User talk:Zinnober9/Archive 01

Prince William, Duke of Cambridge
Hi Zinnober9, could you explpain this edit? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:42, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Martinevans123, I messed up in trying to revert Naomilee89's edit and seemed to have grabbed your revert edit without noticing. No vandalism was intended. Thank you for correcting my error, you got to it before I realized what had happened. Zinnober9 (talk) 18:17, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah yes, I see, no worries. Thanks for your efforts in vandalism corrections. I should have checked your history first! Feel free to remove this thread if appropriate. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:21, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Eds 100
Why did you change EDS to 1: 5000 ?

that figure is so outdated it is Ridiculous  Zebrazebrazebra2 (talk) 02:51, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * If it's so outdated, PROVE IT. What's your source? So far you have changed the values, but left the same sources, and have yet to prove that the medical community agrees with your numbers. The current source listed for the frequency seems up to date (2017) to me. Zinnober9 (talk) 03:04, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Declining your speedy
Hello, Zinnober9,

I declined your speedy to delete User:Cadac2 on the grounds that Wikipedia is not a webhost. My understanding is that this rationale is to prevent editors from using user pages to host their fantasy football results or to write their next screenplay or keep a list of recipients for their Christmas cards. So, a large body of writings.

I think a few short, nonsensical sentences that are barely a paragraph does not harm the mission of the project. Editors are given some leeway on what they can put on their user pages and I don't think this content is sufficient to delete the entire page, especially given that this is a new editor and their user page edits were their first edits. Let's try not to bite new editors. If Cadac2 starts writing a novel on their user page, give me a call. Thanks for your work! Liz Read! Talk! 01:19, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah, my mistake. Thank you for clarifying. Zinnober9 (talk) 01:41, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

AIV
For an IPv6 do consider checking the /64 range - that is often assigned to one user - compare
 * Special:Contributions/2001:1970:57A0:8B00:6D10:381D:9332:4161
 * Special:Contributions/2001:1970:57A0:8B00::/64

I think you'll agree same person - just use the first 4 blocks of address "2001:1970:57A0:8B00" and add "::/64" (P.S. I blocked the IP then I checked the /64 and blocked the range as well.) Ron h jones (Talk) 02:50, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Hyphens and capitalisation
Hey, just wanted to let you know why I undid your edit to Utilitarian (album). The hyphen is necessary as "then-untitled" is a compound adjective. Without the hyphen, you could construct "then album" from that sentence, which makes no sense. The hyphen keeps those two words together, showing that both together modify "album". Also, "is" is capitalised in titles of publications (as well as things like album titles and song titles) on Wikipedia (which makes sense, as "is" is a verb, not a coordinating conjunction or article). Hope this helps explain my edits and subsequent reversion of your reversion. 184.71.94.130 (talk) 20:40, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Ah, my mistake, you are correct. Thanks for the message! Zinnober9 (talk) 21:03, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also: Beeblebrox (talk) 20:21, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.

James Henry Marriott
Hi. I made the redirect of the above-mentioned article and to Alice Marriott (actress)  without realizing I had not logged back in after logging out. It is a valid redirect of an article that was created and has remained a stub since its creation some time ago. Please reply on my talk page as I do not wish to revert without discussing the matter further. Please re-analyze and let me know your opinion. Rms125a@hotmail.com 01:37, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I had only just noticed this article, when it was linked to the Alice Mariott page. I had intended to expand the James Henry Marriott article shortly. I am sad to see that it has become a redirect. As you will have noticed, I had just begun to work on it by adding an image and commonscat etc. I have now userfied an earlier version of the James Henry Marriott article, and I guess I shall have to undo the redirect when I have completed the expansion. Storye book (talk) 09:47, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I think that's a conversation between you and User:Rms125a@hotmail.com as I don't know anything about Marriott except for the small amount I learned yesterday and don't feel I can contribute towards content for him. If there's enough content to warrant becoming a page again, then I don't see why it wouldn't become one again. My only interest at this point is anti-vandal and minor editorial. Zinnober9 (talk) 17:00, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

