Harlock jds

Welcome!

Hello, Harlock jds, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! 

Removal of Writers Strike edit

harlock, just wanted to say that you removing my writers strike edit was uncalled for. What i wrote about it was indeed correct, this writers strike is causing many television viewers out there to be stuck watching terrible reality shows instead of good quality TV. I will be expecting you to put my edit back on shortly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.125.154.165 (talk) 18:41, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Dave Ramsey Edits

Hello Harlock! Funny thing, the guy that helps me run my Battlestar Galactica website also goes by the handle Harlock. :)

I wanted to approach you about the Ramsey edits. You're probably miffed that I deleted a couple of them. Hopefully I can defray any hard feelings with some lengthy explanation. ;)

If you haven't been lurking for a while, the Ramsey page has gone through a whole lot of turmoil in the last few months. A lot of it was over the criticism section, the way it was written was pretty much an all out attack on Ramsey. Through a lot of arbitration, I was able to get a number of editors to come in and we came up with a concensus on the status of the comments. The comments are still being added every now and then, because the user is using an anonymous proxy and at this point its difficult to do anything about the guy. One of the editors has assured me that he is documenting the situation however, so I've rested a little easier since then. But you would be familiar with those comments because I noticed by the edit history you removed them one by one, giving a good explanation as to why. Bravo for that, but if I'd have walked in I'd have just gone to the last legitimate revision and hit Edit, then save. That reverts the article, saves time. Multiple reverting and revert wars are technically a bad thing around here, except in the unique case of a Biography of Living Persons article, which the Dave Ramsey page is. You might want to check out that section, it has a lot of rules about what can and can't be put into these types of pages.

I know I sure spent hours upon hours pouring over that page, and a lot of other policy pages trying to keep this article clean and defend my edits. The anon user was constantly calling me a "Dave Ramsey Lover," which while I understand and do admire his program, I would say some of it is a bit off. I don't know if you're familiar with his radio show, but today he had a comment that said it best. He said whenever they hire someone, part of their orientation is familiarizing the individual with what happens when they tell someone they work for Dave Ramsey, and that person says "Oh, I agree with everything that guy says except..." Which in reference to this article, there is relevence to that.

In all our articles we want to keep them as encyclopediac as possible, meaning as clear cut, fact driven and understated. In the case of a Biography of Living Persons we have to be especially careful because of libel issues. In choosing valid criticism for the Dave Ramsey article (because I'm not against valid criticism, but it better be that-Valid, Verifiable, and not pushing an opinion based on multiple sources that do not speak directly to the subject matter) I would find something online and have to ask myself "is this really valid." As you all ready know, blogs and Amazon.com reviews are out. :) But then I'd find something from somebodies website, that had a really good point, but what it really boils down to is this policy: If the criticism represents the views of a tiny minority, it has no place in the article. Which eliminates a lot.

I myself am still learning at this. One of my criticisms, which at the time I felt were valid, I just found a policy condemning because it is by a self-published author.

Ultimately it comes down to what Ramsey has said about himself. That seems to me to be the only verifiable content of criticisms that we know exist, but are not documented by other valid research avenues.

And that really brings in another point. Dave Ramsey is just not nearly as popular as some of these critics would lead us to believe. By adding some of these comments and assuming they comply with Wiki policy, they are basically saying they are majority held, relevent views. Yet if they were that wide ranging, they ought to be validated by some legitimate source like a newspaper or news site or something!

But I guess my point is, after you deleted those criticisms you added a couple of things that were a bit suspect, and unfortunately under BLP guidelines poorly sourced negative material must be deleted ASAP. Let me go a little more in depth:

Dave Ramsey frequently cites that Americans carry an average of 8,000 dollar in credit card debt which is technically true but paints a misleading picture of the prevalence of excessive credit card debt in American society. Only 1 in 20 Americans have 8,000$ or more in credit card debt and a majority of Americans have no credit card debt at all.

