User talk:TheRedPenOfDoom/Archive 11
This is an archive of past discussions with User:TheRedPenOfDoom. 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 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | → | Archive 15 |
Dual Survival
I agree. Let's do that. Widr (talk) 18:46, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
That person did it again.
That IP user vandalized the Dual Survival article again. What's the next step? Lighthead þ 19:51, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the advice. I'll do that. ☺ Lighthead þ 19:57, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
BLP opening sentences
Hi. I don't know why an editor who's racked up over 39,000 edits on Wikipedia since 2007 is not aware of this, but it is standard practice across biographical articles on Wikipedia to mention in the opening sentence what the subject is known for, and by using the words "known" or even "best known." For actors, directors and other entertainment professionals, it is commonplace to simply list the most prominent works that they have been a part of, which is assumed by things like box office gross, awards won, ratings, etc. In addition, narrative or creative works such as films, TV shows, books, etc., function as their own primary sources for their content (cast and credits; plot), per WP:FILMPLOT/WP:TVPLOT. We do not need an inline citation for this, any more than we need one for the date on which Christmas falls, since a subject's notability is implicitly understood or assumed by virtue of the prominence of the works they've been a part of. The only aspect of this practice where they may sometimes come conflict is over which works should be listed, or in which order or prominence. Do you intend to go across the 600,000 or so biographical articles on Wikipedia to remove the words "known" from all of their Lead sentences? Nightscream (talk) 04:00, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
- If an actor appeared in a movie, and the movie function as a primary source for that fact, then that's the same thing as saying he's known to have appeared in that movie. There's no difference between the two. That an actor's appearance in a film is what he/she is known of is obvious. (See Wikipedia:You don't need to cite that the sky is blue).
- Btw, I neglected to properly link format the phrase "date on which Christmas falls" in my message above. I've now linked it as originally intended. I don't know if the discussion linked therein will change you mind, but Jimbo's comments therein about what needs to be cited and what doesn't bears upon my position here, similar to the "sky is blue" link above.
- If you still disagree, we can start a consensus discussion on this matter with other editors well-versed in WP:V and WP:NOR. If they agree with your position, then I'll alter my writing convention accordingly. Let me know how you wish to proceed. Happy Holidays. :-) Nightscream (talk) 17:18, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
- There is no difference between those statements. The notion that McKellen is known for his performance in that production would indeed by verifiable by his appearance in it, so long as that production is among the most prominent in his career by way of box office grosses, reviews, awards won, caliber of his costars, etc. Similarly, what Hutchison is best known for is easily assumed by virtue of which his roles. The aforementioned roles he was in are easily his most prominent, so he is obviously best known for those, since those are the roles which would have garnered the highest number of patrons/viewers.
- If you don't mind my asking, did you read the "blue sky" and "Christmas" links I linked to above?
- Since we seem to be at the Agree to Disagree threshold, let me know if you want me to start a consensus discussion. Nightscream (talk) 18:06, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
- I do not disagree that there is a semantic difference the two phrasings. I merely hold that for Wikipedia's purposes, it is technical one that does violate WP:V or WP:NOR.
- I did not say that McKellen is known for Lady Grey. If you read my post above carefully, you'll see that the statement I made was in the hypothetical: McKellen would be known for that performance, if that production were among the most prominent in his career. I would appreciate if it you made some attempt to understand my point of view before disagreeing with it, rather than engaging in Straw Man distortions of them, and for that matter, if you made an attempt to tone down the hostile tone of your messages, since talking things out during a dispute is both required, and makes it easier to reach a resolution.
- Again, out of curiosity, did you read the linked pages I included above? Nightscream (talk) 20:59, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
leonard oprea: yes, with all my due respect, you committed ATTACK ON THE/my/ PAGE - just because all my links are reliable sources; please, make the effort to check them out. Thank you.
From: theophil magus <>
To: Sue Gardner <donate@wikimedia.org>; ""info-en@wikimedia.org"" <info-en@wikimedia.org>
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2012 7:06 PM
Subject: Re: leonard oprea: Please, I need help: ATTACK ON THE PAGE! Again were erased all the reliable sources provided by Leonard Oprea. Why?!!
(cur | prev) 01:27, 17 December 2012 TheRedPenOfDoom(talk | contribs) . . (7,448 bytes) (-2,994) . .(the WP:REDFLAG extraordinary claim that Thomas is wrong brings all claims from this editor under question) (undo)(
cur | prev) 01:10, 17 December 2012 Theophilmagus(talk | contribs) m . . (10,442 bytes) (+59) . .(leonard oprea: "life and career" , added "under the communist dictatorship of Nicolae Ceausescu" /on first line) (undo)(cur | prev) 01:01, 17 December 2012 Theophilmagus(talk | contribs) m . . (10,383 bytes) (+653) . .(leonard oprea: new reliable sources concering "anti-communist dissident" and "offcially forbade writings"; please - do not cut off arbitrary; thank you) (undo)(cur | prev) 03:14, 16 December 2012 Theophilmagus(talk | contribs) m . . (9,730 bytes) (+12) . .(layout minor corrections) (undo)(cur | prev) 03:06, 16 December 2012 Theophilmagus(talk | contribs) m . . (9,718 bytes) (+12) . . (undo)(cur | prev) 03:04, 16 December 2012 Theophilmagus(talk | contribs) m . . (9,706 bytes) (+69) . .(Leonard Oprea: minor layout corrections) (undo)(cur | prev) 02:30, 16 December 2012 Theophilmagus(talk | contribs) m . . (9,637 bytes) (+2,189) . .(Leonard Oprea: having copies of Congressional Record, July 26, 1990 / "Thomas" is wrong!/ and all the other proven links and corrections - I did the mandatory corrections. Please, with all due respect, stop to cut arbitrary the proven links.Thank you.) (undo) ... --Theophilmagus (talk) 00:35, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- Hey Red Pen, if I can figure what all this means I'll be a monkey's uncle. Was that an email to Sue Gardner? I'm sorry for all she has to deal with--but then, she never took me up on a dinner invite at Wikipedia, so that's her loss. Anyway, that article is awful. I could go through, but my axe is, as is well-known, on the blunt side. Consider dropping a line to User:Biruitorul, who is of the Romanian persuasion and also a fantastic and helpful editor. Happy editing, Drmies (talk) 23:46, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
- the sue gardiner thing is, as I recall, an attempt at a reminder that the user made a contribution to Wikipedia and let Sue know and she sent a "thank you" back. the rest are a series of my edit summaries on the page, I think. with the person being specifically upset with my last edit - when I reverted a bunch of their edits when they made the claim that they had a personal copy of the congressional record that says something that the Thomas published version does not support. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:12, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Unsourced
Per your invitation,
TRPoD, From your comment at Talk:Sync Mot, it seems that you wouldn't object if editors went from article to article deleting everything that wasn't sourced. Am I understanding you correctly? Thanks. --Bob K31416 (talk) 22:00, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- The behavior as you describe is WP:POINTy disruption and should be addressed in the appropriate forum for editor behavior such as RfC/User. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:01, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- The first sentence of wp:point,
- "When one becomes frustrated with the way a policy or guideline is being applied, it may be tempting to try to discredit the rule or interpretation thereof by, in one's view, applying it consistently."
- The deleting editor wouldn't be frustrated by policy but rather embrace it and think that Wikipedia would be better if there was no unsourced material in it. So it wouldn't be a case of WP:POINT. --Bob K31416 (talk) 22:09, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- I guess you would be out of luck then until someone else brought the disruptive editor under control. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:19, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- Why would you consider the editor disruptive? The deleting editor would be acting in good faith, trying to improve Wikipedia by deleting unsourced material. --Bob K31416 (talk) 23:00, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- if an editors behavior creates a disruption, even if they are acting in good faith, it is disruptive behavior. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:02, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- Getting back to the question, "Why would you consider the editors behavior disruptive?" --Bob K31416 (talk) 23:05, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- Like everything else context matters. If they went around removing every piece of unsourced material and no one was bothered, then it would not be disruptive. However, as the reaction at the particular article page pointed out, such action is not likely to occur for long without a large number of editors being bothered - at which point it is disruptive to continue to remove every piece of unsourced information. But again, it is at the edtiors actions level that such disruption occurs and needs to be addressed, not at the article / content level. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:11, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- Getting back to the question, "Why would you consider the editors behavior disruptive?" --Bob K31416 (talk) 23:05, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- if an editors behavior creates a disruption, even if they are acting in good faith, it is disruptive behavior. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:02, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- Why would you consider the editor disruptive? The deleting editor would be acting in good faith, trying to improve Wikipedia by deleting unsourced material. --Bob K31416 (talk) 23:00, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- I guess you would be out of luck then until someone else brought the disruptive editor under control. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:19, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- The first sentence of wp:point,
Seems like your position is that, the editor is correct to try to delete all the unsourced material in Wikipedia, but he shouldn't do any deletions where he is causing a disruption to do so. --Bob K31416 (talk) 23:36, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks RedPenOfDoom , We Love you all
My dear RedPenOfDoom thanks for the foto of Dr Proff Mujeeb Zafar Anwar Hameedi addition.But please remove the deletion tag my dear.Prof Dr Mujeeb Zafar Anwar Hameedi is a loyal and hardworking Pakistani senior most teacher and lecturer.Please further improve his article but do not delete Sir ! God Bless you RedPenOfDoom My love Bro ! JohnSmith --115.42.78.72 (talk) 02:57, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
The Walken Dead
I don't understand why I received a message that you deleted my contribution to the article "Zombie (fictional)" as needing an adequate source. I included the YouTube URL as reference since it is the only place I know where this video, "The Walken Dead," is found. At that link under the "More" dropdown, the video attributions provide the creators of the video plus additional relevant URL links for the creators. Why is this inadequate since it is the primary URL for the video information on the Internet, and a direct link to the video itself? How would you source this? Thanks for your help on this. --Sdouglas7 (talk) 17:22, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
You responded:
If the only source for the information you wish to include is the youtube video itself, then it is probably not a significant example which provides any encyclopedic information or context. In general, news papers and books are acceptable sources, you can find them at books.google.com and news.google.com -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:59, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your response. It seems the rationale for my contribution is what is being questioned more than the matter of sourcing since primary sources are allowed. I included the brief note since it combined two pop culture phenomenons - the TV series "The Walking Dead" and actor Christopher Walken - in an artistic, creative, and comedic fashion which adds to the body of pop culture popularity and information about zombies/zombie apocalypse. I have seen other such notes and links in Wikipedia for art, literature, music, and film, and, thus, considered this a worthwhile brief note adding to the cultural use of and references for "Zombies (fictional)". The video has received attention on the Internet (as a Google search shows), which has become a reference source in its own right since people are using is as a point of information and publication, but nothing like "news papers and books." Not every YouTube zombie video is worth such attention - and most should be happily ignored - but I still think this is a valid contribution to the article. I would be happy for your thoughts as I am a new contributor. Thank you. --Sdouglas7 (talk) 17:43, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
current tag at 2012 phenoneom
FYI: That's why we have WP:TERMINAL. :) SYSS Mouse (talk) 21:54, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks...
