User talk:WWGB/Archive 9

Geoffrey Edelsten
Thanks for the advanced warning on the Geoffrey Edelsten talk page. I see from the revision history that there's been an edit war. I don't intend to remove any content at all, unless an unreliable source is identified? Either way, I'll appreciate your guidance along the way if you are open to providing it. I'll probably take a shot at this sometime next week. Check the article's talk page for updates. Thanks again. Ballerina battlearena (talk) 03:27, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Vietnamese name formatting
2 examples;


 * (Ngo Dinh Diem)
 * (Nguyen Van Nhung)

Quis separabit? 01:04, 22 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi. It is my understanding that there is a difference between "name referred by" and family name for the purpose of listing. Nguyen Tan Dung is referred to as Dung in a context such as "Dung was born in 1949". When listed in Category:Communist Party of Vietnam politicians he is alphabetised under "N" along with all the other Nguyens. I think the same principle should apply in Recent Deaths, namely, listed under "N". Regards, WWGB (talk) 01:28, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

North Parade Street
Hello WWGB, check out the sources in goole search: where the majority refer to North Parade as North Parade Street. Tell me what you think of this Tony the Marine (talk) 04:15, 22 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi, it seems the original petition refers to is as North Parade, as does the town map but then I see the realtors refer to North Parade Street . I'm confused!!! If we want Wikipedia to be accurate, perhaps settle on the compromise  North Parade Street (also known as North Parade)? Regards, WWGB (talk) 04:39, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

I actually just noticed this discussion, and wasn't aware that there had been an agreement to use the parenthetical. I have been vacillating between the two usages, Street or no Street, but ultimately changed it back to "North Parade" for the reasons that I explained on the talk page. What do you think? There is really only one article that actually focuses on the name of the street, I felt that we should go with that. The Google searches etc. that I was engaged in struck me as borderlining on original research. Coretheapple (talk) 15:09, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I think that is an excellent idea. I'll make the proper change, unless you did so already. Tony the Marine (talk) 05:06, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Our other issue
Well I see we had another Indian death this evening and we are having the same problem again. Again, I dont care which one of the options we choose, I just want everyone to be afforded the same rights and be treated equally. I was reviewing WP:Nationality again and it referred me again to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationality.

One particular thing you should note is this passage-

"Individuals may also be considered nationals of groups with autonomous status which have ceded some power to a larger government, such as the federally recognized tribes of Native Americans in the United States."

I know in the past from our discussions where I have presented the Constitution and Tribal agreements (both Canadian and US), shown you where Federal officials and agency members such as the FBI, etc have to have permission to enter Indian Lands, and even linked Indian Nations ambassadors to the US on the Deaths page.

There are 3 possible scenarios-

1- American (Indian Nation Name), American Puerto Rican, American Guamiam, Canadian (Indian Nation), British Falkland Islands, Danish Faroe

2- American, Canadian, British, Danish

3- (Indian Nation Name), Puerto Rican, Guamiam, Falkland Islands, Faroe

I dont care which of the 3 it is again. I just want the same Nationality rules to apply to all of these Territories. I have changed 2 deaths this month- a Guam death and a Puerto Rico death to reflect scenario 1 which is the one I believe you prefer. Let me know how you feel and I will update the Main Page with a Nationality section so everyone knows the rules. The last time we brought this up on the Talk Page, it was just you and me discussing. So we might as well decide.Sunnydoo (talk) 08:22, 2 March 2013 (UTC)


 * My simple test is "what passport do they hold (or are eligible to hold)"? I am not aware that any Native American nation issues recognised passports, so they are American. Likewise, unless someone considered themselves Welsh, then they are British. I don't know enough about the American-ness of Puerto Ricans and Guamians. I don't recall ever reverting anyone on that issue. So, I guess my preference is "2". WWGB (talk) 12:26, 2 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Almost all of the Indian Nations issue their own passports. There was an issue recently from the Iroquois lacrosse team not being allowed to enter Britain because they didnt recognize the Iroquios government.  I will put up a statement in the discussion section that we have reached an agreement and list the 40 or so territories that will be affected.  Need to find the list again so everyone can be on the same page.Sunnydoo (talk) 14:44, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Defenestration
Defenestration is not a form of homicide. It can be either. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DefenestrationSunnydoo (talk) 01:40, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * You are blurring defenestration with the suicide sub-category Defenestration. WWGB (talk) 01:58, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Not blurring anything. There is a distinct difference between jumping out a window and jumping off of a building or bridge.  They are not the same thing, although both usually have the same result.  At some point in history, someone thought hey we need to make a new word for this to be more precise and defenestration was born.  I dont have an issue with "self-defenestration" or "suicide by defenestration," but combining them is grammatically incorrect and overly complicated because one act kind of implies the other.Sunnydoo (talk) 14:34, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