You've got two good sources here, unfortunately what you've done is introduced an argument that is not supported by either of the citations. You're point is valid, but it is not really a criticism. I guess you might call it an error in thinking? There was a similar criticism added related to his love of Mutual Funds, and the guy added a bunch of links that supposedly talked about how mutual funds really weren't that good. Actually his links had nothing to do with that, though I knew where he was going with it. I found a more valid reference, and added the criticism about how he is often misquoted about the 12% stock market average returns. So perhaps there is a way you can spin this, but I invite you to carefully look over all of Wiki's policies, especially in the area of BLP. As they say, "we have to make it right."

Dave Ramsey has been criticized by some in the Christian community of using half-Bible-verses as catchphrases that do not truly reflect biblical teaching and of promoting being debt-free to the point of selfishness that is altogether contrary to Christian values.

I've seen this article before and considered using it, but like the Jacked article it only mentions him by name at the beginning, and then the author goes on about his own views. He doesn't directly accuse Ramsey of using "half-bible-verses" (though he does at times, and usually admits it when he does). Additionally, you might want to read this article on self published sources.

But other than that, I applaud your efforts. You took a good stab at a tough article, and even though these BLP pages can get a little daunting, I don't want to discourage you from continuing to contribute. Great job, and again, welcome to Wikipedia!

If you ever have any other questions, feel free to ask!--Arkcana 03:57, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• CSD is meant to remove the entire article. It appears that you are looking to remove sections that appear to look like spam/advertising. If this is indeed the case, edit the page in question and just blank the section(s) in question. - Mailer Diablo 18:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Sorry, yes I'm removing all the tags. The above message was for the anonymous editor who converted the templates into CSD. - Mailer Diablo 18:12, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
  • IMO it doesn't qualify for CSD, so no worries. The article needs a lot of fixing, so yes please do use the talkpage for discussion on how to improve it. :) - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 18:16, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

An Automated Message from HagermanBot

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 18:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Wowowee

When someone makes a change with no explanation, not even the courtesy of an edit summary, and gives no source, is your suggestion that we should just assume that they have personal knowledge so must be right, and let the edit stand? (And, to be frank, 99% of the article really should be deleted.) --Mel Etitis (Talk) 12:45, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

WP:CITE and WP:OR are the relevant documents here. Dealing with disription and vandalism will collapse if editors can only remove unsourced material that they know to be wrong; it would be a charter for anyone to add anything they liked to articles not being watched over by experts. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 13:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

The gimmicky templates for references almost all go against the notion that Wikipedia should be easily usable by everyone; the use of "small" causes problems for readers with visual impairments and for people using small screens. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 12:18, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Using misleading edit summaries is disruptive, and can lead to an editing block. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 17:10, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

your edit was unreferenced and uncomminted... not sure what was misleading Harlock jds 13:59, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

First, I explained (and have explained here and elsewhere) why I made the edit; it was therefore not unexplained. Secondly, the issue of a source is irrelevant, as no matter of content is involved. You in fact reverted my edit because you think the page looks prettier your way, thus your edit summary was dishonest. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 16:35, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

To Harlock jds (moved from WaMu talk page)

It seems like your are angry at Wamu. You should learn to manage your finance, or else every bank will "screw" you. Don't blame others for your lazyness/finance problem. I also bank with WaMu. And, they fully disclose all their fees, unlike my previous bank, Bank of America.

very strange... you do know i was removeing the vandalism not adding it myself right?Harlock jds 11:27, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

This has been moved from the WaMu talk page because it is a personal message from an unidentified user. (personal note to Harlock, you can pretty much disregard the above, I know you were reverting vandalism, but when you were reverting it, you did not get all of it out, making it look as if you were creating the vandalism... it's tricky) --wpktsfs 18:59, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Wowowee

Are there any sources for upcoming tours for Wowowee in Italy and Dubai and that they had a world tour in Sydney, because if not we should take these locations out. -chris^_^ 03:23, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

references

Shouldn't we report User:Mel Etitis to the other admins, for he already broke the 3 revert rule last May 12, 2007 (check the history page of wowowee)? -chris^_^ 10:12, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Naw i'm going to assume good faith and say he wasn't aware of the change to the MoS and thought he was doing his job. It's being talked about there and i'm sure he'll go along with whatever is decided.Harlock jds 10:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I should say, though, that without checking the history I'm pretty certain that I didn't violate 3RR.

