User talk:Escape Orbit/Archive 17

Archive 10

←

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Would you wait longer than 30 seconds before you revert a new edit?

Otherwise you interfere in the middle of the process and create an editing conflict by the wikipedia software--Loginnigol 18:29, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Sorry. I think I did wait rather longer. Why didn't you add the cite at the same time as the content, rather than making it a two edit process? Unfortunately, edit conflicts are part and parcel of editing Wikipedia. You have to handle them.

And the rest of my comment still applies. What is it about Sayyid Qutb's opinion that means his must appear at the start of the section, before the criticism is even explained? --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:17, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Needtogo

Jesus here need help — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.248.1.176 (talk) 00:40, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Kirstjen Nielsen

Opinions are not facts and Wiki is about facts only ~ ~ ~ Mitchellhobbs (talk) 15:00, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Unfortunately you have a mistaken idea about what Wikipedia is about. Notable opinions, reported in reliable sources, are valid content if presented as opinion. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:15, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

How can Twitter be a wiki reliable source, and how can you say a New York Times reporter 'reported' on something when she actually tweeted it ~ the statement is misleading making you think it was in the New Your Times.

I'm not against opinions, but what does opinions of her gaining employment after she resigns have to do with her resignation ~ section ~ Mitchellhobbs (talk) 16:29, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Talk Page Reverts

let me ask you a question ~ I understand that I can not revert other editors comments on a talk page but I should always always be able to revert my edits on any talk I edit ~ Mitchellhobbs (talk) 22:58, 11 April 2019 (UTC) As a matter of fact I should be able to revert any edit I personally make ~ can I not? ~ Mitchellhobbs (talk) 23:10, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

@Mitchellhobbs:, the problem of selectively blanking your contributions is it leaves others in the conversation "talking to themselves", and may give anyone reading it later a completely erroneous impression of what was being discussed, what arguments were being employed, and what decisions were reached. See guidelines here.

You do not have an automatic right to delete any of your edits. If you look at the bottom of any page while you're editting you'll see "By publishing changes, you agree to the Terms of Use, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL." Once you click "Publish", your edit is no longer yours to do with as you wish. Generally, the place you have most freedom to what you want is on your own pages, and even there there are rules. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:36, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, never looked down there ~ lol ~sorry Mitchellhobbs (talk) 18:35, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Draft:GPS Hospitality

Good morning Escape Orbit Hope you had your coffee,

I sent this draft for review, If you are the reviewer please let me know what I have to do to improve in order to be accepted, also there is a section in Burger King franchises (at the bottom) and GPS Hospitality for ref of why I started this article ~ thanks ~ mitch ~ Mitchellhobbs (talk) 16:40, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Eliminación de video en lipdub

Hola,

La causa por la que eliminé el video es porque quería sustituirlo por otro vídeo con muchísimas más personas, donde todos promueven un mensaje de celebración relacionado con la vida en sí y amor hacia su propia ciudad y donde el motivo del lipdub no tiene nada que ver con temas políticos a diferencia del vídeo que hay puesto actualmente con simpatizantes nacionalistas vascos. Quería sustituir el vídeo por otro vídeo mejor pero no sé de qué manera lo hice que no se ha subido y ha acabado borrando el otro. Si pudiera darme indicaciones de cómo hacerlo se lo agradecería. Un saludo y gracias.

Unfortunately, "I don't like what is in this video" is not a valid reason for removing it. (Lip dub)

Desafortunadamente, "no me gusta lo que hay en este video" no es una razón válida para eliminarlo. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 19:58, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Undid revision 900416822 by Escape Orbit (talk) Page vandalism, please only add factual info.

The current band members do have legal ownership of the name and from online sources are a continuation of the original band. The Fourmost never stopped touring. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trent Williams III (talk • contribs) 16:56, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

@Trent Williams III:, I'm at a loss to understand what issue you have. None of the cites added dispute what the article, or you, say. And they certainly are not vandalism. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:07, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Undid revision 900416822 by Escape Orbit (talk) Page vandalism, please only add factual info. The current band members do have legal ownership of the name and from sources are a continuation of the original. The Fourmost never stopped touring.

