User talk:Scalhotrod/Archive 26
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 20 | ← | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | → | Archive 30 |
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:17, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Sandbox
Scal, I'm confused by this edit: [1]. Are editors supposed to edit other editors' sandboxes? Lightbreather (talk) 18:22, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
- It happens all the time. I've collaborated with other editors and they have used my Sandbox space for the combined efforts in the past. Other Editors have even changed my User Page, if I like the edit, I keep it. Plus Wikipedia is an open project, there are no "private" pages. Ultimately you have final say over what is or is not on your User and Talk pages, but anybody can edit pretty much anything. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 18:49, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Please reply to Lightbreather
I've just removed a 3O request made by him (for no discussion) in regard to this discussion request he made to you. I'd like to encourage you to either respond to him at Talk:National Rifle Association#Deletion 3X now of info from OpenSecrets via Sunlight Foundation and other sources and the following section there, or drop the stick. I'm not saying that I agree or disagree with either of you, but merely continuing to revert without discussion on an article that's under discretionary sanctions isn't going to do either of you any good. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 21:40, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
- Hi TransporterMan, my apologies that you have become involved in the ongoing Lightbreather "drama". She (yes, she's acknowledged this, not that it has any bearing on anything) has a history of demanding discussion for any content or sources that she disagrees with or that she deems crutial for inclusion in an article and worded in a particular manner. At first glance this might seem in keeping with WP community standards, but a lot of things boil down to her wanting content exactly how she wants it and will use (and sometimes abuse) one or several WP procedures to get her way. In other articles she's resorted to using ANI, Arbitration rulings, and other formal procedures that I (and others) have been forced into because of her efforts. Speaking of other articles, if a comment is made about a trend or similar viewpoint across a series of articles is made, she interprets this as a personal attack. Lightbreather is fond of saying "Keep the comments about the content", but won't accept any criticism about them. In fact, since she patrols my Talk page, it wouldn't surprise me if she makes that accusation again in this discussion and asks me to delete or retract what I've said.
- Granted she has learned to pick better sources, but she has an agenda and purpose behind her editing that she's alluded to here and here (that I know of) where she makes statements like, "...my observation is that I am the only "pro-control" editor here..." with regard to gun related articles. Which, by the way, are what she is predominantly focused on. She also accuses me of having Ownership issues with a variety of articles when its she that makes the vast majority of edits to particular articles and is pushing a particular POV under the guise of "providing balance" regardless of the content being WP:UNDUE to anyone else.
- Hence we come to this particular situation. The NRA article was seemingly fine until she decided that it needed "balance", "improvement", or "fixing". But with regard to the NRA article, currently about half of the Talk page are sections that Lightbreather has started, but interestingly few are currently responding to her. I'm speculating, but I think others have learned that its best to just ignore her until she does something fairly egregious and then revert it or deal with it directly. Lately she's using sources (and subsequently other sources that cite those same sources) that are questionable to make highly contentious claims about politicians. This is part of her domination of the article edits in general. Out of the last 500 edits, she has made 261 of them. In the just the last 30 days, 330 edits have been made by 15 distinct authors. In other words, one editor is responsible for nearly 80% of the edits and uses the Talk page to challenge any viewpoint that differs from her own. The numbers speak for themselves.
- I've learned that trying to engage her in civil debate is functionally useless. She gets a viewpoint in her mind and then seemingly it becomes an "all or nothing" issue regarding what content should or should not be in an article. Many others have tried to reason with her as well as give her what I consider excellent advice on how to interact with others as well as conduct herself on Wikipedia, but she seems to ignore most of it. I'm not a fan of ANI, so other than spending what I consider an outrageously useless amount of time building a case against her (and I say this based on the shear volume of edits that Lightbreather makes) given how she conducts herself what's the point of responding? --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 17:49, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
- You're invited to discuss two sentences backed by three sources. The discussion is here: [2] You've written 618 words above with your critique of me. Per the WP:PERSONAL policy: Comment on content, not on the contributor. Please come and discuss the content in question, or leave it alone. Thanks. Lightbreather (talk) 23:37, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
- TransporterMan, the above comment from LB was perhaps the most restrained one I've seen, but like I predicted... --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 14:59, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
- You are very point on about LB. It seems on wikipedia the use of editing as free advertising and promoting of a political view point is normal. LB Nom ge guerre has nothing to do with her intentions. 24.177.109.112 (talk) 21:39, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
- TransporterMan, the above comment from LB was perhaps the most restrained one I've seen, but like I predicted... --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 14:59, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Arbitration enforcement sanction
The following sanction now applies to you:
Topic ban from gun control for six months from the date and time of my signature below.
