Edit count of the user (user_editcount) | 32010 |
Name of the user account (user_name) | 'Slakr' |
Age of the user account (user_age) | 308530584 |
Groups (including implicit) the user is in (user_groups) | [
0 => 'abusefilter',
1 => 'sysop',
2 => '*',
3 => 'user',
4 => 'autoconfirmed'
] |
Global groups that the user is in (global_user_groups) | [] |
Whether or not a user is editing through the mobile interface (user_mobile) | false |
Page ID (page_id) | 35368171 |
Page namespace (page_namespace) | 3 |
Page title without namespace (page_title) | 'Winkelvi' |
Full page title (page_prefixedtitle) | 'User talk:Winkelvi' |
Last ten users to contribute to the page (page_recent_contributors) | [
0 => 'MediaWiki message delivery',
1 => 'Winkelvi',
2 => 'Ariel.',
3 => '107.150.94.5',
4 => 'NorthBySouthBaranof',
5 => 'Sphilbrick',
6 => 'DD2K',
7 => 'Liz',
8 => 'Anna Frodesiak',
9 => 'Loriendrew'
] |
Action (action) | 'edit' |
Edit summary/reason (summary) | 'Discretionary sanctions notice - American politics' |
Whether or not the edit is marked as minor (no longer in use) (minor_edit) | false |
Old page wikitext, before the edit (old_wikitext) | '{{Rollback topicon
|icon_nr=1}}
{{reviewer topicon
|icon_nr=2}}
{{CVU topicon|status=member|icon_nr=3}}
{{Twinkle topicon | icon_nr =4}}
{{trout me}}
<br/>
{{talkheader}}
<br>
{{editnotice
| header = Hi, welcome to my talk page!
| headerstyle = font-size: 150%; color: #9900FF; font-family: 'Copperplate Gothic Light'
| text =
*You will often find me patrolling the [[WP:Recent changes|"Recent changes"]] page, looking for vandalism by IP addresses and [[WP:Reviewer|reviewing]] to either accept or reject pending changes.
*I'm only human and I make plenty of errors - if you are here to complain about a tag, a warning, a deletion, or something I've said, please [[WP:AGF|'''assume good faith''']].
* If you've had any kind of issue or misunderstanding in your dealings with me, there is an excellent article/essay on Wikipedia editors with Asperger Syndrome found [[Wikipedia:High-functioning autism and Asperger's editors|here]] that might help.
:{{User:UBX/Aspergers}}
*'''If you're here because of an editing issue or a revert I've made to one or more of your edits and you feel I've made an error, please leave me a ''[[WP:CIVIL|civil]]'' message on my [[User talk:Winkelvi|talk page]]. '''Being '''rude''' will [[WP:BAIT|get you nowhere]].
*If ''you'' have erred, chances are I'll help you get round it and over it, but [[WP:GAME|'''I don't like game players''']]
*If you're here to whine, complain, or express anger, please go elsewhere. Any whining, complaining, angry or trolling posts are subject to immediate deletion.
*When you leave a message on my talk page and a response from me is appropriate, I will reply to you here, not on your talk page. Having half a conversation on a talk page and going back and forth between pages is unnecessarily confusing and a pain in the ass.