I have tried to be nice
We are just going to have to get an arbitrator i believe to work out whatever personal problem you have with me. If you have a problem with me thats fine. But you continually assail cultural references to indigenous people, Chinese people and now African-Americans despite me showing you Constitutional facts and Wiki policy. You have also reverted my edits 3x in 24 hours on 1 line(but thats not the point). If you dont understand American culture or our Constitution, then dont comment on it and dont change it. You dont see me working on Australian culture or references. Indeed the several times it has come up over the last few years, I have always deferred to someone from that country and will make mention of it on the talk page. So now let me go file the complaint and lets do this, because obviously we have some issues here.Sunnydoo (talk) 15:31, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Deaths_in 2013 Waiting for your response. Thanks.Sunnydoo (talk) 15:52, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Shame on you for calling me a racist and for reporting me to administrators, a "complaint" which was dismissed and closed . I do not want to have any direct contact with you in the future. WWGB (talk) 01:30, 9 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I said either/or and in the registry of complaint I did make a reference that it could be a generational gap that causes you not to understand the significance of race relations in the United States. Believe me, I lived through the Race Riots of the 1970s.  People such as Hank Aaron, who is arguably the 1st or 2nd greatest baseball player to ever live, were discriminated against and had to have protection details for themselves and their families around the clock.  Hundreds of people were killed in the disputes.  Kennedy almost had the 101st Airborne invade the State of Mississippi over actions at the University of Mississippi. It was an ugly ugly time in the US, especially with Vietnam going on at the same time.  But for whatever reason, you choose not to honor or respect those noteworthy achievements of people who stood up in the face of that adversity and excelled- regardless of race, who broke barriers and made the world what it is today.

If you dont want to have contact with me in the future, that is fine. Stay off of my edits and I will stay off of yours. If we continue to have disagreements over racial content like this, I will pursue other avenues of complaints. This was just a level 1 intervention to work through our issues, which is not something that it looks like you wish to pursue. I am willing to dialouge anytime you wish. If this were about trying to get someone in trouble, there are other avenues to pursue since i have now seen you have edited that one line 6 times in 24 hours. But its not. Its about working together and pointing things out when you are mistaken- like you have done for me in the past.Sunnydoo (talk) 09:52, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Hypotension and Hypertension
For future reference, both can cause death. I suggest you look them up. I left it as irregular because it didnt specify which one. Someone has put up hypoxic lung failure now which can be caused by hypotension. If I would have known which it was, it would have been complications of hypotension as CoD.Sunnydoo (talk) 01:16, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The initial reference clearly stated that Jones was "hospitalized April 18 with irregular blood pressure". It says nothing about a cause of death. Asserting a cause of death from that article is extrapolation. WWGB (talk) 02:09, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

New Nationality Idea
Someone posted on the RFC something I had not thought of. Why have Nationality at all? It kind of makes sense. If someone needs more info on citizenry they can either see the Wiki article or the link to the story. And it would save space to combat the hamsters not being fed at the end of the month for some people. Would be a interesting and fantastic compromise I do believe. Sunnydoo (talk) 02:54, 9 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Without dismissing the idea, I can see that the loss of context in many entries would leave the readers bewildered:


 * Kozo Igarashi, 87, politician, member of the House of Representatives, Chief Cabinet Secretary (1994–1995), pneumonia.
 * P. G. Lim, 96, diplomat and lawyer, Ambassador to the United Nations, Yugoslavia, Austria and the European Economic Community.


 * My opinion aside, I just don't see this being accepted by the Recent Deaths community. WWGB (talk) 05:47, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

My Kitchen Rules eliminated contestants
So why you denied on removing all of the eliminated contestants in My Kitchen Rules? Because, this table list (series section of My Kitchen Rules) is for finalists only and I started on removing there. Similar to other reality show pages (such as MasterChef) don't have the eliminated contestants there. ApprenticeFan work 05:06, 22 May 2013 (UTC)


 * No, it's not for finalists only, it's in a section headed Series details, not finals details. As for what happens in other reality show articles, WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS is not an argument here. Basically, the summary of eliminated contestants does no harm and is informative = it should stay. WWGB (talk) 06:15, 22 May 2013 (UTC)


 * It could be less right. Eliminated contestants of the show are really not-notable. ApprenticeFan  work 06:24, 22 May 2013 (UTC)


