User talk:Tide rolls/Archive 32

Clarence Carnes: revision history
I was hoping that you could find a moment to help me understand what transpired here:

04:26, 4 June 2010 Tide rolls (talk | contribs) m (4,938 bytes) (Reverted edits by 96.247.77.184 (talk) to last revision by BLcarnes (HG)) (undo)

I've only made that one edit here so I am not savvy about how this all works. I remember trying to pinpoint the exact date, but was unable to. I know definitely it was in November, so all I could offer as a source was my personal knowledge. Would I be correct in assuming that this user had changed what I put in and then you reverted to what I place? Just trying to understand how this works! Appreciate your time, Thanks! BenBLcarnes (talk) 10:56, 6 January 2011 (UTC)


 * My edit to that article removed some grafitti. You can see the specifics of each edit by clicking the "prev" link to the left of the edit in the article's history. I hope that answers your concern.   Tide  rolls  11:22, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

unconstructive edit?
I thought it was quite constructive to teach people how to cook a lobster.

Somewhere else in the lobster article, some jackass wrote that the "... enzyme sequence telomerase (TTAAGG) ..." but you didn't see fit to remove that edit, which was "constructive" only in that it provided a vitally needed forum for some loser to show off his would-be erudition in an inappropriate forum.

Tell me, are you folks paid to camp out on a site and wait for pages to be edited? No, I imagine you are responsible for a subset of pages, and you are automatically notified when a page in your domain is modified. I see. Very constructive. But for you to put "Tide" in one font (or color pattern) and "rolls" in another, that's your achievement for the year. You know, I also used to find such things amusing when I was a teenage "operator," as we call them then (I was actually a UNIX systems programmer, changing the code of the shell and the editor and such to effect various restrictions in various quasi-clever ways).

Computers are a tool. If you get high off them, or regard them as a means of obtainment of amusement, you need another means. Then again, I guess I did my share of that before I got older. I sported a variety of social issues, not the least of which was that it was tough for a thirteen-year-old to be in college. (It's more common nowadays, since all you need do is sue the school system and maintain that you actually CAN read, but that sort of crap didn't fly in the New York City of the 1970s.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.141.194 (talk) 18:53, 8 January 2011 (UTC)


 * To address your concerns: WP:NOTGUIDE, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and WP:SOAPBOX  Tide  rolls  18:57, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

helping out
i know how to help out! i could fix typos, post correct info after incorrect info, and y'know, stuff like that.

69.236.166.22 (talk) 22:35, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

P.S. please insert a talkback note on my talk page if u reply back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.236.166.22 (talk) 22:36, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Huggle vs. Huggle2
What do you think is better: Huggle or Huggle2?  WAYNE  SLAM 19:50, 9 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I've never used Huggle2...this is the first time I've heard of it. I'll have to check it out.  Thanks.  Tide  rolls  21:40, 9 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Many Huggle users are using Huggle2 now. Do you like it?  WAYNE  SLAM 22:39, 9 January 2011 (UTC)


 * It seems to be working well so far. No complaints.  Tide  rolls  22:46, 9 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Do you think it's better than Huggle?  WAYNE  SLAM 22:47, 9 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Too early to say. Gimme about six months :)   Tide  rolls  22:50, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay. Good luck! You can let me know on my talk page in six months if you like HG2. :) By the way, are you watching my talk page?  WAYNE  SLAM 22:51, 9 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I only watch talk pages of folks that appear to need watching. I think you have only good intentions.  Tide  rolls  22:57, 9 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Okay but I'm watching your talk page.  WAYNE  SLAM 22:59, 9 January 2011 (UTC)


 * How do you request Huggle 2? I've lost the request page :) --5 albert square (talk) 00:12, 10 January 2011 (UTC)


 * You go to Huggle2.  WAYNE  SLAM 00:18, 10 January 2011 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks, found it now. Now I just need to work out where my computer helpfully saved it to without telling me!--5 albert square (talk) 00:22, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay.  WAYNE  SLAM 00:24, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Turok 2008

 * I need to ask an administrator a question... when it comes to what wikipedia is not, does this fall under that category?. Putting up your own website link on a wiki page?75.60.185.3 (talk) 23:00, 9 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Technically, that's an editorial question not strictly an admin question. To answer your question; the edit you reverted did appear spamish to me.  If possible it's best to leave a message on the user's talk to let them know why the reversion seemed necessary.  Some folks just start editing and don't realize that there are policies and guidelines.  Don't take this the wrong way but it would be best if you could use edit summaries explaining your actions so folks will understand what you are doing.  If you have any more questions, let me know.  See ya 'round   Tide  rolls  23:07, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Eroneously listed as the editor of a page
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:71.227.211.134&redirect=no I did NOT do this foul change and no-one has access to my computer (AFAIK, it has no remote worms or virii allowing such to be done unknown to me) It seems hackers are getting better at masking their ID and probably chose mine by fluke. 71.227.211.134 (talk) 19:11, 11 January 2011 (UTC)