*Thanks for stopping by! -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span>
| textstyle = font-size: 100%; color: #555555; background-color: #DDDDDD
| image = {{Veteran Editor III}}
}}
<br>
== Request for advice on whether to report potential edit warring ==
I would like to ask your advice on whether or not I should report Ring Cinema for edit warring, since his editing may not explicitly violate the 3RR, but as I understand it you have [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RRArchive256#User:Ring_Cinema_reported_by_User:Rationalobserver_.28Result:_locked.3B_Ring_Cinema_warned.29 noted he is a persist edit warrer (around September 19, 2014]. The edits in question on his current edit warring revolve around two Michael Caine films, [[Deathtrap (film)]] and [[Sleuth (1972 film)]] Two days ago I added a sentence to the leads of both of these article noting the similarities of these films, and providing citations of reviews by Roger Ebert and Janet Maslin that explicitly mention the similarities between these films, as well as three published books that mention the similarities. Yesterday Ring Cinema repeatedly reverted these changes on the Deathtrap article. At that point, I attempted to start a discussion with him. Since then, he has reverted the change again. This is his third revert. His first revert was 16:25, 4 August 2015, and his last revert was 16:51, 5 August 2015. At 16:51, 5 August 2015, he also reverted the almost exact same sentence in the Sleuth article. So while it's two different articles, it is the exact same issue with the exact same editors in the two articles, and he is at 4 reverts of it in barely over 24 hours. This feels like edit warring if not a cut-and-dried violation of 3RR. I have opened a discussion of the content dispute on [[WP:DRN]], but do you think I should also go to ANI/3rr? [[User:Mmyers1976|Mmyers1976]] ([[User talk:Mmyers1976|talk]]) 20:31, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
:Report him if you think his actions are deserving of being reported, {{U|Mmyers1976}}. I have no opinion one way or the other. Yes, he and I have tangled previously, but I don't hold any animosity toward him and I'm certainly not looking for reasons to see him taken to a noticeboard. If you believe it's as cut and dried as you say, do what you think is appropriate. If you, however, have been edit warring as well, be prepared for a possible [[WP:BOOMERANG]]. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 20:34, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
::I asked because I believe it's not cut and dried, it's more of those ambiguous situations like he was warned about before, and also because of the open DRN discussion, I don't want to look like I'm forum-shopping. I counted and have 3 reverts on the Deathtrap article, and then I stopped and discussed. Even though he has reverted me again on that article, I have let it stand pending the DRN. I have not reverted at all on the Sleuth article, and I have let his revert stand pending the DRN, so I ''believe'' I'm clear of an edit warring boomerang charge. [[User:Mmyers1976|Mmyers1976]] ([[User talk:Mmyers1976|talk]]) 20:43, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
:::I see you have also asked {{U|Drmies}} for advice. I would go with whatever he says. I've found his advice wise and unbiased as well as trustworthy. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 20:48, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
::::Thanks, will do. [[User:Mmyers1976|Mmyers1976]] ([[User talk:Mmyers1976|talk]]) 20:50, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
:::::Too much praise, Winkelvi. I'm a bit mobile and the keyboard is sticky (it's in Alabama, as am I), and I haven't looked at diffs yet, so pardon the brevity. But y'all, realize that [[WP:AN3]] is also [[WP:EWN]], that is, [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring]]--in other words, while the template may suggest it's all about three reverts, it's a noticeboard for edit warring, and that's a broader thing than just 3R violations. You might say that's more liberal, but it's also intended, I believe, to bring to admin attention the more persistent edit warriors who tend to work long-term, outside of the clear bright line of 3R. So if you're suspecting someone of such edit warring, and if, of course, you're not the only one reverting them, you may well report it--just write up a good report in which you lay out the case.<p>It may be (but this is possibly not of any interest to you) that the "punishment" is different. Clear 3R violations are frequently met with a short block to prevent 4R, 5R, etc.; long-term edit warring violations sometimes call for different matters, and it may be that the matter ends up on ANI for POV editing or whatever. But don't be afraid to report edit warring: {{U|Bbb23}} and {{U|EdJohnston}} know what they're doing. Thanks, [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 22:06, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
