) 02:59, 8 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I have no quarrel with the general principle that editors should normally have been adequately warned before being blocked. In the substantial majority of cases I decline reports at AIV where the editor has not had it made clear that a block is possible, and given a chance to reform, just as most if not all admins do. However, what I totally disagree with is applying sound principles mechanically, treating them as rigid rules, rather than making an intelligent assessment as to how to apply them in a particular case. For example, the idea that a warning to an IP should be discounted if it is not recent makes sense if there was a short spate of vandalism months ago, followed after a long gap by a new spate of completely different vandalism, because it is likely to be a completely different person. However, it makes no sense at all to apply the same principle when the vandalism is so similar in nature as to make it blindingly obvious that it is the same person returning. Similar considerations apply in various other situations, such as warnings to one IP address or account followed by vandalism obviously from the same person on another IP address. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:22, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Spain
The sources provided by Rockysantos did not support the information, you added new sources, so my reversal was justified. Also it is not a territorial dispute, but a dispute over the consideration about the sea surrounding the islands.--LTblb (talk) 20:41, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 21:22, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Francoist Spain
Sorry about that Technopat, I will remember to next time I edit an article, thank you for the heads up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slickmoves (talk • contribs) 22:07, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

photo on The Falls Church Episcopal site
Hi, new to this, and tried sending this as a note in undoing the undo -- but the photo of the sign that is on The Falls Church Episcopal wikipedia page is dated/incorrect; it has the Episcopal shield removed and has the name of the Rector of The Falls Church, Anglican. I've contacted the people at The Falls Church Episcopal to ask them to update the photo, but in the meantime, is there some way to remove the photo (instead of just shrinking it)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Posterity1234 (talk • contribs) 15:35, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied. --Technopat (talk) 15:54, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Irumbai
I didn't add commentary at all, I merely fixed some grammar issues. Why did you revert the changes? Look at it now, it is not looking good. Tung x (talk) 21:18, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 22:10, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of A. D. Lublinskaya for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article A. D. Lublinskaya is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/A. D. Lublinskaya until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

September 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=573130081 your edit] to First Siege of Badajoz (1811) may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:13, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
 * at Olivenza or to repair its defences and fully garrison it; La Romana in turn had instructed Mendizabal to slight the fortress, but Mendizabal
 * Beaten to it... --Technopat (talk) 16:25, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

REference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Darby
Hello Technopat Thank you for your courtesy in giving me some method of contacting Wikipedia. Someone has posted on Wikipedia a description of me which is false and misleading. I am not a politician. Most important of all, I have never been expelled from the Liberal Party. The continuation of this false assertion on Wikipedia causes me problems daily and is defamatory. The description which I attempted to post is accurate. Kindly restore it. All good wishes Michael Darby Queensland Australia

180.148.69.122 (talk) 01:45, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied--Technopat (talk) 08:01, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Podar International School
was there anything wrong that i posted about and its accurately very correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Farsheed96 (talk • contribs) 11:33, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 12:27, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

References Template and editing
I am fairly new to editing wikipedia, and recently edited page. I have corrected errors, but now receive a "cite references" error. I am unsure how to edit the references section (which already exists). Can you guide me? Thanks! Singdance10 (talk) 16:51, 20 September 2013 (UTC)singjazz10Singdance10 (talk) 16:51, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 22:59, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

About mindfulness
Sorry about everything.. never come to this page till I find my dear friend came to this page, now that the hospital docs and therpists and everybody around him, trying to push him into mindful practice...

what he is said is that he checked wikipedia and on this page no mindfulness mentioned.

I was surprised, as I have known modern mental health almost depends on mindfulness...

now I just realise I do not know the rules of wikipedia, for the sake of saving many suffer's lives, I am going to take sometime to edit this page and inset one of most important passages into this article, without mendtioning mindfulness, this page loss its value.

Not sure you can understand the urgency to put mindfulness section into this page...could you kindly allow the mindfulness section be there without references for two days? I am gathering the refernces now....

Do put people's wellbeings before the technology....I think you can understand this.... take care Breath in and out (talk) 20:07, 20 September 2013 (UTC# for all the mental health patients, and mental health workers, and all the relatives of mental health patients.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Breath in and out #talk • contribs# 20:01, 20 September 2013 #UTC#
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 20:31, 20 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Breath in and out, the issue is being discussed on the BPD article's talk page; please join in, as we would value your input. Cheers, Dawn Bard (talk) 20:23, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

No heading
I was being a little funny so thank you for deleting my edits [i probably would have forgotten about it]. Feel free to visit my talk page anytime. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solthedog (talk • contribs) 00:25, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

No heading
Can you specify the page name, in which i didn't specify any citations — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alluramteja (talk • contribs) 13:22, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 14:03, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

re: Wikipedia page - Ivan Johnson verification needed
Hi technoPat,

Enclosed are the uploaded articles that provide evidence for the statements in Ivan Johnson's bio.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ivan_Johnson_going_to_work_in_Australia.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pindling_ducks_out_of_Tribune_questions_on_Contact.jpg

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seafordcourt (talk • contribs) 16:13, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 16:44, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