... for beating that vandal on my talk page. You were faster than me. Boo hoo. Widr (talk) 23:50, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Phoenix Jones merger
I saw that you placed a proposed merge tag on Phoenix Jones but did not start any discussion about why it should be merged into Rain City Superhero Movement. You should either start the discussion or remove the proposed merger tag. GB fan 03:26, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for your welcoming messages and helpful advice. TR Tina Redhead (talk) 05:44, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Removal of National Convention Information for TGOA
You recently removed a table of information about national conventions on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gardeners_of_America/Men%27s_Garden_Clubs_of_America. One reason that table was placed on the page is because past editors have complained that the page lacks sufficient independent citations and primary sources. The table was added because the list of conventions organized by clubs affiliated with the national organization adds such independent citations and sources. Indeed, now that the table is gone, a Wikipedia bot has flagged the page as lacking such citations and sources! So would you please explain your thinking here? Thanks! Lou (talk) 15:56, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Breno
Excuse me, what are you doing there? Please leave it lik I made it, it is not a personal analysis. It is how the world goes around. If s.o. is in prison, he only can start his contract if he is back in liberty. Thats it. If you dont understand this, sorry.Cruks (talk) 23:34, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
- Stop vandalizing the infobox. Or you get reported.Cruks (talk) 11:45, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
reliable sources
Hey redpen. Hope you're having a great holiday. Finally found a minute to clean-up some of the unreliable material at Conan chronologies. (The table took a while.) Would appreciate your help keeping an eye on it, since that page has been a magnet for fan theories and self-published websites. I'll continue to monitor the situation. Shooterwalker (talk) 18:48, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Breno
Stop undo my edits. Enough is enough. Cruks (talk) 19:32, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Removing information from List of Hispanic Republicans
You need to stop vandalising this article as the version you are trying to add is both messy and misses out alot of Latino people. The version that I am trying to keep not only shows the rise of Hispanic Republicans through the years, but also shows what positions they have held, when they were elected/appointed, images of prominent Hispanics, if they are not a politician then I have placed them under a specific category e.g Law or Science. The article now features a section that one could describe as a graph showing hispanic's in federal government. Why then are you trying to remove all that and put in its place a article that only shows names?? Ilford North Scott MP (talk) 18:01, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Miami cannibal
The point of mentioning Stuyvesant High School in the first place is because it is prestigious. There would be little point in mentioning it at all if he just went to Joe Schmo High School. But our readers may not know what the school is, so it is perfectly reasonable for us to describe it as a prestigious highschool. The fact that he went there was mentioned in all the sources, which I suggest you read, as well as reading the article on the school itself.
I am restoring this material, and giving you an edit warring warning, because if you continue to remove it without consensus on the talk page I will take this right to the edit warring bulletin board. I do understand your concern in general, but believe it is misplaced here. Please seek consensus on the talk page if you think this is problematic. Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 19:54, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
LEAD on Tara Strong
Okay, I might have overlooked that. --69.113.52.93 (talk) 13:30, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Can you nominate?
- Hi Redpen, can you nominate this for second time deletion?.Please first take a look at its talk page.Thanks.Justice007 (talk) 14:09, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Tom Stienstra
You may wish to redact your mention of charges on the talk page. He was never charged. Feel free to remove the whole section including my statement.--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:54, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Moshe Friedman
Obviously notable, and very disliked. I can stop editing if you wish and post links on the talk page? Darkness Shines (talk) 00:25, 30 December 2012 (UTC) He is not a Rabbi and also was thrown out of Neturei Karta. Make changes on draft page and include why on talk page. He is one of a group of wackos and doesn't need own page.Tellyuer1 (talk) 00:33, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Notice of Dispute resolution discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we are requesting your participation to help find a resolution. The thread is "Moshe Friedman".
Please take a moment to review the simple guide and join the discussion. Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 01:04, 30 December 2012 (UTC) Dear Please do not remove or delete the best article Mujeeb Zafar Anwar HameediDarling!Mujeeb Zafar Anwar Hameedi Sahib could suffer from,according to my poor opinion, a scholar in one region or country or continent but in every area of the world is, in every era, in every region of the world is mostly dry and a a scholar whose scholarship boom around the world, including Pakistan, but I and millions of readers on the English Wikipedia Template for a removing at most heartfelt sadness life, suffering, anxiety, confusion and sorrow and heartfelt pain is felt. So what should be the appropriate editor Mujeeb Zafar Anwar Hameedi thesis further back because it is a 'provider' article in this wiki article past the boss' Mujeeb Zafar Anwar Hameedi ads were placed, There are (as far as my information, the IP Karachi, Korangi is a region, or around that) but we wonder the English Wikipedia are all damaged by a qualified, registered Editor's against the law does not litigation. Dr. Prof. Mujeeb Zafar Anwar Hameedi is my request sir ! senior government employee, teacher are great. therefore best if the article could be improved but not called to delete expertise can., you will have to wait for feedback that will please a guy by destroying a 'scholar' a scholar and be saved from being slaughtered. many thanks to you all. Allah (God) We all others grant to help easing. Your brother and old friend! Thank You !!! --Hasbi syed (talk) 04:08, 22 December 2012 (UTC) Hasbi Syed
Reliability-launderingThere has to be a better phrase for it. ☺ Uncle G (talk) 18:27, 2 January 2013 (UTC) Your new sigBeen seeing you around for years... but I liked the old sig better. You new one makes me want to call you "tripod". That's the word I hear in my head when I see it. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:12, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Re:Mujeeb Zafar Anwar HameediDear User:TheRedPenOfDoom, this link from The Dawn is an example of such a source. I hope this helps. With regards, AnupamTalk 15:23, 3 January 2013 (UTC) We are both wasting our time here, as most of the collections section appears to be a straight copyvio from the museum website, eg this, & will need a full rewrite. This used not to be the case & I will try to find an old version that is ok. Johnbod (talk) 18:49, 3 January 2013 (UTC) FYIThis name is okay per WP:ISU. Have a good one. NTox · talk 01:26, 4 January 2013 (UTC) Cal Poly Pomona VandalThese informations need to be restored 1. List of NYU School of Medicine people(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NYU_School_of_Medicine_people) Alumnus Frederick Cook's name was removed even after three sources were provided. Source= [1] [2] [3] Already in ref format 2. Yann LeCun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yann_LeCun) Information about the fact that he is also a professor at Polytechnic Institute of New York University was removed even after two sources were provided. Source= [4] [5] Already in ref format 3. Paul Horn (computer scientist) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Horn_(computer_scientist)) Sourced information about the fact that he is also a professor at Polytechnic Institute of New York University was removed. Source= [6] Already in ref format 4.Robert G. Brown (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_G._Brown) Sourced information about the fact that he is an alumnus of Polytechnic Institute of New York University was removed. Source= [7] Already in ref format
massive amount of vandalism occurred at Wireless Internet Center for Advanced Technology (WICAT)... Save this version http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wireless_Internet_Center_for_Advanced_Technology_(WICAT)&oldid=531008679 Thanks--Njboc (talk) 00:15, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
refs
Emma Degerstedt "best known"Yes, there aren't any sources confirming she is best known for 13 but given the several news articles about this play, it would seem this was the most significant theatre production she did. As for television, she is obviously best known for Unfabulous as that was the only show in which she was featured in more than one episode. Additionally, she won two Young Artist Awards nominations for Unfabulous, suggesting this was indeed her best known television work. As for the "most recent work", that was only this past December and, if she is attending UCLA, it's unlikely she would have much time for many productions. But of course, I wouldn't know what she is spending her time with. SwisterTwister talk 03:57, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 7Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lynette Nusbacher, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Geographic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:31, 7 January 2013 (UTC) Message
Hello, I'd like to inquire as to which article edit of mine you removed? I just wanted to know so I can see for myself why it may have been removed. Also I'm sorry if this is the wrong place for me to ask. I wasn't quite sure but "messages" seemed like a safe bet. Thanks, Presidentsomeday0000 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Presidentsomeday0000 (talk • contribs) 01:59, 8 January 2013 (UTC) Alright thanks, you are the first person to make this known to me and I read through the guidelines you linked for me too and understand. Thanks, and no need to stress. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Presidentsomeday0000 (talk • contribs) 02:59, 8 January 2013 (UTC) Belated welcomeThanks for the welcome. NetNus (talk) 21:30, 7 January 2013 (UTC) AFD aritcleI am nominate this article for deletion for non-notable person under blp. He or she has only one source and even that can be considered non-reliable. If anyone can add anything else, go for it, but right now it is unacceptable on Wikipedia.--Hinata talk 22:54, 7 January 2013 (UTC) WP:AFD/Lynette Nusbacher (2nd nomination)Already fixed, thanks! -- KTC (talk) 16:41, 8 January 2013 (UTC) Beef Products IncYou are failing to cite reasons for your alternations - I offer multiple examples as to why you should offer a fair and balanced approach, and it's apparent you are choosing to ignore them. You don't want advocacy. I don't want my sources arbitrarily ignored. --66.172.199.26 (talk) 23:08, 8 January 2013 (UTC) Sad, so sad...Have you ever been laid? Ever even seen a woman naked? You poor bastard. 69.158.137.205 (talk) 13:33, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Agricultural Extension - removal of external linksHi, can you let me know why you removed the external links at Agricultural extension? I'm not contesting this, just wondering what the rules are so that I can avoid mistakes in the future. Thanks. APB-CMX (talk) 17:50, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
ANI and Zombies Oh NoesHello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
A barnstar for you!