 * A more likely explanation is that someone other than yourself was alocated that IP address the day those edits were made. If you notice, the dates on the messages are almost a year old.  One of the benefits of registering an account is that one doesn't receive messages that are meant for others.  Let me know if you have more questions or further concerns.  Regards  Tide  rolls  19:56, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Statement
its not vandalism [redacted]   Opp31337 (talk) 02:38, 13 January 2011 (UTC)opp31337


 * Truth does not translate to verifiability, nor does it justify inclusion. Click on those links...read them and if you have any questions, let me know.  Thanks for your polite message.  Tide  rolls  02:42, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for reverting the (multiple) vandalisms to my user page. --Nlu (talk) 05:00, 13 January 2011 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. I appreciate your letting me know I wasn't butting in unnecessarily.   Tide  rolls  05:41, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Greetings Joe
Greetings Joe,

I've received your letter about my new editing. I understand well the responsibility new and old contributors have for wikipedia and people who are reading it. The information we provide must be reliable, trustworthy and providing lots of references for it's validation.

Please notice, that the sections I added in the page about Shen Yun, have many references to them and the information is not something "I made up", as it was well documented and published in various media sources. I hope you'll take some time to read it for your reference, to see that what is written is a valuable source of information and can be checked and verified.

I am not affiliated with Shen Yun, but I've seen the show three times when I lived in Toronto. Now I reside in Israel.

Thank you Dharia (whitecloud7) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whitecloud7 (talk • contribs) 06:50, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Happy Tenth anniversary of Wikipedia!


Happy 10th anniversary of Wikipedia!

 WAYNE  SLAM has bought you a whisky! Sharing a whisky is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a whisky, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Enjoy!

Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding to their talk page with a friendly message. Message received at 17:55, 15 January 2011 (UTC)  WAYNE  SLAM 17:55, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Happy tenth!


Happy 10th anniversary of Wikipedia!

 Perseus, Son  of Zeus  has bought you a whisky! Sharing a whisky is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a whisky, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Enjoy!

Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding to their talk page with a friendly message. Message received at 18:56, 15 January 2011 (UTC) -- Perseus, Son  of Zeus  18:56, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Happy Decade :)


Happy 10th anniversary of Wikipedia!

 Baseball Watcher Lets Chat  has bought you a whisky! Sharing a whisky is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a whisky, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Enjoy!

Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding to their talk page with a friendly message. Message received at 20:26, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Responding to the celebratory posts
I thank you and my liver thanks you. Seriously, ten years...a long time to be sure. Here's hoping for another, productive, decade. Y'all stay frosty  Tide  rolls  02:54, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Editing Bobzilla
I am just trying to write about a real life situation. Awesomevic (talk) 04:03, 16 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I know. Problem is, you're screwing up the redirect.  Take some time to learn how to edit here before continuing.  I would hate to see you get blocked simply because you didn't learn the policies and guidelines.  It happens, though.  Please be careful.   Tide  rolls  04:07, 16 January 2011 (UTC)


 * So, why was my user page blanked? I'm not involved in whatever this is about (I'm pretty sure), so I'm kind of confused about that part. Was it because of the warning? If I did something wrong here, feel free to bring it up my talk page. Friginator (talk) 05:12, 16 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Hey, Friginator. I'm guessing that this user is young, inexperienced, lacks the proper motivation for editing here or some combnination of the three.  Your revert and warning look proper to me.  Some folks around here prefer a bit less templating and a bit more personal communication.  Templates save time and they begin by assuming good faith so I think they're fine 99% of the time.  See ya 'round   Tide  rolls  05:19, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Thanks for the recognition, Elockid. As you know, work gets done here with the effort of many.  I'll take this opportunity to offer my gratitude to you for your help around the place.  See ya 'round   Tide  rolls  06:52, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Coward
Show me a little respect, i poured my heart out in my previous posts, you hurt me deep and you don't even have the decency to respond!

you are a waste of internet space.

get. a. life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frombyhed (talk • contribs) 08:52, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Feel like a laugh?
Any idea who this is? Reyk  YO!  09:20, 16 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Nope....but they seem to be upset. Pity.   Tide  rolls  16:56, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Happy 10th
 Happy 10th anniversary of Wikipedia! Hey Bzuk  (contribs) has bought you a whisky! Sharing a whisky is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a whisky, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Enjoy!