::::::Thanks, great info, helped my understanding a lot. replied in full on your talk. [[User:Mmyers1976|Mmyers1976]] ([[User talk:Mmyers1976|talk]]) 22:41, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I just received your message. The reason I changed the information regarding Meredith's date of birth, which I'm assuming is the reason for your message, is because of a photo Josh Duggar just posted of his daughter. In the caption of the photo he says that Meredith is one month old today which would indicate that she had been born on July 16th and not July 19th. I think they simply announced the birth on July 19th in order to give Anna time to rest and the children a chance to bond with their new sister. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Beckym1983|Beckym1983]] ([[User talk:Beckym1983|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Beckym1983|contribs]]) 17:40, 16 August 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
==Duggar date==
Hi, I just received your message. The reason I changed the information regarding Meredith's date of birth, which I'm assuming is the reason for your message, is because of a photo Josh Duggar just posted of his daughter. In the caption of the photo he says that Meredith is one month old today which would indicate that she had been born on July 16th and not July 19th. I think they simply announced the birth on July 19th in order to give Anna time to rest and the children a chance to bond with their new sister. ([[User:Beckym1983|Beckym1983]] ([[User talk:Beckym1983|talk]]) 17:42, 16 August 2015 (UTC))
:Thanks for responding, {{U|Beckym1983}}. It's important that when content is changed -- especially dates -- that you give a reason for the change in the [[WP:EDITSUMMARY|edit summary]] and that a reliable source is provided to support the change. As far as I know (without looking first), I believe the 19th date is sourced. I will check to make sure that's the case. If not, then we can look into the 16th date for accuracy and change that content accordingly. Thanks for wanting to edit for accuracy! -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 17:46, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
== Ted Cruz Edit ==
Thanks for your note regarding my recent edit to Ted Cruz. I saw that resource you flagged referenced on a page for another candidate and thought it was useful for establishing ideological context, do you have suggestions on how to be able to provide that type of information from resources like Crowdpac in a way that isn't promotional? Thank you. [[User:Dapcrescendo9|Dapcrescendo9]] ([[User talk:Dapcrescendo9|talk]]) 18:09, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
:{{U|Dapcrescendo9}}, the addition of the content was problematic from three aspects: It's not from a reliable source, it's from a biased source, and the source is promotional/spam in nature. You may not have intended for it to be "spammy", but it would likely be seen as such, regardless. The biased nature of the source you provided is also not acceptable. If you are able to find an unbiased, reliable source that can support that content, you are welcome to add it to the article. As it is, however, we cannot accept the content. Please see [[WP:SPAM]], [[WP:REF]], and [[WP:NPOV]] for more. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 18:14, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
::{{U|Winkelvi}}, thanks very much for your response, very helpful. Can you help me understand how the source is biased? One of the things I found useful about them is that they appear to be very objective politically outside of the issue of money in politics. I found their scoring model to be useful in that it is based on objective analysis of campaign contributions, and have seen them cited a few different places. I've seen similar methodology to the one they used from sources like fivethirtyeight.com<ref>{{cite web|title=Is Jeb Bush Too Liberal To Win The Republican Nomination In 2016?|url=http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/jeb-bush-president-republican-primary-2016/|date=August 18, 2015}}</ref> and have seen their data cited in a few major media outlets<ref>{{cite web|title=Crowdpac in the news|url=https://www.crowdpac.com/about/media|date=August 18, 2015}}</ref>. I very much appreciate you taking the time to respond to me and am just looking to better understand how bias is being defined. Would it be better to combine that data with other sources that have included that data or similar data? Thanks again. [[User:Dapcrescendo9|Dapcrescendo9]] ([[User talk:Dapcrescendo9|talk]]) 18:50, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
{{reflist}}
:::It's biased because it is a pro-Conservative political action group, even though they claim to be non-partisan, the group's founder is a strong Conservative and much of their reports are anti-Liberal. Beyond this, addition of the source you provided is promotional. At the top of the chart was a solicitation for funds to the Conservative candidates listed. The inclusion of such is inappropriate. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 19:08, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
==Walker==
Hi Winkelvi. FYI: [[Wikipedia:Graphics_Lab/Photography_workshop#Scott_Walker]][[User:Anythingyouwant|Anythingyouwant]] ([[User talk:Anythingyouwant|talk]]) 01:44, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
== George Takei ==
Could you please let me know what you were referring to as "relevant information" for the George Takei article I edited. Both sections I edited seemed to have nitpicking information that wasn't necessarily relevant to the page. Thanks!