OpreaLeonard Oprea: Discrimination, Racism, Ignorance & Censorship, or ..what against me? I protest firmly against the slandering of my article in your English Wikipedia. Your “creation” of my “Biography” and “Works” are OUT of the reliable sources, OUT of the truth concerning who I am as writer worldwide. I never wrote a novella “X-Ray of an Instant”, for example; this is the title of a short stories and novellas volume. My first book – well-know – is “Domenii Interzise” / Forbidden Areas/ 1984 published – but premeditatedly you made my article a FALSE image of my biography and works. Premeditatedly you “adjusted” my image as looking … stupid… Probably I have to sue you. I want to be civilized and I like to have a common sense dialog with you… Alas! sorry, you do not have any excuse for your American ignorance and more for your OBVIOULSY CENSORSHIP. I do not agree to have such an article in your racist American space, AT LEAST ACCORDING TO MY FORMER ANTI-COMMUNIST DISSIDENCE WIDELY RECOGNIZED. I did not do anything to deserve this discrimination. Therefore, I think I will have to make public your discrimination. This is NOT a threat – yet what can I do against this evil ignorance? Leonardoprea. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonardoprea (talk • contribs) 09:19, 15 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonardoprea (talk • contribs) oversight and feedbackThe oversight team has been trying to get the message out that the same standards for suppression apply to article feedback as to actual content. Most vandalism, even BLP violations, does not rise to the level of warranting the harsh action of suppression, although it can be hidden or revdeleted. The policy outlining the circumstances in which it is appropriate to suppress material is at WP:OS. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:29, 15 January 2013 (UTC) Repeated creations and deletions of user pageI noticed you keep having to request deletion of your user page, presumably because you want it redlinked in accordance with your username. If you want, I can protect it so other users can't vandalize it. Unfortunately full protection would prevent you from editing it too. Please let me know. In any case I could semi-protect it, which would have prevented some of those edits (and personally I believe semi-protection should be the default state for user pages). ~Amatulić (talk) 17:31, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Andrew BrennerSaw your edits regarding the Andrew Brenner article. Agree fully that that editor has a significant COI, however, I did delete some of the content you had restored. Do not disagree with your restoration due to his COI, but after reading the sources, the article is about his reelection, and the "criticism" entry in the source was a one line "in-passing" mention, with no sourcing, no attribution etc in the WP:RS, so I deleted it as I believe we would need more than that to avoid a BLP issue. Gaijin42 (talk) 17:33, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
RedPen, I'm a bit surprised you reverted Biruitorul. This is just fine, and it's the standard way of doing things. In fact, we owe him a thank you for turning this article into something legible. Biruitorul is one of the good guys. Drmies (talk) 17:51, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
I have to concur with Drmies, and add that I recollect someone removing a word from an article about a Nobel prize winner, citing PEACOCK;, the word came from the 1911 Enc Brit. Sometimes people really are brilliant or influential, and it isn't P to say so straight up. KillerChihuahua 19:24, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
KLTA controversythe section of Kanna Laddu Thinna Aasaiya, which says K. Bhagyaraj filed a case against the film because of its storyline rip-off, why don't u let it be named as controversies? Kailash29792 (talk) 07:06, 16 January 2013 (UTC) 3RR warning on Kevin ClashTo avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.166.31.191 (talk) 09:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC) can we discuss pleaseThis is in reference with Rahul easwar page and I have give reference. Can we discuss please. We had a elaborate deliberation on the same with James b Watson and administrators. Could we pls discuss sir, (Alex.mathews (talk) 14:41, 16 January 2013 (UTC)) Sir, have left the questions raised by you regarding improvement of the article. But. Would like to humbly submit that the detailed debate regarding the notability was in hair splitting detail discussed. Could we discuss this here please. (Alex.mathews (talk) 14:47, 16 January 2013 (UTC)) Sir, I have been raising some points on talk page of Rahul easwar. Pls see that. Is writing in detail before editing, so pls give attention. (Alex.mathews (talk) 04:05, 17 January 2013 (UTC)) if you are not interested in discussion so be it. I was giving precise points of national news channels. AND ONE MORE THING, You can use more civil language, That might not reduce your seniority or stature as a senior wikipedian. Was a learning experience from interacting with you, hopefully your are broad enough to take feedback (Alex.mathews (talk) 05:14, 17 January 2013 (UTC))
Thank you for reply. PLEASE NOTE : I didn't tell about Notability, I was mentioning that he participates in all debates, not only about Sabarimala & Hinduism. I know you are busy editing, BUT please do read. Understands your schedules & work, appreciate that, thanks & regards (Alex.mathews (talk) 05:20, 17 January 2013 (UTC))
thank u again for answering, Do you understand Malayalam?? I can give you interviews OF him & a program ON him in Malayalam (Asianet & KCN News) (Alex.mathews (talk) 05:27, 17 January 2013 (UTC)) BLP issue you reverted.Without going into detail, you might want to get that rev-del'd. Its unsourceable to any reputable source (When the best info that you can find comes from the David Icke forum - you know its bad) and is such a bad BLP violation it needs to be gone. Only in death does duty end (talk) 14:25, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
You need to answer this.Do answer here Talk:Srinivasan (actor). Karthik Selvanayagam (talk) 20:56, 17 January 2013 (UTC) Quit removing sourced material just because you find it personally objectiveWe've been over your edits at Neturei Karta, yet you're at it again:
Hello, TheRedPenOfDoom. You have new messages at Hearfourmewesique's talk page. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 14:52, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Manish Sharma (Panasonic) should not be mentioned as Non-notable Corporate BureaucratI made this page Manish Sharma (businessman) on Manish Sharma who is the current Managing Director, Panasonic India. There are certain issues with the page, the biggest one being that Manish Sharma is being termed as a Non-notable Corporate Bureaucrat. In my opinion this is not correct. I understand that we need to provide proper facts/references to support it and here they are: I would start with a statement from The Economic Times (Category-A Business newspaper in India) here, "Japan's largest consumer electronics company, Panasonic has for the first time ever appointed an Indian to head its flagship consumer durables business in the country. Manish Sharma (41), erstwhile head for sales and marketing of Panasonic India, has been promoted as its managing director from April." Here is the link of the same: http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-03-06/news/31127441_1_panasonic-india-daizo-ito-durables-market His name has appeared in other major newspapers and magazines in India. Here are the links: http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-03-06/news/31127441_1_panasonic-india-daizo-ito-durables-market http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/features/brandline/article3707404.ece http://www.4psbusinessandmarketing.com/07102010/storyd.asp?sid=4042&pageno=1 http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/industry-and-economy/marketing/article3516096.ece?homepage=true&ref=wl_home Apart from these, he has received various awards, one of the most recent one being, the National Conservation Energy Awards 2012 held in December on behalf of Panasonic. Therefore, Manish Sharma by no means necessary can be categorized as a Non-notable Corporate Bureaucrat.I request you to please help me correct this issue.Gadgetsgigs (talk) 13:02, 22 January 2013 (UTC) I have requested page protection for the article due to the frequent BLP issues by anon IPs. You may want to comment. Gaijin42 (talk) 13:49, 23 January 2013 (UTC) RevisionWhy did you revert my addition of a family tree to the Disappearance of Susan Powell article? - Nbpolitico (talk) 00:32, 27 January 2013 (UTC) Discussion on the AFT5 Request for CommentHey TheRedPenOfDoom - this is to notify you that there is a discussion starting on the Article Feedback RfC talkpage that has ramifications for the RfC itself. Your input is much appreciated :). Thanks! and apologies if I've missed anyone Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:50, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Rahul Easwaruser:Alex.mathews is involved in an edit war violating 3RR in the page Rahul Easwar. He is removing citation and notability templates without establishing the same. Inviting your attention to the page.58.68.91.114 (talk) 06:15, 30 January 2013 (UTC) Please have a look at the article Rahul Easwar. Few users are reverting removal of unsourced material repeatedly. They also removed the notability template. 180.215.60.111 (talk) 03:03, 30 January 2013 (UTC) AyuWhy did you remove my edit on Ayu? They never actually said it was astral projection. BigPimpinBrah (talk) 20:49, 30 January 2013 (UTC) Sorry I meant the Ayu section on List of Kanon characters BigPimpinBrah (talk) 20:54, 30 January 2013 (UTC) But the edit saying it was astral projection doesn't have a source on it, either. They never explain in the game or anime how she existed outside her coma, astral projection was a fan theory which is why I added that BigPimpinBrah (talk) 20:59, 30 January 2013 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for January 31Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Pearl (novel), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jack Wagner (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:21, 31 January 2013 (UTC) Actress catsI held off until the AFD was closed. I happen to agree with it, though I did not vote at the time; that being said, the category a.) exists and b.) is being populated. All I'm doing is helping it along. If there is consensus to undo it all, show me and I'll happily stop. That being said (and I know I'm hewing dangerously close to WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS territory here), we have Category:Women classical composers, Category:Women writers by nationality, Category:Women scientists, Category:Female film directors, etc., etc., etc.; why actors should be exempted from that is beyond me. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 05:39, 3 February 2013 (UTC) Bootstrap paradox in fictionBefore now, there hadn't been an addition in months. Thanks to you, there will be thousands. Do not assume I will be cleaning this mess for you. You dug this hole, you live in it. I am sick and tired of deletionists rushing in and blanking pages, then expecting everyone else to deal with the consequences. So yeah, I hope you have a lot of time on your hands, because I am taking that page off my watchlist. Serendipodous 09:50, 3 February 2013 (UTC) Re your recent "work" on colostomyDestruction is easy, replacing unsourced content or content based on 2o sources takes more time, but it is better for the encyclopedia. Lesion (talk) 12:05, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