What goes around, comes around. Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding to their talk page with a friendly message. Bzuk (talk) 15:15, 16 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Bzuk. Additionally, thanks for all your work here over the years.  See ya 'round   Tide  rolls  16:53, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

NPOV
I don't understand why my posts are violating the NPOV policy. I am a long time Wikipedia user but this is my first time at attempting to edit a topic. I am not affiliated nor do I personally know Frank W. Dux. I noticed that page was pretty bare so I looked at the discussion board and noticed that court records were in question and they were unable to be obtained by some editors due to a cost in obtaining them. I paid the cost, received the documents and posted them (obviously incorrectly). However, I do expect to be treated with respect which some editors are neglecting to do. No, I don't know a lot about the site, how to contact administrators, how to file a complaint against a certain user who seems extremely judgmental about the topic, not the policies. He is accusing me of sockpuppetry or something like that. How are people supposed to edit topics when this sort of negativity becomes so blatant within minutes of a post? I do hold a neutral point of view on the subject. I really don't care if it's added or not. I found some interesting documents from the LA county courts and thought they might be useful. I wasn't expecting to be ostracized for it. I would appreciate help or guidance as opposed to being thrown under the bus by people (I don't mean you). Any information you can throw my way to help me add helpful info in a correct manner would be much appreciated. I did browse the policies but some of them read like a computer manual lol.

Thanks for your time Phoenix2923 (talk) 23:35, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I haven't accused you of sockpuppetry. Not yet anyway. I said it was possible that you were one. If and when I do accuse you of it, you'll be notified of the WP:SPI on your talk page. Niteshift36 (talk) 00:27, 17 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, Phoenix, the rules here can seem complicated. It's simple to distill them to some basics, though.  When I looked over the Frank Dux talk page what I saw was an editor attempting to guide you with respect to sourcing.  It appears that you took that as some type of insult to you personally.  If I may speak for Niteshift36, and they can correct me if need be, they had no problems with you personally.  I see that it was explained to you that biographies of living persons are subject to a more stringent standard than other articles.  Some of this is due to legal issues and some of it is simply common decency.  See?  Simple.  Not complicated.  I did not really see any discussion of a non-neutral POV issue, but as some of the threads were a bit tl;dr I could've overlooked something important.  In looking at some of your later talk page posts it appears that you are taking a more calm approach to the matter and I would encourage you in this regard.  If you have specific questions about  WP:Reliable sources, let me know.  I will answer what I am able or find folks that have the answers I don't.  Regards   Tide  rolls  03:21, 17 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I acquired court records from the LA county courts and would just like to know if the ones I uploaded would be considered reliable sources (I am aware that I need to change the license and source info because I'm a noob =) ). When referencing the documents to the courts it only links to the home page (as seen here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Dux#cite_note-litigation-3). I can see how other editors may question the documents' validity since the link does not directly reference the court case directly. Phoenix2923 (talk) 04:14, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Please see my edit summary here. It's quite simple: such records are not to be used. Sorry, Drmies (talk) 04:17, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Shenzhen
Can't take the success of Shenzhen and link to others. And also other countries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 6k7de3x4v (talk • contribs) 01:29, 18 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I have no idea what that means.  Tide  rolls  01:31, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Many people have contributed to Shenzhen success as an SEZ. It is not ethical to just link the success of Shenzhen to other cities and also other countries. For example, take a look at Hong Kong, HK does not give any link back to Shenzhen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 6k7de3x4v (talk • contribs) 01:35, 18 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Ethical? It's a "See also" list not a manifesto. Damn.  Tide  rolls  01:42, 18 January 2011 (UTC)


 * (talk page stalker) Please see my comment on your talk page--you need to immediately stop edit warring, and you need to understand that See Also's are a necessary and important part of our article structure. It has nothing to do with linking success, or giving links back--it only has to do with organizing the encyclopedia in a way that is easy for readers to navigate it. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:38, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Image Adding
Mridul Mrinal (talk) 15:41, 18 January 2011 (UTC)How to add and change a image in a Article?