 * No-one is suggesting they are notable. You do not have to be notable to have your name written in a Wikipedia article. WWGB (talk) 06:30, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Drummer
Please respond at Talk:2013_Woolwich_attack. – Smyth\talk 15:08, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Re this. Foreign terms are italicised, please refer to MOS:Ety. Regards, --  Ohc  ¡digame!¿que pasa? 03:09, 27 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Re this. It appears you are not too familiar with quotations. A pair of single square brackets is now the universal convention for marking anything that isn't in the original text. It is a literary device, much like ellipses, used variously to shorten or illustrate or transparently modify a quote. They do not create any problems and have been used and accepted not just by our FA reviewers, it's much used in academic journals too. Regards, --  Ohc  ¡digame!¿que pasa? 03:44, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Woolwich rant
Aaaargh! Can we leave a stronger and yet stronger message on the talk page to stop this continually getting changed to a poor transcript? Ohconfucious cannot get past the fact that some sources are considered more reliable than others. I don't know how get through that accuracy is more important than some MOS ideal state. Amandajm (talk) 11:45, 31 May 2013 (UTC)


 * This is my transcript, which has a few differences:

"The only reason we have killed this man today is because Muslims are dying daily by British soldiers, and this British soldier is one, it is a eye for a eye [sic] and a tooth for a tooth. By Allah, we swear by the Almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you until you leave us alone. So what if we want to live by the Sharia in Muslim lands. Why does that mean you must follow us and chase us and call us extremists and kill us? Rather you lot are extreme. You are the ones. When you drop a bomb, do you think it hits one person or rather your bomb wipes out a whole family. This is the reality. By Allah, if I saw your mother today with a buggy I would help her up the stairs. This is my nature. But, er, we are forced by the Quran in Sura at-Tawba, through many, many ayah throughout the Quran that we must fight them as they fight us, an eye for a eye [sic] and a tooth for a tooth. We, er I apologise that women had to witness this today, but in our land our women have to see the same. You people will never be safe. Remove your government. They don't care about you. Do you think David Cameron is gonna get caught in the street when we start busting our guns? Do you think your politicians are going to die? No it's going to be the average guy, like you, and your children. So get rid of them. Tell them to bring our troops back so we can... so you can all live in peace. Leave our lands and you will live in peace. That's all I have to say. I mean, Allah's peace and blessings be upon Muhammad, as-salamu alaykum."

-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 12:05, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Lee Rigby
My hesitation in reporting on his marital status is that his wife (to whom he was still legally married) said that she was looking forward to them getting back together as a family. On the other hand, the second young lady referred to herself as his "fiancee". Since he was still legally married, he was in no position to enter an engagement, which is a contract, even if only a verbal one. So we cannot say that a man who was married was intending to remarry. I realise that this is nitpicking, but it is the reason why it has seemed inadvisable to not say too much about the two females in his life.

On the other hand, there is an expectation that these details will be included, so we need to find a way of doing so that reflects what the media says, but is precise in its terminology and doesn't offend, if we can avoid it.

I am leaving this on your talk page, because I don't want to keep harping on the subject of the wife's apparent expectations of a reunion with him, on the talk page which is essentially public. The directions pertaining to respect for the living mention the talk page specifically. Can I leave it with you to consider a few variations on the wording and come up with the least offensive and most accurate you can think of? Amandajm (talk) 14:56, 3 June 2013 (UTC)


 * 'Editor's summary: /* Attack */ overly paranoid, they were identified not merely suspected' ~ Yet the page features a section headed: 'Suspects'. I gather that the trial is ongoing. Beingsshepherd (talk) 05:09, 6 July 2013 (UTC)Beingsshepherd

Santa Monica shooting
Who's the sixth person? The references I've see indicate three Zawahri family members dead (including the shooter) and two Franco family dead (Marcela Franco being described as the 5th to die). I haven't seen a sixth name. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 06:20, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Never mind - found her. "Woman in her 50s collecting recyclable material", her name hasn't been released. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 06:35, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

That he took classes (only) in game design and animation at SMC may not have any relevance to actions of a young man who ultimately dressed up and acted out what could easily be a scene from any number of hyper-violent, animated games? In learning that Zawahri was a student at the college where this event played out, it is not unreasonable to want to know (and we do) what he studied, and in this case the fact could be revealing. Simply because we do not yet know the relevance of a fact we should not assume it to be irrelevant. With respect for your work, I really think you should reconsider your removal in this case. -- Dwpaul (talk) 03:34, 12 June 2013 (UTC)


 * If he studied ballistics or psychopathy there may be some relevance to the event. We don't publish everything because "we do not yet know the relevance of a fact", we publish subject matter of direct relevance to the article. As it stands now, the courses he studied are no more relevant than what he ate for breakfast or the name of his dog. WWGB (talk) 03:43, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Mascots
Mascots shouldnt need their own article. You end up making too many articles (take UGA from the University of Georgia for example). Does it make sense to have a UGA I, then II, then III, etc. all when they are already combined in the UGA football section or on one master page? No, it does not.