My mistake and please except my apologies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trent Williams III (talk • contribs) 17:20, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Not the place for your views

Stop pro-gay bias and allow responses within articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.50.37.226 (talk) 20:50, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

If you want to share with the internet your opinions please go write a blog or something. Wikipedia is not the place for you to voice them. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 20:53, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Then neither it is the place of Wikipedia to provide implicit support, only information Only balancing article tone and bias.

If you bothered to actually read the articles you are vandalising, you'd see that "reponses" are included. No one is interested in your response. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 20:56, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Matthew Santoro ‏ edits

Hello,

I would love to talk about how i can make this edit stay on the page.

There is a number of videos of the vaping community has uploaded talking about the error in his video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONWTe7xSpGE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrncRHtguKE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8WozBZi4JI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3W2-BDGIPU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4j1udlLcmQ&t=2s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-wC_o-KU5c

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYITOaCVjjE

https://twitter.com/wildwelshpete/status/1145116123937103873

https://twitter.com/phil_w888/status/1145039020398956548

there is a ton of replies on this tweet too https://twitter.com/MatthewSantoro/status/1144983497146109952

Love to chat about it email me at allenrobberson at gmail dot com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Htls (talk • contribs) 14:59, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

@Htls: Thanks for you message. I'm afraid that discussion by unnotable youtubers/twitters is not a suitable source for Wikipedia. Wikipedia needs some kind of discussion from reliable, secondary sources, to establish that the dispute is notable and accurately reflected. We can't just take the word of largely unknown people who are involved. Is this just another Youtube drama of no interest to anyone else? Are the facts of the dispute being reliable and neutrally described? Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not just another online battlefield to extend the dispute onto. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:18, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Mike_Tyson#Amateur_career

Hello Escape Orbit! You've resolved the issue over Boxing at the 1980 Summer Olympics, I'll appreciate much if you also assist in resolving the following: Talk:Mike_Tyson#Amateur_career (the way I figured, the better way to stay out of trouble's way is just to stay away, and pay some attention to other articles.) 93.73.36.17 (talk) 14:54, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

@93.73.36.17: No reason why you can't be bold and go for it. You can't get in any trouble for being bold. Just be prepared to discuss if others don't like it. The only issue I see about the Frasier and Williams articles is; What/Who defines an amateur career "highlight"? Try to have a clear, factual criteria, rather than just "In my opinion, this is a highlight". --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 15:56, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, but other articles have "edit" option, and that one doesn't. The way I see "highlights," are something that is highlighted by the media (AP, UPI, NYT, Reuters, etc.) regardless of the actual level of competion (readers should decide.) 93.73.36.17 (talk) 16:33, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

@93.73.36.17: Sorry, I didn't notice. The Tyson article has been protected to stop vandalism from IP users. It must have been a target in the past. To edit it you will have to create a Wikipedia account, perform 10 edits and wait 4 days. It's a good idea to register anyway. It helps you keep track, protects your anonymity, and people know what you've edited, even if your IP changes. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:08, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. 93.73.36.17 (talk) 17:26, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Roland Orzabal

I screenshot an image or Roland Orzabal From Google. It was taken from a concert. Is it Okay to use? --Wyatt2049 | (talk) 13:53, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Depends on what you mean by "from Google". Is it from a website? Which website? Is that website copyrighted? Is it from YouTube? Does the video on Youtube say it is copyright? --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 13:57, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello - You seem to be a lot more experienced than I am.

Hello Escape Orbit

I am da4598 You seem to be a lot more advanced at editing and adding content to Wikipedia. I appreciate all of your contributions that you have made. I think it is really cool that you spend the amount of time that you do. I am sure that the rest of the world appreciates your work too.