claims of "controversial" must be attributedPer your policy link "(labels) are best avoided UNLESS WIDELY USED by reliable sources to describe the subject" (emphasis mine). As Niemti have pointed out, there are MULTIPLE reliable sources describing the video as controversial, and it is rather self-evident (see Wikipedia:You_don't_need_to_cite_that_the_sky_is_blue) to anyone who followed the video (have you?). As I have pointed out, the Wiki Kony video article even called the video 'controversial' multiple times without challenge. Why is it so hard for you to accept that factually, it is a controversial video? If you have a problem with how the edit is sourced, then correct the edit or add 'Citation needed' as others have suggested. Simply removing them even when they can easily be verified smacks of unilateral censorship/ownership/disruptive editing. Regarding the source, did you even read the article or look at the title? The title is "Invisible Children's 'Kony 2012' viral video stirs emotion and controversy". A direct quote from the article "In less than a week, the video has garnered over 26.6 million views, but it's also sparked controversy." How can you claim the article is about Invisible Children the organization and not the video? Nice straw-man argument. However you clearly knew that the source was about the Kony 2012 video, which IS a section on the Joseph Kony page. If you feel that the video is not relevant to Joseph Kony (I disagree) then the whole section should be removed. If you feel the video is relevant, then the controversies need to be mentioned as they are part of why the video gained notoriety, and balance the section out. As it was, only the positive effects of the video are mentioned and unchallenged, which I don't doubt is intentional. Zzsignup (talk) 07:25, 4 February 2013 (UTC) Uh, heyWhat exactly was wrong with the edit I made on the Orly Taitz page? You didn't give a reason. Does it need a source? I could only find HuffPost news and Taitz own webpage (which I don't think is a reliable source). Maedar (talk) 20:14, 6 February 2013 (UTC) Maedar Do not undo actress cat addingIf you do not like actress categories, you are free to nominate them for deletion at categories for deletion. As long as the categories exist, actresses should be added to them. Removing such categories is disruptive and should not be done.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:58, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Film ratingsI'm sure you are aware that Template:film ratings was deleted, which was basically {{video game ratings}} but for films. Adding a substituted version of this template to Lokpal (film) is basically going against the TfD outcome. I trust you won't add it again without starting a discussion at WT:FILM. thank you. 198.102.153.2 (talk) 23:15, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Rape cultureI am correct in that opinion pieces can be used when attributed right? I ask due to this revert of content you had restored. Darkness Shines (talk) 12:47, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
ThanksThanks for your kind words on my Username. Are you an Administrator? Do you check if things have sources etc. Much respect - Aucklandisgood (talk) 09:19, 11 February 2013 (UTC) -- Thanks for your response. Its good that people are doing that. Appreciate your help, thanks --Aucklandisgood (talk) 18:09, 11 February 2013 (UTC) Path to deletionHi RedPen, I opted for prodding rather than speedy on Alex Gilbert under the assumption that the article is not substantially similar to the entry of 2006, before he was working as a cameraman. Either way, this is deletion-bound. Cheers, 99.136.254.88 (talk) 21:29, 11 February 2013 (UTC) My editing of Mike Milken pageI do not believe Wiki guidelines prohibit me from editing a BLP, even if I am a representative of that individual. In fact, I believe I have followed Wiki guidelines by being completely transparent in noting my bias. I then have posted on the Milken talk page the evidence supporting my suggestions. That said, please address my concern - the fact that there is documented proof that Mike Milken has funded medical research since 1982. This documentation exists not only at www.mff.org, but has been reported by Fortune magazine (^ a b c Daniels, Cora (2004-11-29). "The Man Who Changed Medicine". Fortune. Retrieved 2009-07-28.) Also, please be so good as to review Wiki editing guidelines so that you understand that I do indeed have the right to edit this article. Quoting from Wiki policy: "The Arbitration Committee has ruled in favor of showing leniency to BLP subjects [or their representatives] who try to fix what they see as errors or unfair material. Although Wikipedia discourages people from writing about themselves, removal of unsourced or poorly sourced material is acceptable.. Indeed, as in this case, Wiki policy states that "Contentious material about living persons (or recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced – whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable – should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." LarryWeisenberg (talk) 15:18, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Deletion of Alex GilbertHey there. I do not think the page 'Alex Gilbert' should be deleted. It needs a chance. I mean Alex Gilbert even has an award win on his IMDB page. Sources for this is online for the film events that won his group this award. Please try and fix and save this Article. Needs a little more information that is all. Thanks --DemandProcessNZ (talk) 22:08, 11 February 2013 (UTC) -- I agree with that. We have enough sources here, but not worth to deleting at all. Thanks - --DemandProcessNZ (talk) 22:12, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
February 2013This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, as you did at Sam & Cat, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Stop removing the intimation. Geraldo has stated that it's ok and I agree. Please do not swear. Astros4477 (Talk) 22:10, 13 February 2013 (UTC) Your recent editing history at Sam & Cat shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You should know better. Take it to the article talk page and make your case there Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:15, 13 February 2013 (UTC) Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussionHello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. --Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:38, 13 February 2013 (UTC) Thank you for the speedy helpThank you for the message you left me, "your feedback. . .the template is {unsourced|section}. . .". Perfect! And so fast. Gratefully, Wordreader (talk) 02:34, 14 February 2013 (UTC) Why did you remove IMDB links?Why did you remove all of the IMDB links for all of the films on Sheetal Sheth's page? The fact that Wikipedia has a macro to enable IMDB links would imply that such links are perfectly acceptable. Please do not remove these links. JBChristy (talk) 08:54, 14 February 2013 (UTC) Nomination of Happy New Year (2013 film) for deletionThe article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Happy New Year (2013 film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 07:56, 15 February 2013 (UTC) Notability of Rahul EaswarNotability of Rahul Easwar is established. References from reliable sources present. The recent sources cited does not have any relation with the subject. --atnair (talk) 15:39, 15 February 2013 (UTC) Edmund WhitePlease explain why you deleted: As a young boy, "the sweetest thang" according to his grandmother, he had sex with his own grandfather[1]. 1) it deals with the topic 2) it is fully referenced 3) the "ungrammatical" word "thang " is a QUOTE from the author himself, in italics, to underscore it is a Southern pronunciation Please re-instate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.226.60.68 (talk) 14:23, 16 February 2013 (UTC) Nicolas PoussinCould you please explain why you deleted the external link *A website dedicated to Nicolas Poussin? By the way, the thing that should be deleted on this page about Nicolas Poussin is the category "French Baroque painters": Poussin was definitely not a Baroque painter! Thank you and at your disposal for further information if necessary. User:Guillaumeh75 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:40, 16 February 2013 (UTC) Thank you for your welcome and your explanation, but I honestly think that the website linked meets WP criteria, notably the 3 points of "What to link" and the 3rd point of "What can normally be linked" of the WP:EL. Available in French since 2006, the whole site (except the news section - to come) has just been translated in English and now offers an important amount of information about Poussin for English speaking people: his life (and his biographers), his works (notably at The Louvre Museum with many pictures of the paintings and engravings), his bibliography (almost 30 books), his circle... I don't understand your deletion, even if I agree with the principle that Wikipedia is not a farm of links. Do I really need to ask for consensus on the talk page? Thank you Guillaumeh75 (talk) 17:45, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Edmund WhiteI deleted the incidental elliptical clause that seem to be a challenge and made the sentence as plain as it can be. I believe it is important for readers to know that White, from an early stage, wrote about his first sex experience with his grand father, with his grand mother's approval hence the "sweetest 'thang' remark now deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.226.60.68 (talk) 06:04, 17 February 2013 (UTC) A kitten for you!nice patrol work
Doomed (novel)Why do you keep on removing "Doomed(novel)" from the Doomed page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stergiosss (talk • contribs) 19:07, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
did your recent edit[1] stem from The Oregonian being somewhere declared as now failing WP:RS?
unwanted deletion of reviewshai are you from india ?. if yes its a real pity that you dont know reviewers like nowrunning.com who have been reviewing movies for years and you are deleting all the reviews from these sites and you are depriving readers from the right for information . this is cruel that you are using wikipedia for writing and maintaining only what you like . please stop this procedure. Vinayachandranlovedr (talk) 06:03, 19 February 2013 (UTC) when most of the reviewers are considering it as readable review you are trying to put in your personal thoughts. this is truely depriving people for the right for information. Vinayachandranlovedr (talk) 13:44, 19 February 2013 (UTC) Barnstar!
IP addresses indulging in VandalismTwo IP addresses, Special:Contributions/92.105.23.94 and Special:Contributions/142.165.134.126, are persistently indulging in vandalism of South Indian film based pages. Please check out their edit history. Jayakrishnan.ks100 (talk) 06:32, 21 February 2013 (UTC) Edit of Rader PageAnything medical is commercial. Just look at the medical system in the United States. Should we call all those medical treatment commercial. Clinical is the correct word. Please look it up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grammaring (talk • contribs) 23:41, 21 February 2013 (UTC) Please state the source for commercial you are talking about. (talk • contribs) 23:46, 21 February 2013 (UTC) Please keep article neutral and based on sources. (talk • contribs) 23:50, 21 February 2013 (UTC) The correct grammar is clincal. Please look it up in a dictionary. (talk • contribs) 23:56, 21 February 2013 (UTC) The treatment is not in the US for it to be breaking the law. As you can see from the sources it is in the Dominican Republic. Stop putting libelous information about a living person. (talk • contribs) 23:56, 21 February 2013 (UTC) The recent change is correct. Thank you. I am going to fix the grammar and add additional information from the current sources of the article. Do you have any issues with that? (talk • contribs) 0:10, 22 February 2013 (UTC) I don't get it. You ask the community to correct the grammar on Rader's page and yet when I correct it, you change it back. When you say "he published", it means he self published. Stating that he self published is grammatically incorrect. Self should not be in the sentence. • contribs) 0:10, 22 February 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grammaring (talk • contribs) Wow, I have looked at your past edits. You are ruining what wikipedia stands for. Please stop with the editing wars. State your concerns in the talk pages. Grammaring (talk • contribs) 4:15, 22 February 2013 (UTC) TheRedPenOfDoom do not remove my comments in the talk section of Rader's page. I will report it to the admin if you do it again. Medstudent213 (talk • contribs) 12:09, 23 February 2013 (UTC) Rediff and Bollywood Hungama are not spam linksCheck my edits. Rediff and Bollywood Hungama links provided are not spam links Snigdhasinghsweet (talk) 13:30, 22 February 2013 (UTC) Your recent editing history at William C. Rader shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Ronhjones (Talk) 22:42, 22 February 2013 (UTC) TalkbackHello, TheRedPenOfDoom. You have new messages at Skamecrazy123's talk page.
Message added 03:56, 23 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Skamecrazy123 (talk) 03:56, 23 February 2013 (UTC) TalkbackHello, TheRedPenOfDoom. You have new messages at Skamecrazy123's talk page.
Message added 04:08, 23 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Skamecrazy123 (talk) 04:08, 23 February 2013 (UTC) Gomolo is a leading source for Indian moviesIt seems you're not fully aware of the site gomolo.com which is a leading authority site on Indian movies. Leading publications like Times of India, IBNLive etc refer gomolo for various information on Indian movies. It also has a valid Wikipedia page outling the details. Please don't delete the references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vuttaa (talk • contribs) 13:49, 24 February 2013 (UTC) A mess of an articleHave a look at this. A mess of an article. JK (talk) 16:13, 24 February 2013 (UTC) Potential conflict of interestYou seem to know a lot about Rader and his background and his publishing. Hello, Grammaring. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may need to consider our guidance on conflicts of interest. All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible. If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:
Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. -- User talk:Grammaring 22:48, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
TalkbackHello, TheRedPenOfDoom. You have new messages at Jackson Peebles's talk page.