If an animal has a dedicated section that should be fine on a sports page. Its also a precedent we have used for many months on the board. Look up the Texas A&M Reveille collie mascot from a couple of months ago for an example.

If it doesnt suffice, then I will split the article off the Thunder page and make an article myself. There is more than enough media support for it. The dog was honored at Yankee Stadium for goodness sakes where he threw out the first pitch.Sunnydoo (talk) 22:42, 9 July 2013 (UTC)


 * You may not appreciate what a New York Yankee is, but here is a search that should help see how well covered this story is- https://encrypted.google.com/#output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=cahse+trenton+thunder&oq=cahse+trenton+thunder&gs_l=hp.3..0i13j0i8i13i30.1257.4421.1.4541.21.21.0.0.0.0.114.1252.19j2.21.0...0.0.0..1c.1.17.hp.M2dolt5SVhk&psj=1&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.48705608,d.eWU&fp=746bd702df9010f1&biw=1344&bih=740 Sunnydoo (talk) 22:57, 9 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Per consensus, "Deaths of notable animals and other biological life forms are also reported here, if they first have their own page" (emphasis added). Your choice to write that page if you want. Uga and Reveille were quite different to this case, as they were linked to a "family" page, in the same way that Cleotha Staples was allowed to stand when her name redirects to the "family" page The Staple Singers. You are proposing a quite different matter, where anyone or anything mentioned in an article could appear on the deaths page with a redirect to the main article. Shall we report the death of Monty (corgi) and link the death to Queen Elizabeth's corgis? What about George W. Bush's cow Ofelia? Consensus is there to guide us, not to try and work around it. WWGB (talk) 01:03, 10 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Fine, I will start an article and add.Sunnydoo (talk) 01:47, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Recent death
Feel free to link this essay when removing the recent death template, or when trying to explain to people the proper use of it. Cheers, --kelapstick(bainuu) 08:02, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Thérèse Rein and other Spouses of Australian Prime Ministers
Please stop deleting the updated Infoboxes of former and the current First Lady of Australia. If you do not, you will be blocked from editing. You are stopping progress and updating information, which is not allowed on Wikioedia. If you do this one more time, you will be blocked from editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hellomynameisandrew19991999 (talk • contribs) 14:52, 14 July 2013 (UTC)


 * There is no such position as "First Lady of Australia", and the spouse of the PM is not a politician. Leave it alone and edit elsewhere. WWGB (talk) 14:54, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Some of these people
Cant make everyone happy all of the time i guess. I totally agree with you though on the CoD thing.

Wanted to drop you a line about Garment. He is the one that investigated for Deep Throat in the Watergate scandal. Some people thought he was Deep Throat (Mark Felt was later named, but Garment didnt think that was accurate). Anyway he was the White House Consul at the time under Nixon. His part in the initial stuff was that he did the right thing and told Nixon not to destroy the tapes, which probably saved his own bacon so to speak- which is why he was allowed to continue under Ford as consul. He also did some of the investigative work until the US Congress finally got off its duff and did their own investigation. Just a little Am History for you.

I was trying to encapsulate that into his description. Give it a whack with a different phrasology if you want.Sunnydoo (talk) 03:28, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Spouses of the Prime Minister of Australia
It is fully understood by many that the Spouse of The Prime Minister of Australia is not an official office. I would like to remind you also of the fact that being the Spouse of the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom is not an official office. However, if you look at the current Spouse of the PM of the Uk, Samantha Cameron, her infobox names her as an office holder and gives the full information an office holder would normally have. So why can't we put one on for the Spouses of Australian Prime Ministers? It has been done for the Spouses for PM's of the UK despite it being an unofficial office, why can't it be done for the spouses of the Australian PM's? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.180.111.44 (talk) 04:48, 20 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Because it is not an official title, and because Australia is not the UK. WWGB (talk) 06:49, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Byran Adams
Hi, this is just a polite notification to say that I have tagged this redirect for deletion. It is, as far as I can tell, an implausible typo and I have pointed all uses of the redirect to the redirect target. Thank you.-- Laun  chba  ller  13:39, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

JJ Cale
Where does one put the recent death template when the article is fully protected? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:34, 27 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Nowhere, you wait until its unprotected or semi-protected. The reason for the protection was that the death was not confirmed at that stage, so a Recent Death tag would be presumptuous. WWGB (talk) 14:39, 27 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I think the death had been very definitely confirmed. But the confirmation was not believed by the editor who had added the protection? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:55, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Darlene Flynn obit
"no less notable than some old fart who is listed just because they live to 110, give it 30 days)"