Anyway, I was wondering if you can help me. On the wiki article called: "Drum Rudiments" in the section called "Hybrid rudiments"

I have done an enormous amount of research on this particular subject. I keep attempting to cite a book called the "drum rudiment bible" add both a reference and cite a URL: http://www.thedrumrudiments.com/the-history-of-the-snare-drum-rudiments/ which is an article called the History of the Snare drum rudiments.

I was wondering if you can look it over for me. Also possibly tell me how to properly cite it, and also, tell me what I am doing wrong. I want to follow the rules and I want to contribute some of my work, so the world will reference it. Here is my email: mark@markisworld.com

also, if you email me. I am willing to give you my phone number too. I would like to collaborate with you.

Thank you

Da4598 (talk) 16:19, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for your contributions. Please contact me. I want to know if you can help me fix something that I guess I am doing wrong. Da4598 (talk) 16:26, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Your reversions based on your experience

Hi, you reverted my edit re ginger hair, with the following comment: "Not widely used in my experience, needs pretty good sources first" Firstly, may I respectfully remind you that Wikipedia edits should NEVER be based on "Your experience". In MY experience, use of the term is widespread. Since the two effectively cancel one another out, I accept that a source may be required for this, which I will provide. I didn't provide a source in the first place because I didn't think there could possibly be any potential bones of contention within my edit, or any point that would require a source to back it up. Secondly, Such proofs are ubiquitous, should you bother to look. A quick search of the term 'gingernut' on Google immediately provides a plethora of proof to back up the veracity of my edit, with both a wiktionary page and an urban dictionary page describing 'gingernut' as Brit. Slang within the first 10 hits. It isn't even necessary to click through to these sites, since the Google descriptions for both these pages define the term as pejorative British slang terms - which they are, regardless of "Your experience".

Thirdly, Why you judiciously removed my edit without first raising your concerns either with me or via the talk page, remains a mystery. I can only assume your intention in doing this is to provoke and wind up other users; in which case, congratulations! You've achieved your goal. I see on your talk page that you've made similar unnecessary edits in the past, based solely upon your opinion. Wikipedia is not the correct place to write about your personal experience, or to edit the work of others based upon that experience. I would suggest that you may have missed the point of Wikipedia, in which case a refresher of its guidelines may be necessary before you deliberately vandalise or remove the work of any other editors. In terms of Wikipedia, there is no "I". Your experience, your opinions and your feelings account for nothing here. Please keep them to yourself. Thanks Codeye (talk) 00:41, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

You need to read your notifications and histories with greater care. I didn't revert you.--Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:38, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Richard Stallman

You just wiped out an entire subsection that was full of citations from two news sources that are green on Wikipedia's sourcing list.

You're not on the talk, you haven't said anything, nothing. Just wiped out the whole subsection for bad sourcing.

What gives?

My bad, not you, someone else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.24.39.178 (talk) 01:15, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Vince Carter

Hey, were you able to read what you reverted it back to? "He is the first NBA player to play in four decades." He has yet to play four decades, someone made the change and had it switched back to the previous statement, I'll just remove it entirely if that's want you want. He was also tagged as a former basketball player which i changed. Hope you can read the changes first even without explanation, you can always compare the previous version to the new one. *wink* Tbb 911 (talk) 17:28, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry. I've removed it entirely now. It doesn't belong there until it actually happens. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:32, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Fleetwood Mac band picture

Isn't John McVie the tallest? I thought he was the tallest. He's known for being tall isn't he? -- Doctorx0079 (talk) 19:20, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Stereotypes

Hi EO, I'm not sure why you reverted my edit. I modified a statement that was a colossal generalisation which was not supported by the source. In fact, the source made reference to positive stereotypes such as "sober as a judge". I contend that "some stereotypes encourage prejudice" is a more accurate summary of the relevant section of the source. However, if you're unhappy with this, I would suggest we remove the contested sentence from the lead completely. Would this be okay with you? Thanks, 5.81.164.70 (talk) 23:08, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

The source says "Stereotypes lead to social categorization, which is one of the reasons for prejudice attitudes". This isn't qualified with "some", and it doesn't distinguish between positive and negative stereotypes (this is done on a later paragraph). Positive stereotypes can be one of the reasons for prejudice. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 12:06, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Your preferred version is as open to interpretation as mine, so I've put the precise words of the source into the article. 5.81.164.70 (talk) 14:09, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Psst!