Message added 04:58, 25 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Thanks for your message regarding the verification of accuracy in articles that I review. I have responded and would really like to hear back from you, as I would like to determine what the typical policy is regarding this, as I am a bit confused as to what the "de facto" expectation is versus the "de jure" rule at WP:REVIEWER. Thanks again! Jackson Peebles (talk) 04:58, 25 February 2013 (UTC) Hallo, I see you have removed materials from Stem cell educator. This passed detailed and very proper scrutiny at AfD. I note you are concerned to apply the policy on medical references, which is good and right. However, there is no reason why a 'Reception' section - whose job is, after all, to describe the reaction or reception by the world's media to the subject of an article - should be written to the standard required of medical claims. The standard for 'Reception' of something is what it is everywhere on Wikipedia, namely that it is true that the press said something of relevance, and that what they said is reasonably substantial, and that the claims are properly cited - which they are. We cannot insist that the journalists conduct medical research; they have neither the time nor the training, and that is not their job. Similarly, you have removed some truthful description of what the 'stem cell educator' does, viz the material flows through in a certain way. This is not controversial and should not have been removed. Therefore, I'd be grateful if we could find a way to restore the article. I do not believe that it is correctly tagged, for the reasons given. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:33, 25 February 2013 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for February 25Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alex Jones, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New World Order (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:36, 25 February 2013 (UTC) the wander of the gothsHi, I am a bit surprised that you have deleted the link. I thought it may be interresting for someone reading this topic.
there is so many unsourced content on article mohanlal. please check and remove it. thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nightocean (talk • contribs) 15:54, 27 February 2013 (UTC) A barnstar for you!
ANEWI've reviewed the report at WP:ANEW filed against you, and you clearly violated WP:3RR at Aligarh Muslim University. In exchange for not being blocked, you must promise to stay away from the article completely for 7 days. Please respond here whether you accept that condition before you contribute elsewhere at Wikipedia. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:02, 2 March 2013 (UTC) Asian American article
Sock puppetingCheck the editing patterns and timing of user:nighttoocean and user:Flowers_of_the_world. Both of these users seems to be controlled by the same person. Also they have an apparent similarly to blocked user:materialthunder. I think we should take this upto to sock puppet investigation. JK (talk) 07:49, 3 March 2013 (UTC) Response needed, Concentrate on the Talk!Well, as the discussion is being held between you and me at Talk:Aligarh Muslim University, So instead of making new discussion, focus on your previously created discussions! I have replied, but your response is still needed. You did not understand the University examples that I gave. All of them have Alumni section in the main article, and also have a separate article, have a look at them! Faizan (talk) 11:17, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Mr. kunchacko boban has acted in more than 50 films,in malayalam cinema as lead actor and is cosidered as one of the leading actors of malayalam cinema. this is long standing sourced material you can check it. thanks. (talk) User:Flowers of the world —Preceding undated comment added 10:28, 7 March 2013 (UTC) Thanks for the kind, welcoming words.I appreciate your notes and helpful suggestions for the new guy. I hope that I've approached my suggestions appropriately, and will read up on the articles you sent me. Thanks! Jeremy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reelpolitik (talk • contribs) 20:48, 7 March 2013 (UTC) Singam II editHi RedPenOfDoom, With respect to the edit I made on the Singam II page about the producer of the movie, I am trying to find an online source, that said the producers name is listed on the movie poster from the same page on the left bottom. I know the producer personally and is why I am making these changes for him. If you still need any other reference, please let me know. Thanks, Siva — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shiva sg (talk • contribs) 21:09, 7 March 2013 (UTC) Re: External linksI totally agree with the external link policy. In this case the articles about magicians (e.g. [4], [5]) contain information about their birthplace, where they lived, theaters where they performed, death place, burial place, dedicated museums etc.. A link to an online map of magic containing all those mentioned places should be considered appropriate. --Utcumque (talk) 21:55, 7 March 2013 (UTC) user Karthik SelvanayagamHello, Kindly note the page Vishal. user Karthik Selvanayagam is repeatedly changing wikitables. please make sure the page is clear and fine. thank you. Intellectual savior (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:43, 8 March 2013 (UTC) professonal reviewsUser : Filmyfreak . Pages : mirchi, julayi movies. That person has been writing for a reputed website and has written more than 50 reviews. cant you consider his reviews as professional — Preceding unsigned comment added by Filmyfreak (talk • contribs) 18:28, 8 March 2013 (UTC) Sock puppetryHello, I think User:Intellectual savior and User:Flowers of the world are maintained by same person. I don't know how to report this, can you please help me with this? Karthik Selvanayagam (talk) 17:05, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
Thank youFirstly, thank you for removing the insulting message posted at my talk page. I have a feeling that the user is connected to IP 87.232.1.48 who has sent similar messages in tone at my talk page concerning our discussions at Killing of Travis Alexander. And as I discussed him with user jamesbwatson yesterday that might have triggered him. That IP is probably using IPs 134.226.254.178 and 87.232.101.49 also and user page MaxxFordham, all I can say is that the pattern is very similar. [6], [7], [8],[9] [10]. Thank you.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:43, 9 March 2013 (UTC) PhotomarathonA new editor has found his way to my talkpage, at User talk:John of Reading#Editing Photomarathon, to ask for advice. I've done my best, but since you were involved in deleting most of the content from the Photomarathon article, you may wish to comment. -- John of Reading (talk) 05:17, 10 March 2013 (UTC) Please stop making test edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Eega. It is considered vandalism, which, under Wikipedia policy, can lead to a loss of editing privileges. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Raghusri 15:41, 11 March 2013 (UTC) You did the right thing today (edits) but yesterday you removed Teluguone, but it is also a reliable telugu cinema site. Raghusri (talk) 15:44, 12 March 2013 (UTC) I don't want to argue with you, rather than ask any other user or open up a discussion. Raghusri (talk) 15:56, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Civility and young contributorsPlease be careful when you make comments such as this one. Avoiding profanity when contacting an editor you do not know is a basic tenet of the civility policy. In that particular case, the editor in question is quite young (as you can probably discern from my previous comments on his talk page), so it is especially suboptimal to be instructing them not to use "fucked up code". Your message would have been just as effective had you toned down your language. Thank you, AGK [•] 16:01, 12 March 2013 (UTC) Article Feedback deploymentHey TheRedPenOfDoom; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:22, 13 March 2013 (UTC) Continued Question on Reliable Source w/r Bend Not BreakHi, thank you for being patient with me when explaining what is reliable source on Bend Not Break talk page. The talk page there seems very emotionally charged. So I am asking my newbie question here so not to trigger more tension there. I am trying to understand what can be called reliable sources. I read Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. Does Daily Beast meet that criteria? Even Huffington Post? where the "magazine" hires bloggers to write blogs there. But essentially they are blogs, right? And Wiki in general doesn't accept personal blog WP:SPS as reliable sources. What am I missing? Thank you in advance! Pimpilala (talk) 19:45, 15 March 2013 (UTC) Manjari (Singer)Please have a look at the article Manjari (Singer). An SPA keeps adding promotional stuff even after warning. He has not even provided an edit summary. JK (talk) 06:27, 19 March 2013 (UTC) FYI... the subject is editing his own article again as an IP (64.131.188.170). He unwittingly admitted to being Atran by his autosigned comment at BLP/N. Just wanted you to be aware in case any of his edits were improper. --76.189.111.2 (talk) 01:14, 20 March 2013 (UTC) EegaThis is your last warning. The next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Eega, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Raghusri 19:10, 20 March 2013 (UTC) EegaPlease tech User Raghushri some wikipedia knowledge, he is unable to understand what is a published source, he has re added the unreliable source, saying only URL's are accepted, such a fool, I have added a publish source in pdf, please explain to that fool some wikipedia basicsMurrallli (talk) 19:29, 20 March 2013 (UTC) PhaniDon't Delete the Critical reception, marketing, reception of MIRCHI film. Jalapathy Gudelli is a Film Critic with http://www.telugucinema.com & Film Journo for TV9 Hyd, He is a professional reviewer of telugu film critic ([11]).Idlebrain.com is one of the oldest professional website of telugu fil industry operated by idlebrain jeevi.idlebrain.com is also the MEDIA PARTNER for the films like GABBAR SINGH, CAMERAMAN GANGA THO RAMBABU, NAAYAK etc..........He is operating website from 11 years ([12]).Mahesh s koneru of 123Telugu.com is also a professional reviewer of TFI. ([www.123telugu.com]) was owned by TFI producer SHYAM PRASAD REDDY(MALLEMALA ENTERTAINMENTS-ARUNDHATHI,ANJI producer) ([13]0. 123telugu.com is also the media partner for the films like REBEL, SVSC, RACHA, BAADSHAH etc..So brother this three websites are the perfect professional websites of TFI.TIMES OF INDIA, NDTV, SIFY are depended upon this three websites news,reviews etc... and TOI,NDTV,SIFY are not the media partner for any telugu film upto date.So, plz dont delete the reviews of MIRCHI and critical appreciation...........................Phani 18:58, 23 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phani999sai (talk • contribs) swim deepHey, guys, I took a look at the Swim Deep article, and I declined the A7. The band has a release and a label, even if the release is just a single, and given that I see some coverage in sources, I don't think this meets the low bar set by A7. I'm not sure how an AfD would end, but if you still think it should be deleted, that's probably the way to go. Writ Keeper (t + c) 14:42, 23 March 2013 (UTC) User:Violetcries and a potential conflict of interestSince you have heavily edited Violet Cries and appear to focus on other content related to Matador records, I need to ask you User:Violetcries if you have a conflict of interest in your editing. If you do not respond here, since you have asked me not to contact you on your talk page, I will bring this up at the conflict of interest notice board. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:23, 23 March 2013 (UTC) what, what are you on about first of all I did not ask you to not message me on my talk page I prefer you do that and second what does that mean, I can't be bothered to read the massive page about it just say it simply ≈
That doesn't mean anything, I meant stop coming up every where I go deleting everything but you still haven't answered my question ≈
I was asking what does conflict of interest mean
yeah but i'm not reading all of that explain it to me simply
how can I risk causing public embarrassment
well i'm not it as a promotional vehicle, I just love this band and I like to make their pages on Wikipedia good, what's so bad about that
but I'm not editing it all the time any ways. and I thought it was 'encyclopedic', it would make sense to have someone who know's al lot about them rather than someone who doesn't
um... Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding or editing commentary and your personal analysis into articles, you may be blocked from editing. This is your last warning. Match summary (User talk: Match summary
Legendary creatureI replied to one of your Legendary creature article edit on the article talk page here. If, after reading what I wrote, you still do not want to add back in "and are handed down by tradition from earlier times" to the lead, I'm find with that. No need to respond. -- Jreferee (talk) 13:33, 24 March 2013 (UTC) Red Wine (film)Please watch out for the red line. You've reached 3RR now. De728631 (talk) 18:08, 24 March 2013 (UTC) Hi! I wanted to ask why you keep reverting my edits on Kapoor's page. I mean, if you look at other Bollywood actors' Wiki pages, the "Special appearance" note is located in the Notes section. This includes articles such as Kareena Kapoor and Vidya Balan, which are featured articles now, so saying that the "Special appearances" should be located in the Role section is like refuting reputable articles like those above. Also, even Hollywood stars like Jennifer Anniston have it this way. I don't think you can just edit articles based on your own personal views... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chulbul pandey ab (talk • contribs) 12:41, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
March 2013Hello, I'm Karthik Selvanayagam. I noticed that you recently removed some content without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry: I restored the removed content. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Karthik Selvanayagam (talk) 16:13, 25 March 2013 (UTC) Please please please do read more good and featured articles in Wikipedia and try to learn before you make your edits. Not every edit of yours is justified and even reviewers and admins would undo some of your edits. Forget me, more experienced editors will object your edits as well. Thanks to you, I totally lost interest in editing and I may quit. Have a good life! Karthik Selvanayagam (talk) 16:18, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
About The Gangster (film)Hi Red Pen O'Doom! Yup, I've reverted your WP:REDIRECT to the director's name. Feel free to revert if you are so minded to do, but I think WP:AfD would be the better forum for this discussion. --Shirt58 (talk) 11:31, 26 March 2013 (UTC) I've removed your "discussion closed" and archive tag - do not disrupt the talk page on The BeatlesI've removed your "discussion closed" and archive tag - do not disrupt the talk page on The Beatles. You can see the date with the signatures. You archived the thread for reasons other than stated. It is not your decision to decide when to archive other editors comments on talk pages. I will report you to admin for disruptive editing since you chose to archive a thread only a few hours after the last post while the discussion is still ongoing through user talk pages (check my edit history) and may return to the original article once we have finished discussing some finer points of article editing and its relationship to The Beatles article. Sluffs (talk) 01:53, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Red Pen of Doom - hmmm - interesting name. Go on then have it your way - you obviously should consider a career in teaching then you can cross out with a red pen all the mistakes your pupils make. It would also give everyone here a rest from the impending swipe of doom from your phallic red pen. lol Sluffs (talk) 21:52, 27 March 2013 (UTC) Regarding your edits in Andrea Jeremiah pageI see that you are just removing parts from this page. Please note that the information added aren't from any gossip sites. It's plain facts. Having seen all your edits, it seems you are doing PR agency work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coffeemugs (talk • contribs) 18:19, 27 March 2013 (UTC) Esben and the Witchunsourced are you serious, nobody put's sources for the genre of music they have, I'm going to give you a list of successful band's that don't have sources and the Wikipedia pages are fine. I could go on for ages and I know it's not that much but you know, these bands are highly successful (although babes in toyland aren't MASSIVE)if sources where necessary there would be some, the only one I could fine was The White Stripes.