[[User:Mitchmasontim|Mitchmasontim]] ([[User talk:Mitchmasontim|talk]]) 17:50, 20 August 2015 (UTC)Mitchmasontim
:If it happened and is written in a manner consistent with policy on [[WP:BLP|Wikipedia biographies of living persons (BLPs)]], [[WP:NOTABLE|notablity]], and [[WP:REF|citing reliable references]], then it's inclusion-worthy. We don't keep negative content out of BLPs just because it's negative (which was the reasoning for removal you cited in the edit summary). -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 17:54, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
== Jared Fogle ==
Hasn't Jared publicly admitted to having sex below the age of consent (which is 16, 17 or 18 depending on what state you're in). Well, I still find the pedophilia category inaccurate. Pedophilia is a medical diagnosis and while it has been said he has a medical condition and will be receiving treatment for sexual disorders, they haven't specifically said he has pedophilia. [[User:Clr324|Andrea Carter]] ([[User talk:Clr324|at your service]] | [[Special:Contributions/Clr324|my good deeds]]) 22:57, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
:Yes, he has had sex with minors and that is one of the things he was charged with. He was not charged with rape. He has also been charged with being in possession of and distributing child pornography. You could be right about the pedophilia category, however, you are incorrect to add a category for rape. Categories, of course, have to be supported by article content as well as reliable sources. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 23:00, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
::Isn't sex with people under 16 considered rape? I am probably right about the pedophilia category. In order to be diagnosed with pedophilia you must be '''primarily''' attracted to people under 11 (something that doesn't appear to be true with him). He has a sexual disorder but until he has a diagnosis he shouldn't be in the pedophilia category. [[User:Clr324|Andrea Carter]] ([[User talk:Clr324|at your service]] | [[Special:Contributions/Clr324|my good deeds]]) 23:10, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
:::Rape has different definitions. That said, if the sources don't support that he raped anyone, and the charges don't say he raped anyone, then we don't say he raped anyone. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 23:16, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
::::You're right. [[User:Clr324|Andrea Carter]] ([[User talk:Clr324|at your service]] | [[Special:Contributions/Clr324|my good deeds]]) 23:18, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
== Canvassing ==
Hi, I just read your post on [[WP:RSN]]. Informing noticeboards of RFC's that have questions are normally dealt with on those boards is not canvassing. You can [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment#Publicizing_an_RfC read here] for other appropriate places to publicise a RFC that are not canvassing. [[User:AlbinoFerret|<span style="color:white; background-color:#534545; font-weight: bold; font-size: 90%;">AlbinoFerret</span>]] 00:22, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
:Thanks for the heads-up, {{U|AlbinoFerret}}. With the other comments left in conjunction with the RfC notification, there was an intent for something else. Trust me on this. As always, it's good to hear from you - I hope you are well. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 00:25, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
::Yes, the statement was not neutral, but I wanted you to know what is acceptable so that you dont make unintentional false statements. I'm doing good, hope you are also. [[User:AlbinoFerret|<span style="color:white; background-color:#534545; font-weight: bold; font-size: 90%;">AlbinoFerret</span>]] 00:40, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
:::I appreciate it. Glad you are doing well -- I am, also! -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 00:41, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
== FrozenFan2? ==
You might want to look at Meg0n00by as a possible sock. [[User:Beyond My Ken|BMK]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 14:43, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
:I will. Thanks for letting me know, {{U|Beyond My Ken|BMK}}. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 18:33, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
== Duggar ==
Hello,
"In 1984, Duggar Michelle Ruark." doesn't sound grammatical to me.