Psst! I think you mean "anecdote" Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:04, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

D'oh! I blame the auto-spell! --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 15:39, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Hello Escape Orbit: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Everedux ^(talk) 20:28, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

the general culture of Escape Orbit

Do you think romance is an etnic group ?? You must think or read before deleting articles--81.67.166.149 (talk) 12:12, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

What I think isn't relevant. What can be cited to a source is. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 15:37, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Benny Hill

Can someone put a temp protect on Benny Hill? The IP is switching too. PAustin4thApril1980 (talk) 17:21, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Greetings

File:Happy New Year 2020 Images HD Download (5).jpg	~ Happy New Year ~
	~ Hoping you have a safe and joyful holiday season ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 13:26, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Sorry

I am really sorry to remove the information about Nevfidan Kadin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editorrob18 (talk • contribs) 17:17, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

That's ok, @Editorrob18:. If you have concerns about the accuracy of what's there, it's better to explain what they are exactly on the article page first. Otherwise blanking can look like vandalism. Better still, show references that correct the problem. Thanks. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:20, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

The 2019 lincoln memorial incident

I’m doing my best to remove political bid from that page, as it is so riddled with conservative talking points and boded language, it’s almost illegible or belongs on conservapedia.

I urge you to read the page in its entirety, and help me remove political bias, instead of rolling back the hard work i am doing to make the page reflect the truth of the situation.

The catholic school wasn’t “forced” to close its doors, it chose to.

The investigation concludes the black israelites started the conflict and the students extended it. The native americans never moved from their protest location, as the other 2 groups did.

the investigation found that “no racist language” was used, although the investigation found “likely racist gestures” including the “tomahawk chop” and “drumming pantomime” mocking the native americans

the page is written with clear political bias, and it should not be preserved in a false manner to betray the truth and protect the offenders.

I urge you, as an honest human, to manually go in and edit the things that make the story biased, including the things i mentioned and more. the page affords many false assumptions to the students, while condemning the native americans. Please, as a human, preserve the truth of the page, instead of the conservative bias.

thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.163.101.180 (talk) 17:53, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

I can only repeat what I said on your page. You cannot change things because it's the truth, if that's not what the cites say. If you want to demonstrate that the article is inaccurate then please show reliable sources that prove this. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 20:33, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

2019 Lincoln Memorial Incident Continued

I’m not aware of how to cite properly, but here’s the link:

www.washingtonpost.com/national/diocese-reverses-course-clears-covington-catholic-high-school-students-of-wrongdoing-after-investigation-of-viral-incident-on-mall/2019/02/13/c11195f8-2fa7-11e9-8ad3-9a5b113ecd3c_story.html%3foutputType=amp

it’s reliable, it’s the washington post, and as i said before in my previous comment, the covington students investigated were found not to have made “racist statements” but it was found that several of them made “racist gestures including the tomahawk chop and drumming pantomime”

the wikipedia article deliberately leaves out these findings from the investigation, and that is wrong to color the students as innocent or unaware—the article says they were “confused, not malicious”, but that doesn’t remove blame in the eyes of the public. The students stood in his face and made a racist gesture to the rhythm of his drumming—and to intentionally leave that out is wrong—but to remove it after I checked sources and added it, without verifying my source to you is dishonest.

Please add that back in with the citation, as it’s removal is unwarranted and intellectually dishonest. It is not right to have political bias deciding which facts are presented in a wikipedia article.