Just ignore Red Pen of Doom. His user name tells you everything you need to know about what role he has decided to give himself on Wikipedia. Blame it on the parents - usually a domineering father. Someone in his childhood gave him this perception of himself as judge beyond all others. What Red Pen of Doom doesn't realise is that sometimes the ink well runs dry and then we just have a scratchy pen. lol Sluffs (talk) 21:56, 27 March 2013 (UTC) your so petty the red pen of doom and thank you sluffs for talking sense and you are correct
Glad to see you have a mum - is she the one to blame for your blind and overbearing adherence to the rules? You could try relaxing on the red pen strike-throughs - at least then it will give new editors a chance to judge their own work rather than have you judge them. I also wouldn't want to make you feel uncomfortable here but you obviously don't understand the nasty impact that your over-zealous approach has on making others feel uncomfortable. All editors have mums and dads but only one editor here received a red pen from his. Someone should take that pen and shove it where it really belongs. lol. Back in the pen case I'll add just so you don't strike me with your metaphorical pen of doom. Oh no! there's a big red pen standing outside my door - blimey you are quick on the "draw". lol Sluffs (talk) 22:49, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Well they do say "the pen is mightier than the sword" but I think in this instance its safer for the world if we make sure you never become "The Red Sword of Doom". lol Sluffs (talk) 02:29, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
this is getting interesting violetcries oh my god your still going and this time with a threat, get a life.
ssstttiiiiillllllllll gggggooooiiiiinnnnnngggggg can't you just leave me alone I don't mean don't post on my talk page cause there is more meanings for that like... STOP PRACTICCLY STALKING ME ALWAYS POPPING UP AND CHANGING EVERYTHING I DO SAYING THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH IT AND LET ME GUESS YOUR GONNA RESPOND IN SOME STUPID WAY LIKE OH YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW THE POLICIES, JUST GO AWAY YOU PETTY, UM, UN-FISH
I'm fine letting people edit my stuff but with you it's constant for you, no THANK UHi RED, Thank you for keeping the page List of highest-grossing Indian films worldwide perfectly.This is the correct order but I have done it so but resulted in vain. Box Office India website is far far better than NDTV,CNN IBN ,TV9,Indian Express and India Today. Enthiran is the highest grossing Indian film of all time as said by India Today ,The Indian Express ,[[NDTV],TV9 and CNN-IBN with minimum grossing of 400 crores. India Today [[14]] Indianexpress[[15]] TV9[[16]] NDTV[[17]] CNN-IBN[[18]] [[19]] [[20]]
Suspected sockingSuspected socking going on in Kunchacko Boban and Dulquer Salmaan. The user User_talk:Mollywood1 seems to be the sock of blocked user materialthunder JK (talk) 10:15, 28 March 2013 (UTC) help pls
Editing reliable sourcesRef-List of highest-grossing Indian films worldwide Don't edit on you whim. It is agreed that boxoffice india is the most credible box office source.If you have any, doubt check BOI references given on the page. Article also says that rankings are based on Boxoffice india. You should consider at least that.Different papers can give different data.On all the articles,boxoffice information is given by boxofficeindia. If it is not available then only,other source is taken into account. Please consider that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.212.33.195 (talk) 20:47, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
Actually the numbers you are mentioning, were claimed by Enthiran producers.other news sites simply repeated their claim.Read the article on Enthiran. User 101.212.33.195 is right. We should give data on basis of Box Office India.If the data is not available in Box office India then only, we should take help of other sources. Otherwise everyone will start claiming that a given data given by Box Office India is wrong.Kumarila 03:01 30 march 2013 —Preceding undated comment added 21:32, 29 March 2013 (UTC) You can not edit on your personal opinion. News paper articles that you are giving, don't specialise in boxoffice data.They gave the data reported by Enthiran producers. Box office india is an independent source,whose sole work is to track boxoffice data. If you do like this,I can give articles giving different box office figures for different films. We should follow a common parameter for ranking.I think your bias is reflecting in you edits. Please refrain from this..Kumarila 17:43 02 april 2013 —Preceding undated comment added 12:13, 2 April 2013 (UTC) !!!!!Why do you keep reverting my edits?? Yesterday, on Ranbir Kapoor's page, I added information about his reviews for Bachna Ae Haseeno and Anjaana Anjaani; fixed up all the punctuation errors, added references for his future projects and removed the unnecessary info; and you reverted all of this because of one sentence that had an NPOV concern. Why are you doing this? Did you even read my edits? You know, people work hard here to improve articles, but from what I know, you seem to be doing the complete opposite!! Please, next time, read my (and other peoples') edits, and then revert anything that seems incorrect. Don't just carelessly revert huge chunks of information that's important! Chulbul pandey ab (talk) 05:51, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
"Hatchet job"I'm not sure which content you think is unreferenced or poorly referenced at William C. Rader. Edits like this are pretty clearly not constructive, as they don't identify which sources are unreliable. (For instance, a citation to the journal Science is not reliable? Really?) I'd like to invite you to participate constructively in discussion. Also, I will remind you at all times please to avoid engaging in personal attacks. Sławomir Biały (talk) 11:17, 2 April 2013 (UTC) Sockpuppets of flowers of the worldI've added some new accounts whom I strongly suspect to the sockpuppets of Flowers of the world.Check. Is this enough or should I reopen the case? I also suspect User:Pen.cil.80. JK (talk) 14:47, 2 April 2013 (UTC) Formal mediation has been requestedThe Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Jose Antonio Vargas". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 10 April 2013. Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Komsky AFDThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. Please refrain from deleting the citation about the patriots game viewership. Your subjectivity on doing so swayed the vote of a later editor who specifically stated that because the performance was not broadcast to live TV, like a playoff game, it was irrelevant. But it was as on a live broadcast and the editor missed that because of YOU. I have brought this to the attention of an admin. Please do not remove he citation to unduly sway any more editors. Selmaflora294 (talk) 23:01, 3 April 2013 (UTC) No really cares about bets you are willing to make, and your assumptions are just assumptions. I will consider what to do. But you are a rude editor (I have read the history) and should exclude yourself from further edits. I will certainly bring it to the attention of an admin because I think you are both biased and ill informed. Editors like you give wikipedia a bad name. Selmaflora294 (talk) 01:30, 4 April 2013 (UTC) You have not done your homework. The source from diablo magazine is reputable and mentions the performance. Because they are in the Bay Area they could not have known about the performance unless they saw it National TV. Also, see here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lOUubkE8Sk If you still don't believe that it's true, then you are purposefully doing all this to sabotage the article. And I will gladly report that to an admin. Selmaflora294 (talk) 01:47, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
I apologize if I've offended you, I was simply sayin that assumptions are pretty worthless. I understand that you probably did not do anything purposefully, but you are also, despite knowing wiki terms, guilty of not doing your homework. I can see why you are against the 23 million number. I have done further research and discovered that the real ratings for when the subject sang (the start of the game at 8pm eastern time) was 17.7 million people. So I will make the chane immediately to reflect the facts. But do agree that your ignoring this matter might have influenced unduly one of the 'Delete' votes? If not others? Selmaflora294 (talk) 02:17, 4 April 2013 (UTC) One of the voters specifically said that he didn't think singing the anthem is significant because it wasn't televised. You knew FULL well that it was and removed the source based on a technicality. Now that I have done th research and ascertained that an exact amount of 17.7 million were watching the moment that subject sang at 8pm sharp, I hope that the numbers and the Nielsen ratings are proof enough to make it a notable and appropriate part of the subject's article. Again, I apologize if I've offended you, I just don't see why you didn't do the research. Why you didn't watch the video where you can see with your own eyes that it was on national TV. Why you would make the specious argument that a PR agency manipulated an entire editorial staff at a major publication for ONE client. More importantly, if he was SO important as to be able to manipulate an entire editing staff at Diablo Magazine to write about a performance that no one according to you saw, he would definitely be worthy of a wikipedia article (joke). Seriously sir, consider what you are arguing... It's highly dubious. Selmaflora294 (talk) 02:30, 4 April 2013 (UTC) 3rd party sources did cover the matter, and despite what you may think its a big deal to sing at a major NFL football game. You have to be selected and go through a rigorous audition process. Obviously it's not written about in newspapers! But it's a huge deal, you simply probably work in a differ field and don't respect it. Selmaflora294 (talk) 02:46, 4 April 2013 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
KonyThanks for the move to the U.S. I should have put there. Kennvido (talk) 06:15, 4 April 2013 (UTC) George Komskymy reply here Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:29, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
TalkbackHello, TheRedPenOfDoom. You have new messages at 16912 Rhiannon's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. April 2013BLP should be removed immediately. Then you change all the other actors why are you removing only mollywood actors. you are saying BLP should be removed immediately both the finest and method actor's source are not BLP. you and JK put my name on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Flowers of the world. I know that i am not Sockpuppet of Flowers of the world. wikipedia is not for fight. so you remove my name from there. I think you understand what i am telling. Thanks.. ---London at night talk to me 16:09, 4 April 2013 (UTC) HELP! Are you rediting my page. The prevoius content was virtually accurate and vetted for ten years. Now a comprehensive article has been reduced to trivial with many inaccuracies and incomplete. In the 1970s WHN became the most listened country rasdio station of all time for which I was inducted in the Country Rasdio Hall of Fame; now wikipedia calls me someone whio changed country music in bthe 90s! If you truly an accurate entry, I will be glad to help you verify everthing in the orginal article from the references listed. You will find incorrect and incomplte information if you limit your serach to what comes up in a Google search. Ed Salamon Edsalamon (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:53, 4 April 2013 (UTC) A comprehensive article that was vetted for over ten years and largely accurate has been replaced by a few lines, some of which is inaccurate ( I was not a "national dircetor", I was president/programming), confusing ("networking" being used for both radio networks and social networking) and incomplete (I was inducted into the Country radio Hall of Fame because of WHN which became the most listened to country radio station of all time in the 70s - verifable in my Hall of Fame entry http://countryradioseminar.com/ed-salamon, and other sources). Wikipedia now has me conrtibuting to country music in the 90s, which is not the bpoint. I'm not a wiki user, I was only trying to change my picture. Doesn't anyonme care about trying to get my entry back to correct? Edsalamon (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:31, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Milagrowhalo theRedPenOfDoom, #PinkAmpersand has approved Milagrow, dont edit it! i have no conflict of interest, i told pink to edit it, he was busy with something else, hence i did it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayush.datta (talk • contribs) 09:59, 8 April 2013 (UTC) Ok, I don't no how create an account Please tell me.