DOTY articles
Hi. Please don't accept any edits where new entries are included without a reference as this is against the current guidelines. Thanks. Deb (talk) 09:10, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Ah, sorry. I was verifying that the person being added's wiki page had the same date and that they hadn't been edited by the same person, but I'll check and look for those to be cited. Thanks for the message. Zinnober9 (talk) 22:34, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi. Further to your latest message, I must draw your attention to the guidelines, which say: "Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source". This requirement was introduced middle of last year for DOTY. Also, in your message to me, you referred to certain "edits", but the links you gave were to articles, not specific edits, so they were meaningless. To refer to a specific edit, you need to follow the instructions here. Deb (talk) 08:07, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Shortening the links to say "link" didn't work the I remembered. I've now corrected them on your talk page and added a link to the version I saw at the time of my edit for your convenience. Dick's page, when I read it, followed the "Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source" criteria to the letter. Zinnober9 (talk) 08:58, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I think you've misunderstood. The guidelines I quoted are for DOTY articles; you added an entry for "Dick" without an inline citation. Deb (talk) 09:29, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * To get this straight, are you quibbling about the sources on Dick's page, or are you saying that the DOTY pages now require the sources to be found on the DOTY page itself, regardless of whether it's sourced on the addition's page? In other words, if I'd said "*2019 – Dick Dale, American surf-rock guitarist, singer, and songwriter (b. 1937) " we wouldn't be having this conversation? Zinnober9 (talk) 20:26, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I was assuming that you would know what an inline citation was. Yes, as long as you include a reliable source that actually gives the date, you can add a new entry. That is exactly what the guideline says. Deb (talk) 08:04, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Avengers: Endgame
Hello. Please do not make false accusations or assumptions about other editor's actions, especially when reverting. You reverted my edit saying no source was provided. This is clearly incorrect. Going further and templating me as if I was the one that did not know what I was doing didn't help either. I can see that you are still relatively new here, so this is just a warning to be more careful in the future when you are reverting someone's edits. - adamstom97 (talk) 01:45, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * My mistake. Your edit came up in red on the recent changes page and I thought you were saying with your edit that "your daughter Ava was playing a secret role in Avengers: Endgame", which looked like an unsourced addition. I also didn't spot the source at that time since it was shortened with a reference name instead of the full source text, but I see that now and will watch for that in the future. My apologies for misunderstanding your edit. Zinnober9 (talk) 02:00, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Haha wow, I can see how you made that mistake now and it makes me feel a bit silly to have worded my message to you so strongly. Sorry for my knee-jerk reaction there, and no worries on your mistake. - adamstom97 (talk) 02:08, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Walter Hayes Trophy
Hi, I noticed you changed my edits back to the original which is factually incorrect. I didn't feel the need to put a source as I am the son of James Beckett the creator and organiser of this event. I didn't put a source as I was consulting him on the details and facts to add to the page. Will be making correct changes in due course as there seem to be many errors in the pages original text. Ff 1600 fan (talk) 21:10, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Welcome and thank you for your message. I'm glad you want to update and correcting any issues with that page! However, since you are involved with the organization that is the page is about, you have a conflict of interest, and I highly recommend seeing WP:COIEDIT before you do anything else with that. Zinnober9 (talk) 05:19, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Kim Thatcher revision
Hey can you explain why you undid the addition to Kim Thatchers page? The information was accurate, and a source was included, though admittedly may need tidying up to fit the preferred format. This page has a history of accurate, relevant, and well sourced information being removed if it was unfavorable to her, hence my concern. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1C0:4600:2720:89A9:F5E4:EDFA:728B (talk) 00:49, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
 * The link didn't seem like a credible source to me since it seemed like a blogging/filesharing site, but I do make mistakes with sourcing. Since your question, I've looked to see if there were any other sources claiming the same info but I haven't found any to substantiate it. That could be a problem for adding that info to Wikipedia. Zinnober9 (talk) 01:59, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt response. So the original link included was an official press release from her office, so hopefully that will count towards the evidence. In case it is not sufficient, I'll include a couple more to back up the claims.

https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2019R1/Measures/Overview/SB319 The official site for the oregon legislature, specifically overviewing Thatcher's bill to end the estate tax.

https://www.larslarson.com/is-it-time-for-oregon-to-repeal-the-death-tax/  This site contains an interview conducted with Thatcher, on the topic of the estate tax. While not an unbiased source (the host shares her views and endorses her), it provides a direct conversation of her discussing her views on the subject on a nationally syndicated radio show (the Lars Larson show).

Hopefully these will be sufficient, thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1C0:4600:2720:89A9:F5E4:EDFA:728B (talk) 02:53, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Correction regarding Malakpet
Dear,

Somebody might have mischievously wrote that Malakpet is in old city of Hyderabad. I am a resident of Malakpet since my birth. Please correct the facts. Nato James (talk) 04:46, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I think you and I have misunderstood each other. I'm objecting to your stating that various places are the "best/worst parts of town" etc. since that isn't neutral phrasing and sounds like your opinion since it isn't sourced. Opinions shouldn't be in articles. I did not object to your removing 'old city', and I'm fine with that being changed if it's incorrect. Cheers, Zinnober9 (talk) 06:27, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

removal of content
I added a newer picture of Senator L. Louise Lucas as requested. You indicated that my justification was insufficient and restored an older picture. The picture belonged to the Senator, and she asked me to post. It was received by text from the Senator directly to me.

How do you recommend I share justification. Asmal011 (talk) 23:29, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I did not indicate such and I do not object to the picture. My only objection was to your removing the infobox data and replacing it with the picture. While I do agree that the proof of provenance is a bit lacking, I'm not the person to ask about how to fix that issue as I do not know. WP:HELPDESK might be a good place to ask about this issue. Best wishes! Zinnober9 (talk) 01:01, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

St. Paul's School
I added another common name for North house at St. Pauls, it doesn't have a reliable source, that's just a useful bit of info. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hi1233215 (talk • contribs) 06:36, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
 * It's not common knowledge and there is no reliable source for that claim, so it can NOT be added to Wikipedia per WP:RELIABLE. Zinnober9 (talk) 06:46, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Fairy King of Ar


The article The Fairy King of Ar has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Completely unnotable, fails WP:GNG, WP:NFILM, no actual coverage aside from a single RiffTrax"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. –eggofreason(talk &middot; contribs) 21:04, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I have no opinion on the matter, I only created the page to correct an ip's page move of Beings (film). I agreed with the ip for the redirect, as I didn't find any evidence of the movie being called "Beings", but another editor (the creator of that page) has disagreed for whatever reason and reverted that redirect. Since you marked Fairy King for deletion, you should probably mark Beings as well, as I copied that page (pre-redirect) and pasted it on The Fairy King of Ar's page. I don't care if movie remains as an article or not, I just care that it's in the right place, and there aren't any broken redirects. Zinnober9 (talk) 05:27, 29 November 2019 (UTC)