 * Hello, Mridul Mrinal. I'm really weak on image processes, sorry to say.  I do know that to be used on Wikipedia, the image must uploaded to Wikimedia Commons.  You should contact knowledgeable editors there for more in-depth instruction.  Apologies for not being able to be of more help.   Tide  rolls  00:30, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

IP user of interest
Hi Tide rolls. When you've got a moment, perhaps I could draw your attention to the last two posts I've made at User talk:67.85.168.11. Thank you. -- WikHead (talk) 21:20, 18 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Hey, WikHead. Thanks for this info.  They have not edited since your final warning, so I feel that a block now would be more punitive than preventitive.  If it is the same individual we will know in due time.  I have left a message on the IP's talk letting them know that actions have consequences.  See ya 'round   Tide  rolls  00:25, 19 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Very well handled! Have yourself a great day Tide, and stay well :). -- WikHead (talk) 16:46, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

hi
Hi there. Please keep looking the article "Criticism of Muhammad" because people seem to be reverting sourced materials that are notable :) Thanks again --Fancy.kira (talk) 20:11, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

I think you have made a mistake
I believe i have my facts correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by XXreetrawrXx (talk • contribs) 00:52, 21 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I regret to inform you that your belief is misplaced.  Tide  rolls  00:54, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Juris Doctor
Sorry to bother you but that IP you warned several times has made two more reverts at Juris Doctor. Best, A Sniper (talk) 01:22, 21 January 2011 (UTC)


 * No bother, I appreciate the help. I'm watching, though.  If they don't add commentary I will leave them to the admins that watch the 3RR board.  The user will not last long if they continue their disruption.  See ya 'r ound   Tide  rolls  01:26, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

False positive
Hello there Tide rolls; just a quick note to tell you that you reverted a good faith revert of a ClueBot NG false positive by an IP user on this article. I have reinstated the good version, but you may want to consider removing the warning or adding a note on the user talk page. Cheers - [CharlieEchoTango]  01:57, 22 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi, CharlieEchoTango. Thanks for letting me know about this.   Tide  rolls  03:15, 22 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Sure, no problem! :) [CharlieEchoTango]  05:42, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

The Turok Multiplayer Revival Campaign (TMRC) - Turok 2008
Just to let you know TideRolls, I'm not intentionally spamming I just wish to promote The Turok Multiplayer Revival Campaign. Please don't delete it. Many Thanks. SportingLisboaXI


 * Obrigado para sua mensagem polida, SportingLisboa. I don't follow gaming topics as a rule so I will not be targeting your edits for deletion.  The regular editors of that article may have input regarding your content, so be prepared to answer any concerns on the article's talk page.  Regards   Tide  rolls  04:04, 23 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Hello TideRolls, thank you for your very polite reply! I have two questions to ask you! Is my Wikipedia Profile linked to the Turok Wikia Page or not? Also I have created another TMRC Page and they keep on deleting it! It's so annoying! Finally can you please place a comment on the Turok (2008) Talk Page saying to people to stop deleting the TMRC Article please! As you are a very polite and kind admimistrator I hope you can help me as I'm fairly new to Wikipedia! Many Thanks SportingLisboaXI (talk) 18:25, 24 January 2011 (UTC)


 * As an administrator I cannot tell users of this site what to do. I can only advise them of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines (which any editor can, and should, do).  I do have the ability to block users if their editing becomes disruptive, but that is an extreme option to be applied only after other processes have been attempted.  If your content is being deleted, start a discussion on the article's talk page explaining your position.  Read the replies and opinions of the editors that respond and determine if they have valid reasons for their position.  You can learn much of the policies and guidelines by interacting with other editors.  Please be patient and try to avoid frustration.  Most people here want to help even if they do not share your opinion about everything.  Regards   Tide  rolls  21:20, 24 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you for this valuable information! The problem is I have written to the Wiki editor that keeps deleting my articles and doesn't reply back on his talk page! Also no-one has used the Turok (video game) talk page since 2008 and so it'll pointless. Also would you like the Wiki editors name? Regards SportingLisboaXI (talk) 16:24, 26 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry SportingLisboaXI, but you said it in your first line in this section, that you "just wish to promote The Turok Multiplayer Revival Campaign", your own personal campaign. Wikipedia employs rules about notability, for which your own personal campaign does not qualify. There are many ways you can use the internet to promote your campaign, but the Turok Wikipedia article is not it. Otherwise, I could write on the Gilligan's Island article that I want to bring it back, but that doesn't make it notable. Greg Salter (talk) 20:51, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Can a reliable source be a Facebook Page? If that isn't good enough I'm currently getting GamesRadar to make me an article about this new Turok Campaign. Would that be enough for me to publish this article? Many thanks :) SportingLisboaXI (talk) 17:15, 31 January 2011 (UTC)


 * If you read the links I provided on your talk page you would be able to answer your own question. No matter, one is not required to read Wikipedia's guidelines to edit here.  The guidelines are in place to provide a framework in which many different editors with many different priorities can work together to provide useful, verifiable content.  Facebook can be edited by anyone to say anything; that runs counter to Wikipedia's guideline on verifiability.  So, no, in most instances Facebook will not meet the standard set by Wikipedia's guidelines as reliable.   Tide  rolls  00:14, 1 February 2011 (UTC)