ROTFL! I thought her obit is the LEAST notable of anybody I've ever seen listed on the Deaths page! It's not a big deal to me (19:41 revert by you), but I thought she really doesn't belong in the list for such a spurious rationale. Or if she does for that sole [pun intended] reason, then so does Imelda Marcos (if you remember her from the '80s) when her time comes with her 1,060 pairs of shoes! At least the oldest guy in the world is notable for that unique and important reason! Katydidit (talk) 03:20, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * So, how come you didn't re-revert her subsequent removal (20:37) by Rusted AutoParts? ROTFL! Katydidit (talk) 03:37, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * No point fighting when the odds are stacked! It's already two against one, with no-one supporting me. A losing battle, methinks ... And the thought of RAP's collection of toenail clippings, ewww! WWGB (talk) 05:15, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * That hit me right in the feels. Rusted AutoParts 05:33, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Bhattacharjee
So basically, i'm an asshole for trying to give the guy a proper DOD? Ok, that makes perfect goddamn sense. It appears I had the audacity to actually look for a source stating the date! My sincerest apologies. P.S., despite what conspiracy theories you formulate, i'm here to contribute and improve. So never disrespect me like that again. Rusted AutoParts 14:07, 31 July 2013 (UTC)


 * The most reputable media sources concur that a date of death is unknown (The Guardian, The Independent, Evening Standard, Variety, Times of India). When I pointed this out in an edit, you simply reverted my edit with a trite "stop". You nailed your colours to a single reference, without addressing why the vast majority of sources were wrong in your eyes. Your reversion was stubborn and unco-operative, and not responsive to an alternative position (that the d.o.d. cannot be determined). As for your self-assessment, I cannot comment on your personal judgement. WWGB (talk) 04:09, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Earl Barbry (Jul 31 death)
FWIW, for Earl Barbry, Tunica-Biloxi Indian Tribe is the bolded name of the group in the lede of that article, which is why I used it. The official name of the tribe, however, according to its website is "Tunica-Biloxi Tribe of Louisiana", and this is the name I see in many other sources. As far as "chief" I left it alone because it has a specific meaning. Based on the reference and other sources, however, it seems it is wrong. I propose: —&#91; Alan  M  1 (talk) &#93;— 01:22, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Earl Barbry, 62, Chairman of the Native American Tunica-Biloxi Tribe of Louisiana since 1978, cancer.


 * We would always start the listing with "American ...". Personally, I think "American Tunica-Biloxi leader ... " is sufficient. The purpose of the piping is to provide interested readers with a fast link to learn more about the subject. We don't have to explain less-familiar terms in the listing. The Wikipedia article is titled Tunica-Biloxi so we don't need to use the extended name of the tribe. The listing is meant to be a brief summary of the deceased's reason for notability, with more expansive information available in the article, the death reference and other links in the listing. WWGB (talk) 01:36, 2 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Starting the listing with "American" makes it awkward to use the preferred descriptions "Native American" or "American Indian" when describing the tribe, since neither Indian nor Native American are part of the tribe's name. When I argued for the use of structure, templates, and tables here, one of the claimed virtues of the current structure was to not force such rigid structural requirements at the expense of ugly prose.
 * I understand the purpose of piping and the rest of the boilerplate, but I don't understand the virtue of being purposely inaccurate (which is what the current result is) when the accurate description costs nothing. The current "American Tunica-Biloxi tribal leader, Chairman (since 1978)" doesn't say anything about Native American, Indian, or Lousiana. It implies he was a leader before being elected chairman, which is not mentioned in the source(s). How can that be better than using the correct title (only) of the person and tribe?
 * This is only one such example. I often get changes reverted by the handful of people who seem to WP:OWN the deaths articles and it's mostly not worth arguing, but it's honestly getting a little old. One of them recently responded to a perfectly reasonable posting on their talk page by deleting it without comment. AFAIK, we're all still part of the same project. —&#91; Alan  M  1 (talk) &#93;— 20:42, 2 August 2013 (UTC)


 * There is a small group of regular editors (wikignomes) who vigorously maintain the appearance and consistency of the "Deaths in" pages. Some may see that as "ownership", but they/we think it is important to maintain a standard on one of the most-read pages in Wikipedia. I guess we act a bit like sub-editors in a newspaper. Most casual editors don't seem to mind this tweaking, as the most important function of the page is to bring recent deaths to the attention of readers. Detailed information about the individual is better left to their article. The general sequence in a listing is nationality + reason(s) for notability. In the case of Barbry, moving between leader and Chairman does not necessarily represent a transition, rather a report of his area of notability followed by the specific title. It is like "Elizabeth II, British monarch, Queen (since 1952)".