Sorry for adding a second message, I don’t know how to continue within the same one, but my point remains the same:

Add back in that the students did several racist gestures including the “tomahawk chop and drumming pantomime”, and use the source i cited: www.washingtonpost.com/national/diocese-reverses-course-clears-covington-catholic-high-school-students-of-wrongdoing-after-investigation-of-viral-incident-on-mall/2019/02/13/c11195f8-2fa7-11e9-8ad3-9a5b113ecd3c_story.html%3foutputType=amp

and i urge you to be through before assuming truth isn’t verifiable. truth is truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.163.101.180 (talk) 20:12, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Corn

What confused me was having read (outside wikipedia) that the British government of the time imported maize into Ireland, to replace the high-priced wheat being exported (to England) during the Great Famine there. Ah, I thought, Peel must have read the letter of the law and found a way round it. But Great Famine (Ireland)#Tory Government says that Peel actually smuggled it in! Not that it helped much - too little, too late, too hard, too indigestible. --Red King (talk) 19:03, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

British Comedy Guide

Hi there. Regarding adding these links, I think to point 11 I do believe the site is a recognized authority because the BCG is one of the biggest sites around. I'm not sure if it complies witht the first rule however. If I am definitely breaking the rules I'll stop but I'm not 100% sure I am. ISD (talk) 06:48, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

conflict of interest

Hello you said I may have a conflict of interest but I don't know how to log this... — Preceding unsigned comment added by RevLesley (talk • contribs) 10:52, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Dynamo revision

Look up 'dangling participle' and 'gerund'

"They followed Dynamo" is correct, but when the present participle "doing" is added it is left adrift or "dangling," if it is not considered a noun (gerund) which belongs to Dynamo.

Clearer examples:

"I saw him cleaning his car" is incorrect "I saw his cleaning his car" is correct

My correction may sound odd to you, but that does not make it wrong.

I leave your reversion, comforted by the probability that I have less time to do on this planet than you.

Bossrat (talk) 12:55, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

More significantly, my reversion returns the article to the English understood by most. Unlike your peculiar grammar used by no-one. Look up "prescriptive grammar". --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 11:13, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Catholic Memorial High School

The mascot IS controversial. Whatever side you take on the controversy does not matter. This is like saying the Redskins is a controversial mascot. It is because there is controversy around it. Why is CMH so afraid to even have this mentioned on their Wikipedia page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uofcphd (talk • contribs) 20:43, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

@Uofcphd: If it is controversial then you should be able to find articles online where this controversy is discussed. Use them to cite your addition and there will be no problem. It is not enough for you, or me, or anyone else on Wikipedia to agree that it's controversial. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 20:48, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Ok will do. That evidence has been deleted in the past. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uofcphd (talk • contribs) 21:00, 4 March 2020 (UTC) Done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uofcphd (talk • contribs) 21:06, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm going to put a sharper concern on that...the current "omit it" is an article-talkpage consensus, not just a one-time objection. So please (re)start/continue a talkpage discussion demonstrate that consensus has changed. Best to include new evidence that was not raiased previously if you'd like to see a different outcome. DMacks (talk) 03:34, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Streetwear

Hi, can you take a look at this and that please? Thanks, --Killarnee (T•1•2) 02:36, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Neely Crane

I dont think this is less interesting than the museum thing above. It was a viral moment and all pover the internet her name and his were associated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EricaSims (talk • contribs) 17:42, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

It still has nothing to do with his personal life and very little to do with him. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 19:42, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Guy Aldonce de Durfort de Lorges

Dear Escape Orbit. Thank you for your edit. You were so right. Best regards, Johannes Schade (talk) 16:23, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Simon Watson Sperm Donor

Hello, you seem to have removed Simon Watson from the list of people with the most children on earth. In that very same list at least one other other sperm donor is included. In regards to it being hard to prove, that is unfortunately the nature of that very list, as very few are accurate, and I don’t see how one can really prove it very easily, especially when there are some who are included from times before birth certificates. Simon Watson has been donating full time for over 20 years now, has been on the TV and many papers over the years because of this too (including BBC), so I really do not see how it can be proved any further.