You have been sanctioned per this AE request.
This sanction is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gun control#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions for that decision. If the sanction includes a ban, please read the banning policy to ensure you understand what this means. If you do not comply with this sanction, you may be blocked for an extended period, by way of enforcement of this sanction—and you may also be made subject to further sanctions.
You may appeal this sanction using the process described here. I recommend that you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template if you wish to submit an appeal to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. You may also appeal directly to me (on my talk page), before or instead of appealing to the noticeboard. Even if you appeal this sanction, you remain bound by it until you are notified by an uninvolved administrator that the appeal has been successful. You are also free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:46, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
- @Callanecc, Understood and I have no intention of protesting it. My behavior in reaction to Lightbreather's efforts has not been stellar and we can only learn from our mistakes. I have enough other interests to keep me active in the mean time. Was an answer posted to my question regarding the breadth of the topic ban? --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 18:36, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Did you ever get clarification as to what degree the sanction covers plain firearms articles vs only actual "gun control" articles? Gaijin42 (talk) 18:47, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
- Not yet, any suggestions? --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 18:49, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
- Either callanecc as the applying admin or the clarifications/modifications board I would think. If you do go through either route, if you would be so kind as to ask if the answer applies to all of those sanctioned in the case or just you it would be appreciated. Gaijin42 (talk) 18:52, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
- Asked and waiting for an answer. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 18:57, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
- Hey Gaijin42, so it looks like its OK for us to edit specific firearm articles, but as I pointed out editing certain firearm articles would likely be problematic such as Assault Weapon or potentially AR-15 and AK-47 as those are considered "assault weapons". --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 20:02, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
- Asked and waiting for an answer. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 18:57, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
- Either callanecc as the applying admin or the clarifications/modifications board I would think. If you do go through either route, if you would be so kind as to ask if the answer applies to all of those sanctioned in the case or just you it would be appreciated. Gaijin42 (talk) 18:52, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:46, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
July 19
Greettings. The sources I cite, do support that Nina Mercedez is the same person as Mariza Villareal. Check under Alias/aka: (Careful NSFW) http://www.freeones.com/html/n_links/bio_Nina_Mercedez.php http://www.milffox.com/milf-pornstars/nina-mercedez/
Not to mention that Nina's official twitter, is also under the name of Mariza, if you want to double check. I mean, all it takes is a quick google search to see that Nina Mercedez competes as a fitness model under the name of Mariza Villarreal.
Also Nina Mercedez has changed her tumblr address to marizavillarrealfitness.tumblr.com, yet you change it back to her old address of NinaMercedez.tumblr.com which if you click on it, you'll realize is no longer up.
Also one last thing. The websites we both source, show that Nina Mercedez goes under the name of Nine Mercedez and Nina Mercedes. However those are mistakes, and she never has performed under those names, you'll find no profile of hers under that name, and instead Nine Mercedez and Nina Mercedes are simply wrong typos/spelling by Users on the internet uploading videos of her.
Look forward to hearing back from you. Kind RegardsNa3000 (talk) 15:51, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
- There are NO reliable sources that link Nina Mercedes to the name "Mariza Villareal". We only have proof of her original Adult name "Mercedez" as an alias, nothing else. Nothing you have used, Freeones or any of the fitness photo galleries are a reliable source. I have removed everything but that name to end the confusion. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 15:56, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi again.
You said there were no reliable sources that showed that Nina Mercedez and Mariza Villarreal were the same person. However if you click on Nina's official twitter, www.Twitter.com/FitnessbyMariza , which is on the page itself, under the external links section, you'll see it's the same person.
Also Nina's changed her official tumblr address from www.NinaMercedez.tumblr.com to www.MarizaVillarrealfitness.tumblr.com. Hence why if you click on www.NinaMercedez.tumblr.com in the external links section, you'll see it's no longer works.
Kind regardsNa3000 (talk) 16:25, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
- First off, that's a primary source and what you are doing amounts to original research which is not allowed. If someone writes an article about her and makes the same obersvation, THEN you can write about it, but until then its off limits. The other is now just a deadlink. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 16:34, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Elizabeth Hilden, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Softcore. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.