Yes i know. i told how to develop my account — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suriya180 (talk • contribs) 13:11, 8 April 2013 (UTC) George KomskyThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. Excuse me, you are rude and mean. I reverted your edits because you deleted so much that it was confusing to clean up the page. Please stop contributing for a day and allow me to revert to how it was before, that way I will make all the changes to suit your tastes and complaint. You are being mean and spiteful, you should be ashamed of yourself. Ngoesseringer (talk) 09:42, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
All I'm asking for is for you to give me a moment to clean up the page, Can you just be reasonable? Please? Ngoesseringer (talk) 09:45, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Listen, it is relevant because 23 million people saw him sing the national anthem on live TV. For a performer/artist like him that is a BIG deal and is an accomplishment. Are you so thick as to no understand that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ngoesseringer (talk • contribs) 10:14, 2 April 2013 (UTC) Ngoesseringer (talk) 09:54, 2 April 2013 (UTC) Hi -- since I've reported this editor at AN3 for a 3RR violation, you'll need to be careful now as well. —Nomoskedasticity (talk) 10:35, 2 April 2013 (UTC) Hey doom pen, just wanted to let you know that I wrote the following to an admin: Also, have you noticed how belligerent the editors have been? Is this normal and acceptable behavior? Please take a look at their comments: 'sources are crap' 'person is a nobody' 'charities are biased and lying'... Etc. it's really offensive and I thought wikipedia was supposed to be above that. All those lovely comments are yours. Maybe you can recommend how I can report your belligerent and nasty comments officially? Being such a knowledgable user I'm sure can point me to the right direction? Ngoesseringer (talk) 09:20, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
a question for User:Ngoesseringer about your relation to User:BlackstonBSince you have asked me not to post on your page, I will ask here and hope that you see it and respond before I take the next appropriate step. Can you explain this series of edits? [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] and how you are related to User:BlackstonB that you think its appropriate to edit xir comments?-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 11:20, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Howdy! T-5 hr. 25 min. and counting until this nonsense ends... and possibly begins again only to reach a new level of insanity which will possibly result in salting the page. Just thought I should share. Cheers! Coffeepusher (talk) 05:03, 9 April 2013 (UTC) adding sourcesI wish I could provide the George Komsky article with more, or have access to more but I don't. Where do I find out which articles need to be explored more thoroughly? Mikeclark22 (talk) 22:50, 9 April 2013 (UTC) Thanks! Mikeclark22 (talk) 23:02, 9 April 2013 (UTC) Twinkless TBReplied at Talk:Andy Reid --Go Phightins! 02:48, 10 April 2013 (UTC) Requests for Comment: Proposal for rewording WP:NSONGHi, an RfC has begun which proposes rewording WP:NSONG. As you participated in a related discussion, I invite you to join the RfC conversation. Regards, Gong show 05:00, 10 April 2013 (UTC) RC or OR?Hello, Firstly great to see a response on this forum from you. I am humbled by your pointers as a heads-up for me. It has given quite some clarity to ask a few questions. Lets take an example of a movie review citation. Lets take 'MillionLuck' or 'MovieCrow' How are these sources deemed as reliable sources? When it comes to the Indian space who are deemed to be critics? How are they elevated to that level? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charan2987 (talk • contribs) 12:56, 10 April 2013 (UTC) A few other questions. Have you checked the credibility of all the references that are generally seen on a movie page? How do you arrive at the authorial credibility? A review is a viewpoint, it does not need to undergo a credibility check. All it needs to have the relevance (meaning a movie review citation should not point to something totally different). Who are these community folks who arrive at consensus? What's their background & knowledge with respect to the topics under discussion? Kindly answer to all the questions raised, to the point and then continue preaching reliability and credibility sermons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charan2987 (talk • contribs) 18:36, 10 April 2013 (UTC) Purappadu filmThis is a very old film and its hard to find any coverage on the internet. But the people involved in the film, including the director and major actors are notable enough and hence I thought the film meets the notability guidelines. Rest is up to you. Thank you. JK (talk) 17:46, 11 April 2013 (UTC) Why don't you think the Biography Channel is a reliable source? http://www.biography.com/people/demi-lovato-481444 —Kww(talk) 00:34, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
QuestionHello TheRedPenOfDoom, I have a question regarding the reviews by reviewbol, there's a user who has repeatedly adding reviews from that site to upcoming Bollywood movies. I am quite not sure where that site is a reliable source since I have never seen that used in other articles before today and also that there are summary of reviews from other sites (like toi, zeenews, bollywoodhungama etc). I hope you can help me. Tolly4bolly 11:43, 12 April 2013 (UTC) Offshore company - You have removed external linkHello, You have sent me a message that you have removed an external link which I have placed to the site Tax Havens Guide. I don't see any reason why this link shouldn't meet the guidelines, since it is totally on topic (the site is about tax havens with specific sections for offshore companies), is of non commercial nature and I guess it adds a lot of complementary information about the topic. Since you have removed the link immediately after I have posted it, I doubt that you really had the time to review the linked site to get a full picture about the content. Thus, I would like to ask you to review it again an reconsider your position. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Offshoreguru (talk • contribs) 11:53, 12 April 2013 (UTC) TalkbackHello, TheRedPenOfDoom. You have new messages at Tolly4bolly's talk page.
Message added 11:57, 12 April 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Tolly4bolly 11:57, 12 April 2013 (UTC) Drugstore Band - new edit - further sourcesHello there,
Thank you for your message.
I have updated the page and reverted your last edit, as believe the inclusion of external links (2 interviews + 1 live review) adds context, if readers want to pursue further information regarding the artist in question.