I have noticed that you have reversed almost every edit that I have made, but from all of them, I strongly believe that this one was uncalled for. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.105.246.242 (talk) 13:59, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

I removed your edits because they added;

• the name of an unnotable person, without a Wikipedia article, twice, with information not in the source.
• incorrect wiki markup to conceal that the unnotable persons did not have a Wikipedia article.
• unnecessary sensationalism about headlines
• uncorroborated claims by a single person that can in no way ever be proven

The last of these may have media coverage and may be notable, but I do not believe these claims alone merit inclusion on the List of people with the most children. But happy to see any better sources that suggest differently.

However, the fact you have repeated some of these edits a number of times from various IP addresses, sometimes with misleading edit summaries, suggests that you are not editing in good faith, and have a conflict of interest in their inclusion.

Thanks. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 14:20, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

July 2020

Sorry you do not understand what references are such as a globally trusted source like CNN. Also the words someone used can be certainly be restated on their page in the case of Anthony Sabatini. So I highly suggest you actually look at sources before stating they aren’t worth.

I'm sorry that you do not understand that sources are there to verify what is said, not as a starting point for you to add your thoughts and opinions on what they contain. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 15:19, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Being Human

Couple of comments: Not sure exactly what brought me to your user page, but I found it. Your user page is very useful. Thanks for setting it up. Ill be back. Your "I am human" text reminded me of this "4/" of mine, from another platform. Apologies for the self-reference. Rklahn (talk) 06:18, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Page :Mar Thoma Syrian Church

Hello could you help rectify the citations in the info box of the Mar Thoma Syrian Church. I have tried to add citations for Classification and Orientation, however some error is being mentioned. MalankaraSuriyaniNazrani (talk) 15:18, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Joseph Lister

Hi @Escape Orbit: How goes it? I noticed you changed Joseph Listers nationality from English to British. British isn't a nationality. He was born in England. Is there a particular reason why you think he was British? Certainly he was living when the British Empire was on the go, could be something to do with it. I'm currently in the process of upgrading this article. scope_creep^Talk 13:32, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

@Scope creep: Hi. A few replies to you comment;

• I didn't change his nationality, you did. I only restored it because you have yet to provide a reason why it should change. Please stop edit warring.
• It is you that needs to provide a reason for changing what has been there for some while. So what is your reason?
• "British isn't a nationality" - Are you serious?
• "Is there a particular reason" - He was British because he was born a British citizen and lived in more than one part of Britain.

--Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 13:31, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Well, he was born in England, in Upton house. The policy is clear on where you born dictates where what the article says on nationality, and that is clear as day. I always get folk trying to change the nationality of a person, almost on a daily basis, but I'm sympathetic to your argument, if you can give me some references that say he is British. He could be British-English, as he was living in the time of the British Empire, which may be one aspect of it, but unless you can be find me some cast-iron proof that he was considered British, or considered himself British, then it will stay as English. If I find cast-iron proof that he thought of himself as British, then I will change it back, for sure. It would be cool if you could find something. I plan to update the article over the coming months, as it is some state at the moment.scope_creep^Talk 13:42, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

@Scope creep:, you are confused on who has to do what. You need to provide "cast-iron proof", not me. You are the one who want to change things.