No heading
A ludicrous response. How can correcting a factual error be not constructive? I will again make the correction. 78.56.215.146 (talk) 20:20, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 21:06, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Dunpeal Hellfighter
How is it NOT constructive, for me to provide a legitimate EXAMPLE of the practice being done on the LP record page? Yet your version needs a citation to meet quality standards? If you would like to write your own version of the FACTUAL EXAMPLE, feel free to do so. Work with me, please. I'm here to make Wikipedia better, not leave things as "citation needed." By the way is this the inbox?Dunpeal Hellfighter (talk) 14:02, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I've moved this here from your user page. Jackmcbarn (talk) 22:37, 24 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 09:55, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Greetings...
Hi Technopat, Thanks for fixing the "tweaks". Long time no see. Hope your'e doing well. I am now translating whatever I write that is worthwhile from Spanish into English and Portuguese, so I'm doing a "triple-whammy". Abrazotes, --Maragm (talk) 15:07, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Message for Technopat
Is THIS your inbox? If so please reply though I'm not sure I can even find my own inbox at this point. I linked the info on the LP page, to the page of the record I was talking about. From THAT page there is a link to the item on Amazon (this is the link) where you can read it, as well as a link to a website where someone reviewed that entire box set and even has pictures to show the contents. The sticker on the record box set itself even says it comes with all that stuff. Also, the tips you gave me I honestly just don't even know what you're talking about. I just try to update things when I know them to be factual, and it's usually from my own PERSONAL experiences, like the record for example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dunpeal Hellfighter (talk • contribs) 05:11, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gene Orloff, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Concrete Jungle (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) 12:13, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Fixed.--Technopat (talk) 13:55, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

1992 Cricket World Cup
You need to either add my point back or add something out there about the most disastrous World Cup organization. My point about India being robbed of a semifinal place was accurate. The 1992 World Cup *was* about robbing several countries of a legitimate chance to make the semi-finals due to stupid rules and letting in weak teams make the grade. In fact, this disastrous World Cup was the reason for the ICC to implement saner rules related to the run rate.

The main rule was that the worst overs for the batting team would be removed in case of rain. Guess what happened in the India-Australia match? A maiden over did not count and so India had to chase down the SAME total in 49 instead of 50 overs and still India managed to come within one run of Australia's score. Add to this the fact that Sri Lanka were minnows back then and India-Sri Lanka match was washed out without a spare day for the match!

West Indies, Australia, England also suffered as a result of the poor organization.

And Pakistan? They were ALL OUT for 74. England was on target for victory. In fact, had it been truncated to a 15-over match under normal rules, England would have already won with the same score as they would have overhauled the 15-over target. However, they had not batted for 15 overs yet and so it was declared abandoned which was stupid because they were ahead of the 15-over target and had bowled out Pakistan. Pakistan and England split the points for this match which was ridiculous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.5.186.169 (talk) 16:54, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 17:24, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Teachable moment
I wanna ask you about some things you just did. On Murray Rothbard, Binksternet removed some photos, so I explained why this was a bad idea, then reverted it. Without further explanation, Bink reverted back, which I believe is edit-warring because it goes against WP:BRD. I restored the original version and went back to the talk page to work out a compromise. Then you got involved, in a way that just doesn't make any sense to me.

First, you reverted, saying my edit was in good faith. Then you immediately placed an inappropriate template warning on my talk page, falsely accusing me of edit-warring. Finally, you quoted WP:BURDEN, which is an irrelevant policy. Nobody's denying that these photos contain what they say they do. We're just trying to figure out which ones belong on this page, where some of them seem to but others aren't strongly connected.

I think anyone can see why your actions seem confused and counterproductive to me. 21:04, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied to the inital note. As my reply covers the points raised in the second instalment above, no further comment is necessary. --Technopat (talk) 21:13, 28 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Curious reaction on: user's talk page. --Technopat (talk) 21:15, 28 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Not so curious, after all. Par for the course. --Technopat (talk) 23:05, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I eventually remove false accusations. Maybe some people keep them in a little box and take them out at night to play with, but not me: I just rubbish them. MilesMoney (talk) 02:23, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Curious how some folks accumulate so many "false accusations"... --Technopat (talk) 10:33, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

EW on Rothbard Article
The removal of neutral-captioned pictures is continuing. Perhaps your good offices would again be helpful there. SPECIFICO talk  02:59, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * There's refactoring of talk page comments underway as well. It's impossible to get anything done there. SPECIFICO  talk  03:12, 29 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 10:26, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

last word
This is my talk page, so I get to have the last word. - I'll support that! (If you want/need any support.) Pdfpdf (talk) 11:12, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied --Technopat (talk) 12:07, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Andreas11213
Your warning to this editor was not a good idea. Aside from the dubiousness of warning someone about something which happened a week ago, the post was made in response to the following abusive comments from Pdfpdf:,. Nick-D (talk) 23:38, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied... --Technopat (talk) 00:32, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for striking the comment. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 00:28, 30 September 2013 (UTC)


 * ... and here. --Technopat (talk) 00:55, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

666!
As one of a highly select international group, you are hereby invited to join me in celebrating my 666! (Let the games begin!) Pdfpdf (talk) 11:17, 30 September 2013 (UTC)