If the MoS says that either is acceptable, then consensus has to be reached at each article about which to use. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 22:07, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

oops you are correct i thought you did on the 13'th but you didn't i'll also change the note i left you on your talk page.Harlock jds 22:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes actually, Mel Etitis has broken 3RR. He did it four times from 13:52 May 11 to 10:49 on May 12 on Wowowee page. RaNdOm26 04:51, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

The first of those edits wasn't a revert; it was the initial edit which was reverted by someone else. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 22:06, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Your edits to Braille

This is directly from the website.

“Serving Philadelphia's and the nation's blind and visually impaired population since 1874”

This organization provides service to all of the US. I also see they mainly provide service to Philadelphia. But, it is not their main goal. I think your edits should be reverted. --BlindEagle^{talk~contribs} 14:36, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Even if they do provide services to the entire US (and looking at the actual services they provide i can't see evidence that they do) i still think it's not appropriate to the score of wikipedia (which is international). However i wouldn't revert it again if added but i wouldn't be shocked if another editor did.harlock_jds 15:07, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I took the quote directly from the website. Did you miss it? Also, there are other links on the Braille page that link to other blind associations for the US and Australia. Should they be removed as well? In my experience, blind orgs are national whether in one country or another and I am hard pressed to remember any that are truly international only. If you find any, please add them. --BlindEagle^{talk~contribs} 15:31, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

i see the quote i was saying that none of their services (as far as i can see) extend beyond the philly metro area so while they may say they are national their work says something different. Like i said feel free to put it back in... i won't remove it. As for the other links that may be a good topic for talk on the braille discussion page.

Ultima IV edits

I see that you moved part of the items. I understand on the movie reference for removing it, but I'm unclear on your logic behind the other removal. There is no other more appropriate place to reference the trivia about the pirated version of the game. The information would be citable if we could generate citations to 30 year old BBS forums :( It seems like this abuse of the citation hammer risks feeding a black hole of lost information.BcRIPster 01:35, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Here is the Crack screen from the release ... http://www.kitchencloset.com/tmp/ultima_iv_crack_screen.jpg ... Here is his "tfile" where he covers what he actually did (to set the story straight) ... http://www.kitchencloset.com/tmp/hot_rods_tfile_1.txt ... I will locate the distro files as well and provide links as I can. I imagine all of these are on textfiles.org but I don't have the time to dig through his site. BcRIPster 04:22, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

peer review

I was wondering if you could take some time out of your schedule to head over to the Heroes (TV series) talkpage and give us an honest peer review. The page has gone through some major changes in the last few months, and it would be fantastic if a prominent editor/contributor like yourself, could head over and give us at the Heroes Wikiproject some sound opinion and ideas on improvements for the page. We have all worked very hard at improving the page, and we need great outside, reliable and trustworthy users to come over and help us improve. I you are interested in joining the peer review discussion with other prominent users/contributors, much like yourself, please follow the link. Thank you very much for your help and your continued effort to improve Wikipedia and its quality! Wikipedia:Peer review/Heroes (TV series)/archive2--Chrisisinchrist (talk) 06:11, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Request for Mediation?

Hello - I am alerting you that we are preparing a Request for Mediation regarding Gavin.collins. BOZ (talk) 04:25, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I am alerting you that we are now considering a Request for Arbitration regarding him as an alternative to mediation, and would like your opinion on the matter. BOZ (talk) 13:49, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

you suck go eat a boner —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.199.211.2 (talk) 18:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Gavin.collins RFC/U

Hello. A request for comment on user conduct has recently been filed regarding Gavin.collins. Since you had been involved in discussions prior to his Request for Mediation, I thought that you would want to know. You can see the RFC/U here. Thank you. BOZ (talk) 00:51, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Tony Hawk Games Wiki

Help is needed at the Tony Hawk Games Wiki, which can be found here. It is very lonely. There are only about 3 users on there. If you join, and you have questions, please see this user page. The Tony Hawk Game Wiki is based on the Tony Hawk series of video games. There is alot of stuff on the wiki, but we feel so much more can be done on there. --98.148.171.15 (talk) 23:58, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)