• "The policy is clear on where you born dictates where what the article says on nationality" - There is no such policy. I invite you to read this guide.
• "I will change it back" - You are mistaken. Guidelines are clear, if you are reverted you do nothing until there is consensus to do it.
• "I plan to update the article over the coming months" - Excellent, I look forward to your improvements, but you don't get to insist on any changes and must discuss them when reverted

--Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 13:51, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

The article was created by dozens of editors over many years, with no discussion of how to build it. I'm the first to actually to take a look at as a project. No discussion was made of whether he was British or English, so there wasn't any ground state on the term, to say he was British. It just happened to be put in because the reference said it. I'll take a look at that document, but I'll also post a message on the reference desk to see what the consensus is. Thanks for posting it. scope_creep^Talk 14:08, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Scope creep: When I first saw your statement "British isn't a nationality" my first thought was much the same as Escape Orbit's: "Are you serious?" Perhaps you had better inform the government of the United Kingdom that British isn't a nationality, so that they can correct their mistake in numerous places, such as various pages on their own web site (e.g. https://www.gov.uk/types-of-british-nationality) and my passport, where under "nationality" I clearly and unambiguously see the word "British". British is not only a nationality in a legal sense, but it is also widely recognised and regarded as such. I cannot know why you insist on the unorthodox line that British is not a nationality, but the presence on your user page of mention of Scotland encourages me to suspect that you may be a Scottish nationalist, and wish to erase the concept of British nationality. If that is so, then you are of course perfectly at liberty to pursue that as a political goal, but denying that a word has a particular usage and meaning because you would prefer that it did not have that meaning is not constructive. I have had enough experience over the years of your editing to be absolutely sure that you know enough about Wikipedia policies to be aware that editing in order to promote a point of view is unacceptable. Whatever you might personally prefer to be the case, what the case actually is is that British is accepted as being a nationality, both in a legal sense and in popular usage, and Wikipedia should reflect that fact. JBW (talk) 20:12, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Nationality “preference”

You re-edited some changes I made. No changes made on my part were incorrect, and in fact increased the accuracy by being more inclusive of all band members or specified origin of an individual. There is a common narrative where English artists are referred to as just that, English, while artists who are Scottish/Welsh in origin are classed as the catch-all ‘British’ or even English in the case of David Knopfler. Adding accuracy or inclusion is not suiting ones own preferences, and I implore you to do better in the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.218.80 (talk) 17:28, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Again, I direct you to the guidance here. Unless you have a source, it's not up to you to decide what is more accurate or a "catch all". --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:31, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

M J fox edit

Love a good self revert.... eat those words

I put likely as don't know how to put source and I knew some dogooder would fix — Preceding unsigned comment added by RanielDigal (talk • contribs) 19:41, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Edits to Janine Wiedel 7 Aug 2020

Hi. Thanks for your comments on the Janine Wiedel Wiki page. I edited a note regarding a cite from a Guardian newspaper article. My problem is that the source is incorrect. The article stated that Wiedel was trained at the Guildford School of Photography. As part of my PhD I have been studying Wiedel and there was no such thing as the Guildford School of Photography. It was the Guildford School of Art, which had a Photography section. By the time she attended it had amalgamated with another school and was renamed The West Surrey College of Art and Design. I am reluctant to follow the incorrect source. What should I do? Artmac6 (talk) 15:59, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

@Artmac6: Unfortunately, even though you believe for certain that the Guardian is wrong, Wikipedia cannot tell the reader that "The Guardian says this, but Wikipedia editor Artmac6 thinks that's wrong, so we're going to go with what Artmac6 says instead". Please try to find another reliable source that confirms which school, or at least change the article so that it says "Guildford" without being too specific. I would imagine that what's important is who influenced/taught her, rather than which school it was. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 10:08, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

IMDb as a resource on Elmo's World

Hey User:Escape Orbit 👋. Thanks for helping improve the Elmo's World article. I reverted your removal of the IMDb sources. The reason I added those sources is because there were some previous edits that put incorrect episode names/release dates for some episodes, and I wanted to cite my decision to change them back. I am aware that IMDb is not generally accepted as a source; however, exceptions have been made for hard facts about released media (WP:CITEIMDB). I was unable to find any other sources on episode lists for Elmo's World, so I went with IMDb out of default in hopes to set a ground truth we could use for maintaining that list. I also realise that in general the citations do not look great on that table, and I'm looking into how to make it look better.