 * Looking at your suggestions, I don't have a problem with inserting "Indian" after the name of the tribe for clarification. I think adding "Native American" introduces duplication of the word American after listing it as the nationality, and Louisiana is becoming overly-specific.


 * I hope this helps you to see my perspective. I wouldn't dare speak for the others! WWGB (talk) 10:42, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Apology
I'm sorry for snapping at you in my edit summary. I'm just having a shit time these days. Here and in regular life. Rusted AutoParts 04:45, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Deaths in 2013
Just checking that my relatively recent edits, are keeping this article's reference formatting style consistent with the somewhat non-existent, consensus only based, 'guidelines'. I really do not want to spend time and effort, only to discover that everyone else thinks "what a waste of time" that is. I am not seeking praise or 'gong's, just a little reassurance that I am not way off beam. Cheers,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 23:13, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Re:Death of Lee Rigby
No worries, I thought someone was messing about, but it seems to be correct. Thanks for checking it out. Paul MacDermott (talk) 11:50, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Bill Peach
Thanks for the thanks on the Bill Peach article. I am amused that 30–60 mins after I wrote and posted the Wikipedia article, numerous virtually identically worded and structured news stories appeared on AAP, Fairfax and other outlets! This has happened a few times... first port of call for the busy journalist! --Canley (talk) 00:00, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

In regards to deletion
I would like to apologize in advance for my article. I know I was taking a chance by posting it directly.

The article is actually an English project that I am working on. I had seen other schools' formula team pages and thought a Wayne State team page would be of an equivalent importance.

I don't want to take up too much of your time, but I would appreciate some advice or tips for editing or creating an article. I had read much of the "how to" articles for doing so, but still I do not know enough. If possible, I don't want to give up on the page, but perhaps it isn't encyclopedic material.

Thank you for your time,

CroodLude (talk) 20:53, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Revert
What out-dated content? What are you talking about? Everything is up-to-date. I did not replace or revert to any old content, I only re-added the flags. Nothing more. Please discuss before reverting someone without explaining. And please stick to WP: Civil. Thank you! EkoGraf (talk) 14:16, 26 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Not true. You removed Australia from the table on two occasions. WWGB (talk) 14:51, 26 September 2013 (UTC)


 * That's because 95 percent of reliable sources are counting him as a Briton and in their toll, not an Australian. With you reinserting him constantly while still maintaining the British figure of 6 that is reported (which includes him) you are doublecounting which is missleading for the readers...Tell you what, we add a foot note on the British number which will say one person is also an Australian in origin. EkoGraf (talk) 18:53, 26 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok, I did something else. I lowered the cited British toll by 1 and separated him as a British-Australian. But I am still of the opinion this is OR since most sources count him in the British toll, regardless if he was Australian born. EkoGraf (talk) 19:02, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Who can speak English?
Re your remark Do Lihaas and Jan olieslagers claim to speak English? By their reasoning, they do not have the right to make that claim ... English is the language of England, where they do not live! How dare they ..... ! WWGB (talk) 10:40, 25 September 2013 (UTC) I take it in good humour, as I guess and hope it was made, and will venture to reply that there are even some Americans (sic!) who claim to speak English. Why then shouldn't I, poor little Belgian? Kind regards (and of course mainly appreciating your good work, in the shoot-out article and elsewhere) Jan olieslagers (talk) 14:41, 26 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes of course it was tongue in cheek. My point being if citizens of USA cannot use the term American, then perhaps citizens outside England cannot claim to English language? WWGB (talk) 14:54, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Regarding my revision in Deaths in 2013
Thanks, I noticed that I was entirely incorrect briefly after my edit. I should avoid editing before my morning coffee, it's potentially hazardous. {{{sub|C}}  A S U''' K I T E  T} 13:06, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Christine White content
You have repeatedly removed the line "She was survived by eight nephews and nieces", as well as the reaction from William Shatner from the article on Christine White, justifying it as "non-notable." I am curious why you don't believe this should be a part of her biography? She had no children of her own and so they were her closest relatives, the information was also cited by the reference given. Countless biographies list survivorships. Also, her claim to fame in popular culture was the episode she appeared in with William Shatner and as with surviorship, plenty of other biographies also describe the reaction(s) of those who played a large role in that person's life/career/fame. So, I'm finding it difficult to understand why you feel the information isn't notable, especially with regards to surviorship, but also with reactions to her death. Coinmanj (talk) 21:44, 13 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Citing WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS in no way justifies the retention of non-notable material in an article. You have not explained how citing family members in any way adds to the reader's understanding of the article or its subject. Basically, no-one cares whether she had eight nephews and nieces or none. Likewise, a minimalist comment by Shatner carries no particular significance. It's what you do when someone dies. Adding this kind of information to an article suggests WP:FANCRUFT. WWGB (talk) 10:16, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Keryn Jordan
He may well have held New Zealand citizenship - but that claim is unreferenced. If he represented South Africa (the country of his birth, and death) at international level than that is his nationality. Just look at his categories, and the RS which describe him as South African. I would invite you to revert yourself. GiantSnowman 11:36, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Apologies
You have my apologies for thinking you did something you didn't. I should've been more careful in my reading. It's unfair to you and I am sorry. -Justanonymous (talk) 01:18, 25 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your gracious comments. WWGB (talk) 02:13, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter
Books and Bytes Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013 by , Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved... New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted. New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis?? New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration Read the full newsletter ''Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:12, 27 October 2013 (UTC)''