Is there a quirk of the English language that makes it correct to omit the word "married"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jim_Bob_Duggar&diff=679158632&oldid=679156228
[[Special:Contributions/15.211.201.85|15.211.201.85]] ([[User talk:15.211.201.85|talk]]) 20:27, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
That was an error on my part, thought I corrected it, but didn't. My apologies for any confusion. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 20:38, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
== On Denali ==
Come on, you know it's true. [[Special:Contributions/24.255.44.92|24.255.44.92]] ([[User talk:24.255.44.92|talk]]) 05:47, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:{{tps}} Which is completely beside the point. Follow the link he helpfully provided to you and learn how to use article talk pages correctly. ―[[User:Mandruss|<span style="color:#775C57;">'''''Mandruss'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Mandruss|<span style="color:#AAA;">☎</span>]] 05:57, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:[[User:24.255.44.92]], you're being disruptive just for the sake of being disruptive. Talk pages are [[WP:NOTAFORUM|not a forum]]. If that's what you're looking for, do it outside Wikipedia, not here. And if you didn't come to my talk page to truly discuss, rather, to just stir the pot some more, please stay off this page. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 15:40, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
::(Notifications - any kind of ping, reverts, etc - don't work for IPs. However, as I understand it, they do get the yellow "you have new messages" bar if you post on their talk page.) ―[[User:Mandruss|<span style="color:#775C57;">'''''Mandruss'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Mandruss|<span style="color:#AAA;">☎</span>]] 05:20, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
== [[Sidney Blackmer]] ==
Sorry, his house is probably notable enough for an article.— [[User:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#070">Vchimpanzee</span>]] • [[User talk:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#FA0"> talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contribs/Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#700">contributions</span>]] • 16:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:{{U|Vchimpanzee}}: What is the point of your message here? -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 16:46, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
::You reverted my split. You want this discussed first, Meanwhile, I'm going ahead and finishing the separate article and then we can decide what to do.— [[User:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#070">Vchimpanzee</span>]] • [[User talk:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#FA0"> talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contribs/Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#700">contributions</span>]] • 16:48, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:::Do whatever you feel you must do, {{U|Vchimpanzee}}, (as long as it complies with policy, that is). Removing a large section of an established article all on your own isn't a great idea. Please discuss per [[WP:BRD|BRD]] at the Blackmer article talk page as to why you believe the content doesn't belong in the Sidney Blackmer article. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 16:53, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
::::Okay. The article I am creating is about the man's house, not the man. I was waiting until I felt sure the house on its own was notable. I'm working on the talk page discussion now.— [[User:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#070">Vchimpanzee</span>]] • [[User talk:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#FA0"> talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contribs/Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#700">contributions</span>]] • 16:55, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:::::The template is in the article but due to a glitch repeatedly discussed on [[WP:VPT]] I can't see it. It may need fixing.— [[User:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#070">Vchimpanzee</span>]] • [[User talk:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#FA0"> talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contribs/Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#700">contributions</span>]] • 17:00, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
::::::Looking at the part of the article I removed before you reverted, Blackmer's name is hardly mentioned. His last name is used only as part of the name of the house, and his son who is of course not the subject of the article is mentioned. And by the way, I've learned to be suspicious of [[IPv6]] edits, and I noticed you restored to a version by an IPv6, which turned out to be vandalism.— [[User:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#070">Vchimpanzee</span>]] • [[User talk:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#FA0"> talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contribs/Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#700">contributions</span>]] • 17:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:::::::No one has commented on the split, but I believe I'm justified in my action. As long as I doubted the notability of the house, it was probably all right to have the details in the article. now, no one has questioned the house's notability and I think we are okay. — [[User:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#070">Vchimpanzee</span>]] • [[User talk:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#FA0"> talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contribs/Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#700">contributions</span>]] • 18:55, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
== Undid ==