Let me know if you have any thoughts/feedback. Thanks! motevets (talk) 21:02, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

I had a thought of removing all of the IMDb as sources in the table headings and adding the following verbiage at the beginning of the section.

"Elmo's World was not segmented into seasons. While neither Sesame Workshop nor PBS have published an official episode list, the IMDb community have maintained episode list grouped by year, which is reproduced here."

What do you think? motevets (talk) 22:34, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Incomplete edit

You recently removed a section of text from the Alexander Graham Bell article but broke something, leaving in a pair of braces '{'.

The text you removed was rather large, so I can't see where the other half of the braces are.

Just thought you'd want to finish the edit.

Thanks, WesT (talk) 23:06, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, you are right. I didn't notice. I've fixed it. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 12:02, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

User:Mayfleure

Might I suggest tagging for WP:G11 and/or WP:U5 instead of blanking? --Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:14, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

I would have done, but I was waiting to see what their next move might be. The user page looked like it may have been a mock up, not a company at all. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 10:00, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Edit Warring on Hella

You are engaged in behavior that may be construed as edit warring. If you are happy to discuss on the talk page, please do. You'll see that Before you issued that premature warning, I had already started a discussion on the talk page. --evrik ^(talk) 18:39, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

You are in breach of WP:3RR and WP:BRD and you know it. I warned you because, as you well know, Wikipedia doesn't work like this. You don't reinsert something twice after being asked to explain it, and then initiate discussion. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 19:53, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Question about the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s.

Hi there. I have a question about possibly re-introducing a section about actors and entertainers from the 1980s, 1990s & 2000s. If I were to do that, would referencing IMDb be an acceptable reference for you? Or what about a list(s) of top entertainers from an entertainment website? Let me know on my talk page. Have a good day. Mr. Brain (talk) 14:35, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

I have a couple of websites in mind, such as IMDb and Ranker. But I wanted to run it by you first to see if those are acceptable reference points to you. I didn't want to go rogue. Mr. Brain (talk) 19:43, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Undoing Beggar & Co page

I am a member of the band and you have just undone my additions relating to our history. Please restore. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kennybfa (talk • contribs) 17:01, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Reply on Kennybfa's talk page. Conflict of interest and adding info about other bands and projects. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 09:37, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Brit Funk Association page

HERE IS THE INFORMATION FOR YOU TO KINDLY UPLOAD BRIT fUNK ASSOCIATION Brit Funk Association website https://www.britfunkassociation.com/

Official Independent Album Charts archive chart position of 2nd album 'Lifted' NUMBER 44 (NUMBER 11 BREAKERS OF NEW ALBUMS SEE BELOW)

https://www.officialcharts.com/charts/independent-albums-chart/20200828/131/

Official Independent Album Chart Breakers 'Lifted' Number 11 https://www.officialcharts.com/charts/independent-albums-breakers-chart/20200828/255/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kennybfa (talk • contribs) 15:45, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:42, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

December 2020

Hello, I'm Slykos. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Spitting Image have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Slykos (talk • contribs • rights) 18:04, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Please spend more time reviewing what you are reverting, instead of firing out template notices to people without consideration. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 18:07, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Sarah Hayes

I don't disagree at all! I'm only posting here because the page history is rather confusing, in case you think it was my edit that put "English" back in. It wasn't me, and I have already been in a disagreement with the editor who added an assortment of errors to this page. I'm sorry I didn't notice and restore this one too. --Monxton (talk) 18:11, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Moon landing nonsense

Why have you removed my edits without asking me first? You simply REMOVE facts which are relevant to everyone else and offer no reasons. Not something which is acceptable to others here attempting to bring the truth to all researchers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Do better (talk • contribs) 15:24, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Because you added a heap of your own observations and opinions, not facts, without any sources. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 19:00, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

a.k.a Lal topi wala

As mentioned in News paper with reference Angrysoldier (talk) 18:12, 20 December 2020 (UTC)