Deaths in October 2013
A wee bit early, but I thought I'd do it before someone mucked it up. —  Wylie pedia  07:26, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

User:Dexter Kae
I removed the template you recently added to User:Dexter Kae. I assume you added the template in jest, but the template instructions specifically state that this template should only be added to a user's page by that user. Any other use could be considered an attack. Thank you for your understanding of this matter. -- &#124; Uncle Milty &#124; talk  &#124; 13:57, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Bob Becker
You are probably entirely correct, but the creating editor needs to learn how to get it right, so this is probably as useful a mechanism as any. I was struggling with the edits I was able to make. Fiddle  Faddle  23:17, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Prod of Whitney M. Young, Jr. Job Corps Center
I understand the rationale for your prod, but I would ask for a little leeway in, at the very least, merging the information therein. I would say this falls under the heading of countering systemic bias- the Young Center, Lincoln Institute, and associated historical sites are minority-oriented institutions that have historically been under-represented in published material and local media. There is at least one media story that I found in some (brief) research via Google that covered a stabbing that occurred on the campus that describes the Center as serving at-risk youth, but I felt that its inclusion was not representative of the work that the Center does. --Spasemunki (talk) 23:07, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

'Jamaican international'
Re. this edit, no, they're not. A 'Jamaican international' is a footballer who represented their country. --Michig (talk) 09:24, 18 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Most of the footballers on this list have played at international level. It's not a defining achievement here. WWGB (talk) 09:46, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to Sydney editathon - Saturday 23rd November
There is a backstage pass coming up to be followed by an editathon in the State Library of New South Wales on Saturday 23 November. This is the first time that an Australian cultural institution has opened its doors to us in this way and will be a special opportunity because the Library is providing: one of its best rooms; its expert curators (along with their expertise and their white gloves); a newly launched website (containing new resources); and of course, items from its collection (including rare and usually unavailable material) which we can look at, learn from, and use, to improve WP articles. For example, on the chosen topic (Australia and WWI), the Library holds many diaries and manuscripts from the period.