I have based this addition upon following other similar artists pages on Wikipedia, and I think the 2 or 3 extra links are not exessive, as most bands/artists usually add a much greater number of linked reviews and interviews. Curve
youtub as a sourcef you look at the video at 8.08 you can hear Dhanush himself confirm the information (DOB) edited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.51.159 (talk) 21:58, 12 April 2013 (UTC) The actor himself state's it, either way you are getting it wrong information from your "reliable" source.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.51.159 (talk) 22:37, 12 April 2013 (UTC) About that blanking you just did due to personal info being there...If an admin deletes it for that speedy deletion criterion, I will learn something. However, it wasn't an attack page, so I wonder how they will see it. I'm actually a bit surprised there's no criteria that has personal information on it like that. (And, of course, there's a reason I'm not posting the link to the page... obviously.) Steel1943 (talk) 03:54, 13 April 2013 (UTC) Imran KhanHey TheRedPenOfDoom! I was wondering, would you be willing to copy-edit the Imran Khan article. It recently passed GA but a veteran editor is concerned about the number of 'direct quotes' in the article. Some of them need to paraphrased. I would've done it myself, but I'm not good at it. Your assistance will be greatly appreciated. GleekVampire | talk! 06:22, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Your messagewhat? Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made to Chashme Baddoor (2013 film) has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. Thank you. You warned me aggressively while i engaged with socks already.I revert them because they were deleting important info again and again.I doubt your experience here.Make sure to watch first before taking such an action. ---zeeyanwiki discutez 20:04, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Re: User pageNo problem mate! I contributed to the discussion (kicked it off in fact) and I have no problem with the result. Thanks for the note! Stalwart111 22:03, 13 April 2013 (UTC) Re: Asian Heart Institute and Asian HospitalsI am mystified as to why over 80% of the page of AHI has been removed. I edited it last night, and toned down what had been toned down repeatedly. Even descriptions of hospital services have been removed! I spent a lot of time looking at other hospital's pages and took language, style, editing content cues from there. Please provide some guidance, or at least give us an example of what you believe is the epitome of a really neutral page and we will follow it. We welcome any amount of work to meet Wikipedia standards. In this case, this hospital really is an extraordinary organisation and a mere listing of its features could seem like advertising. Every single fact was linked to an external source. I request you to temporarily restore the page while we correct it to meet your requirements. Alvin J Saldanha 04:38, 14 April 2013 (UTC) Alvin Saldanha — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alvinsaldanhaecd (talk • contribs)
May I request you to restore the page and I will completely redo it to your satisfaction? The hospital is a very important part of the Indian healthcare landscape and is very highly regarded globally also. This article will be corrected to Wikipedia standards and to Wikipedia's satisfaction. Alvinsaldanhaecd (talk • contribs) —Preceding undated comment added 06:51, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
How do I find the page as it stood before you changed it? This allows me to show the hospital what was the last set of changes effected. This 'last' page also has the links to outside sources. Since 'external' links are vital to the credibility of an article, I had taken pains to link each and every claim made. I also want to submit that if an organisation like JCI recognises AHI to be 'The Safest Hospital in the World' and it a link to JCI and the article reporting it is provided, how does it fall short? If the hospital is chosen by the PM of India to do his redo bypass and links are provided, (and they can be found by the dozens on a simple Google search) what else is required? I would honestly appreciate a little advice. Thank You for your time, and your help. God Bless.--Alvin J Saldanha 07:30, 14 April 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alvinsaldanhaecd (talk • contribs) Thank You very much. You have been very patient with us, and I really appreciate it. Disclosure: I am the Creative Director of AHI's advertising agency, but this is NOT what we are signed on to do and we are NOT compensated for it. The info, in my personal opinion is vital to millions of people in the region, who we know are looking for inexpensive top-quality cardiac care. Having had a quintuple bypass I know how desperately people are searching and what a relief it is to find corroboration of information on Wikipedia. I put all these entries out of my own personal effort. I can completely see the points you are making, and in respect to your intention but also for the sake of people looking for a reliable information on AHI, I will work at it. I am also very happy to submit the redone page to any Wikipedia 'independent editor' to correct. God Bless. --Alvin J Saldanha 07:49, 14 April 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alvinsaldanhaecd (talk • contribs) Rob Paulsen's Talkin Toons PodcastWhy isn't it a reliable source? Feel like an idiot arguing this case, but aren't these people not just colleagues, but friends of hers. And shouldn't they know things like this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Radiohist (talk • contribs) 15:28, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Chashme Baddoor (2013 film)Film to hit ho gaee hay ab jitni jal rhi hay jalti rhay ap ki. So please dont reveal the full story Saman Zara Zaidi (talk) 17:16, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
edit war warningTo avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. you have now fully crossed into the territory where you will be blocked] unless you revert yourself. I urge you to take that chance. Otherwise, I hope that while you are blocked you actually read up on copyright and its application at Wikipedia. Saman Zara Zaidi (talk) 17:56, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Please do not assume ownership of articles. If you aren't willing to allow your contributions to be edited extensively or be redistributed by others, please do not submit them. Thank you. You do not listen ,still doing whatever you want. ---zeeyanwiki discutez 18:36, 14 April 2013 (UTC) Wendy Williams Talk PageYour continuing corresponding regarding edits on the Whitney Houston 2003 Interview and [Kim on Wendy Williams & Rapper Biggie Smalls] is requested so some kind of WP:CON can be reached regarding the information. Silver Buizel (talk) 18:45, 14 April 2013 (UTC) Re:please be careful at what you call "vandalism"Hello. I just wanted to inform you that I was a former editor who started back in 2006 and had even worked on couple of good articles, so I think I pretty much know what's right and what not. Removing films, including ones that are in production, does definitely not violate any guideline. A film that has started principal photography and/or been official announced can be listed in a filmography, if it is reliably sourced, that surely is NOT crystal balling. Crystal balling means speculating, but these films ARE in making, that is a fact and a difference. That too couple of those films do even have separate articles or are listed in IMDb already. You may or may not like that, but adding upcoming films in a filmography does not violate any rule, so I request you to refrain from making this change again. With regard to the awards section, you may be right be that it was not properly sourced, but that's by far not a reason to remove the entire section. When I was promoting articles to good articles, I was told to include only the most notable awards in the filmography and the others in a separate section. So which guidelines prevents me from having an awards section please? Wilhelm Chandrahaasan (talk) 20:03, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
You have not proved anything, you only assumed so and I have stultified your arguments. And come on, isn't that obvious that if something isn't prohibited it is generally allowed? And before pointing at me, I would suggest you to look at your edits first. Anyways, this leads nowhere, so no more replies from me. Happy editing! Wilhelm Chandrahaasan (talk) 10:00, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Mediation noteHello, TRPoD. You were recently involved in a discussion on the RS noticeboard. I've been mediating this dispute, and I thought I'd let you know that one of the editors has put forward a proposed resolution. I'd just like to notify you of this opportunity to build consensus. The proposition in question is here. Regards, m.o.p 18:08, 16 April 2013 (UTC) KonyNgunalik (talk) Hi TheRedPenOfDoom, what I am trying to bring out is that the 2million displacement was not because of Kony or LRA. Forceful displacements of civilians started before there were LRAs. I know that the outside world has been misled to believe that every thing in that region is done by or because of LRA but that is false informationNgunalik (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:59, 16 April 2013 (UTC) Hi Ngunalik (talk) What do you mean that I am adding my personal comments? Have you checked my citations? I have not finished working on the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ngunalik (talk • contribs) 00:57, 17 April 2013 (UTC) Just in case I wasn't clear enough in my edit summary, read my comments at WP:ANEW. The contents at issue are being discussed on the article talk page and at WP:BLPN. As far as I can tell, you have not participated in either of those discussions. Regardless, in my role as administrator, this is a warning. Leave the article alone, or you risk being blocked. I am going to revert you again to put the article back to the status quo before I made my intentions clear at WP:ANEW.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:53, 17 April 2013 (UTC) Comments on User talk:DanTDHey, I was linked to this situation on his talk page, I might suggest you might want to let go for the night, because while his very incivil behavior is a problem, I might suggest you bring this to the attention of a third party in the related WikiProject. It's not worth getting insulted and into drama over this. Mitch32(It is very likely this guy doesn't have a girlfriend.) 03:13, 17 April 2013 (UTC) DhanushI don't understand the logic behind removing this alleged POV/OR in Dhanush article. There are thousands of actor articles in exact the same style. Maybe you should take your complaint to a better place where we could discuss this centrally instead of edit warring on a single article. Where would be an appropriate place for such a discussion? -- Dravidian Hero 19:03, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Box Frenzy, by Pop Will Eat ItselfWhere exactly do you see the alleged "lack of reliable third party sources" in the article on the Pop Will Eat Itself album Box Frenzy? Honestly, I'd like to know what your deal is. -------User:DanTD (talk) 20:39, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Step in with the AfD?Can you help talk with the editor at the Arch Enemy Entertainment AfD? The big issue is that I'm trying to explain some of the principles of sources and such, but it's not really going over well. I didn't think I was being overly nasty or rude, but we're really not getting anywhere. Could you help step in? I'm going to ask a few other people that I know are good with sources and the like. There's just no depth of coverage for the company, I'm afraid. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 03:48, 19 April 2013 (UTC) Request for mediation rejectedThe request for formal mediation concerning Jose Antonio Vargas, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. For the Mediation Committee, User:PhilKnight (talk) 19:10, 21 April 2013 (UTC) Ping Fu draftHi there, I wanted to reach to you after your note on my Talk page to ask if you would like to review the draft for Ping Fu that I've prepared, and possibly move over the remaining sections that haven't been added in to the live article yet? A few editors have reviewed now and one has moved two of the sections (the more controversial ones: Early life and family and Memoir) into the live article. The introduction, infobox, Career and Awards and recognition haven't been moved but are much less controversial and generally just involved tidying up the information and making sure everything is sourced correctly. I made some changes based on feedback from editors on the Talk page, see discussion here and FreeRangeFrog recommended at WP:BLPN that I move the sections myself, however I would prefer not to since I follow the "bright line" rule for COI editors. If you're able to take a look and move the sections if you think they're ready, that would be great. Thanks. 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 21:58, 22 April 2013 (UTC) WarningWill you please stop removing the contents from Sanjeev Nanda page? You are trying to modify the page to focus only on the accident. This page is not about the accident. It is about Sanjeev Nanda. It is a very crucial information that this fellow is a grand son Indian Naval chief and how he was able to influence the outcome and his time in jail due to his lineage. This is my last warning to you. It almost looks like as if you have been paid by Nanda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hankspanks (talk • contribs) 04:02, 23 April 2013 (UTC) Could you check ...Talk:Eugene Plotkin, again (from about 6 months ago). Any help appreciated. Smallbones(smalltalk) 04:33, 23 April 2013 (UTC) Speedy deletion nomination of Asian Heart Institute
A tag has been placed on Asian Heart Institute requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable. If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Uberaccount (talk) 00:01, 25 April 2013 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for April 25Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alphonse Putharen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tamil (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 12:37, 25 April 2013 (UTC) Sridevi FF "awards"These people don't give up easily, huh? BollyJeff | talk 15:04, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Feedback?Can you help me understand why you deleted the external link I added? I thought it was very relevant. I'd like to get more involved as a wiki editor again (I tried to get involved in 2007 but gave up as a didn't have enough time) I do now but I'm scared that anything I add or edit will be deleted because I'm new. I hope I have followed the instructions right here Redtango88 (talk) 17:15, 25 April 2013 (UTC) Re: Wendy Williams Talk PagePlease... don't try to speculate as to the thoughts I have regarding Wikipedia's purpose. It's clearly written right here. If memory serves me correctly, you tried serving the same explanation to omit an incredibly notable event in the subject's career, only to be disagreed with by another user. In your attempt to come off as politely condescending, your correspondence comes off as uncivil and overbearing. I cannot speculate as to whether or not that is who you are beyond the reach of the internet, but that's certainly how your thoughts are represented in the section. I'm not sure if you're clear on what the purpose of talk pages are for, so here's a refresher. "A talk page (also known as a discussion page) is page which editors can use to discuss improvements to an article or other Wikipedia page," per WP:TP. Just in case you're rusty, I'd like to acquaint you with some of the guidelines presented here How to use article talk pages. The Discuss edits is one of the principles I abide by, and according to the Make proposals portion, I'm well within reason to suggest material I think is pertinent to the subject's BLP. I'm not in the business of trying to take possession of a particular article per WP:OWNER, but am more interested in reaching WP:CON through discussion with other contributors to the page. By the way, WP:CIV might also be of some assistance. Silver Buizel (talk) 20:33, 25 April 2013 (UTC) MilagrowWhy did the Honour and Recognitions under Rajeev Karwal get truncated? Those were reputed honours received from prestigious bodies..definitely not "unsupported hype". Why was the subsection on "Milagrow" get deleted? It was merely informing..no advertising or promotional feature for sure. I have discussed this issue with PinkAmpersand extensively he gave me approval too "as currently written, I think this has enough sources and doesn't appear to be an advert". We merely want it to be more informative, it is not hype/advertising.marketing in any way Ayush.datta Want an urgent reply from you, since I intend on adding the honours.Ayush.datta (talk) 06:04, 26 April 2013 (UTC)(talk) 08:26, 25 April 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayush.datta (talk • contribs) 08:20, 25 April 2013 (UTC) |
- ^ Quoted by Stephen Barber in his authorized biography of White, The Burning World, Picador, 1999, page 23 from White, States of Desire, p. 135.