As you can see from the Library's project page, they have connected this editathon with their own work. They have already set out a wide range of resources to make things easier for us. Please sign up on the editathon project page if you can participate either online or in person with other Wikipedians. Hope to see you there! (Sorry if you've received this message before - I did a quick check but didn't see it.) 99of9 (talk) 10:49, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Egon Lánský
Hi. You removed the word "former" from the entry for this person at the Deaths in 2013 page in Wikipedia. I fear you have misunderstood the context. He is not "former" in the sense that he died, and while in office. Whilst living the latter part of his life, having been voted out of or having stepped down from the role of Deputy Prime Minister, he was indeed a "former Deputy Prime Minister" - in other words, he lived life in that context, before his demise. I have therefore re-inserted the word, as the present description seems to infer that he did die in office, which is not the case. Thanks. Ref (chew) (do) 07:17, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "Deaths in 2013". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot  operator /  talk  09:31, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The case will be closed shortly unless the involved parties come to the page and begin a discussion.-- — Keithbob • Talk  • 01:04, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Christopher Evan Welch's Age
I suggest that you watch an episode of Adventures of Sonic the Hedgehog and listen to the character's voice, that is done by a child. Not a 28 year old like the magazine's claim. a 28 year old male cannot sound like a child, that is why I feel that the official sources have made a mistake, or it's all been a sad case of mistaken identity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by David31584 (talk • contribs) 22:40, 4 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I suggest you listen to the voice of Bart Simpson. Does it sound like the voice of a 56-year-old woman? WWGB (talk) 23:31, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Reply
It's not me being disruptive, it's you being possessive of all death related articles, no matter what month or year. Yes, the award is significant, but do we really value them receiving an award as a reason why they're famous? I won't remember Brennan because she won an Emmy, I'll remember her from Private Benjamin and Clue, movies that provided entertainment, which was her job. Accolades are rewards for talented acting, but it's not what makes them famous. Does this mean when a person who wins a Razzie and nothing else dies, we'll put their entry as "Razzie-winning actor"? Brennan was notable long before she won an Emmy, or was nominated for an Oscar. The accolades aren't what makes Eileen Brennan who she is. Rusted AutoParts</i> 14:59, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey
As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 14:57, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Reply
Alright. Enlighten me. Why 'can't we file the ones whose DOD were unsure of in their own section? It's better than assuming, because the death was reported December 14th, that's where we put the entry. "We've never utilized unknown categories here". It's called change. Change happens every second, every minute, every hour of every day, every year. My actions were in a constructive nature, and the fact you so arrogantly reverted shows that you refuse to embrace change. Though we decided it was clutter, pictures were at one point added. We want sure fire accuracy. Having Paul Bhattacharjee listed on July 12 when his body was only found that day is incorrect. He could've died the 10th or 11th. With an Unknown dates section, we can list the ones who haven't an official DOD, get a reliable source stating the day, so it prevents is from going "huh, John Doe died the 17th, not the 22nd". This is nowhere near an unconstructive idea. Hell, articles depicting events of a year, like 1974 have unknown sections for the information that doesn't have a set date for when it happened. It's not fair to me as well as I spend a good time of my life contributing to Wikipedia with the sole purpose of improving not just the content, but the accuracy of what we're posting. News sources use the site for info, and if they're reading Paul Bhattacharjee's name in the July 12 section even with the (death announced on this date) tag, they'll still say he died the 12th. It makes sense for accuracy, and allows us to pinpoint which entries need more information in regards to their content. Does this satisfy your query? If not, the stubbornness that disallows me to further do this cost me valuable time I could've put somewhere else. I decided to put that time into improving our DOD accuracy. <i style="font-family:Rockwell; font-size:medium; color:red;">Rusted AutoParts</i> 04:11, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Change requires consensus. You do not have it. Writing " I think this should be a thing, and when the day is discovered, we add them accordingly" in an edit summary does not substitute for consensus. If it cost you "valuable time" then you should have sought consensus before you ploughed on through many months. If interested editors accept your proposal, then so be it. Change requires more than a whim. WWGB (talk) 04:21, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * It's called being bold. Editors would normally take their concerns about a drastic change to the talk page before stripping away a time consuming edit. If this bothers you, voice your disapproval on the talk page. And your "cost you valuable time? Boo Hoo" stance isn't appreciated. That series of edits took me an hour and a half as I'm on my IPad. <i style="font-family:Rockwell; font-size:medium; color:red;">Rusted AutoParts</i> 04:24, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Nah, WP:BRD, I'm entitled to use the R part of that. WWGB (talk) 04:28, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * This seems more personal than professional. Your response above is smug and does not take into account the good intentions of my edits. <i style="font-family:Rockwell; font-size:medium; color:red;">Rusted AutoParts</i> 04:36, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Young Chozen
I think I've fixed what made Young Chozen a candidate for deletion and am about to untag it, but I've been away for a long time, so I thought I would give you a heads up in case you wanted to check I had done everything I needed to. Dolive21 (talk) 13:13, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Some sort of engagement beyond listing the article for deletion three different ways would be good. Dolive21 (talk) 13:31, 28 December 2013 (UTC)


 * OK, he is not notable. WWGB (talk) 13:33, 28 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Have you looked at what I have said about that on the talk page?Dolive21 (talk) 13:40, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

In the light of the changes to the article in the last few hours, and the sources that have emerged that support notability, would you reconsider your nomination? I understand your immediate reaction (deleting the article) and in fact I came across the article while RC patrolling, because it ticked all the boxes (living person, music etc.) but when I went to get more information to explain why it didn't belong on Wikipedia I found the subject was notable. Dolive21 (talk) 16:44, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Pioneer Coaches
In the transit bus infobox, "parent" refers to a parent company, such as Transdev is the parent of Transdev NSW. Where a person or family operates/operated the service, the correct title is operator. Thanks, WWGB (talk) 12:32, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * A parent company is the owning company, so yes it would be correct to list Transdev Australasia as the parent of Transdev NSW. As Pioneer Coaches wasn't owned by a company, but by a sole trader in the Iffland family, is appropriate to put in the parent field.
 * The operator field is used to list subsidiary companies or contractors. If this was an article on Transdev Australasia, the operator field would be used to list Transdev NSW, Transdev Shorelink Buses etc. Refer to Transperth for an example. Mo7838 (talk) 13:09, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Deaths in 2013
Someone also was kind enough to bitch about it there. —  Wylie pedia  15:01, 1 January 2014 (UTC)