I made a recent edit to Jesse Ventura's page changing his unit affiliation and using a website address that had 3 pages of factual interviews from various Vietnam era SEALs that was copyrighted by Bill Salsibury yet you deleted the footnote citing it wasnt a credible website, yet several other attached footnotes from other websites were left alone and thus were deemed credible. What is your criteria for credibility on a website? <small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/66.87.75.69|66.87.75.69]] ([[User talk:66.87.75.69|talk]]) 13:27, 17 September 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Well, it's not my criteria, it's Wikipedia's criteria for [[WP:VERIFY|verification of references]] and [[WP:REF|referencing]]. The The reference you provided is a self-published source and that's not acceptable for referencing. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 00:15, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
== Ahmed Arrest ==
I think you are misreading the press release. There's a possible distinction with juveniles regarding custody but the reasons for taking him to a juvenile detention center for processing is functionally equivalent to an arrest. <s>"Taking him into custody" = "Arrested."</s> They cited the law he was arrested and that would have been the probable cause for taking into custody. For adults, they would not have been able to take a person into custody like that without an arrest. A [[Terry stop]] is a detention. People are making more out of handcuffing, though. It's generally policy in police departments that anyone arrested is handcuffed with hands behind their back while being transported unless a medical condition prevents it. After arrest and further investigation, they chose not to charge him but it doesn't negate the arrest. --[[User:DHeyward|DHeyward]] ([[User talk:DHeyward|talk]]) 05:05, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
:And I stand corrected that in Texas, for juveniles they explicitly state that "taken into custody" is not considered an "arrest" under the law. --[[User:DHeyward|DHeyward]] ([[User talk:DHeyward|talk]]) 05:16, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
I think his detention does constitute "arrest". The law in question (as I understand it) says that when someone has been arrested but is free not to disclose it, they can say "no" and be considered to have answered truthfully. I think that's because requiring them to say "yes but I'm not required to disclose this fact" would be incoherent: it would require them to disclose the fact in the course of saying that they're not required to. As I understand it, there is instead an implicit clause, in effect: it says only "Have you ever been arrested?", but it means "Have you ever been arrested, that isn't privileged from disclosure?" Furthermore, if I read it correctly, the Texas statute on kidnapping and unlawful restraint makes exception "when it is for the purpose of effecting a lawful arrest or detaining an individual lawfully arrested" -- not when it's either arrest or the substitute-for-arrest applicable a juvenile. (There are a bunch of clauses saying it's lawful to restrain a child, or for a child to restrain another child without force, intimidation, or deception. So I might have missed a pseudo-arrest clause in there. But I don't think so.) Nor do I think that this detention constitutes a ''Terry'' Stop. Here's how ''Terry'' describes arrest: ''An arrest is the initial stage of a criminal prosecution. It is intended to vindicate society's interest in having its laws obeyed, and it is inevitably accompanied by future interference with the individual's freedom of movement, whether or not trial or conviction ultimately follows.'' That's what they were doing. At that point, they suspected that he had perpetrated a bomb hoax, and were acting toward a possible prosecution for that offense. Finally, there's video of the police chief being asked about the "arrest", and not objecting to that description of what happened. --[[User:Dan Wylie-Sears 2|Dan Wylie-Sears 2]] ([[User talk:Dan Wylie-Sears 2|talk]]) 02:32, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
:I disagree. There is so much about this incident the media has gotten wrong (for instance, saying charges were dropped - there were never any charges filed) that I'm sick of reading the distortions of the truth in the news. Nothing personal, but I'm also sick of talking about whether he was arrested or not arrested, to be honest. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 02:36, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
== You really templated me ? ==
Nice going, but no. I'm enforcing WP:POLEMIC, consensus exists that his writing is polemic and per the policy, it needs to be removed, full stop. [[User:KoshVorlon|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">'''Kosh'''<span style="color:#CC4E5C"></span><span style="color:#008000">'''Vorlon'''</span></span>]] 16:43, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
:Yeah. Twice now. Cut the bullshit. You were told to move on. Do it before you get taken to a noticeboard and will surely be blocked. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 16:45, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
:: Yeah, cool story bro, but I have both consensus and policy on my side, you don't have anything except WP:ILIKEIT. Take it there, if you dare! [[User:KoshVorlon|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">'''Kosh'''<span style="color:#CC4E5C"></span><span style="color:#008000">'''Vorlon'''</span></span>]] 16:51, 28 September 2015 (UTC) PS: You reverted me with Twinkle and you referred to me edit as vandalism, which it wasn't. That's a mis-use of Twinkle, better read the manual again sport! [[User:KoshVorlon|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">'''Kosh'''<span style="color:#CC4E5C"></span><span style="color:#008000">'''Vorlon'''</span></span>]] 17:06, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
:::Where is this alleged consensus to be found and viewed? -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 17:08, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
::::It was in the edit summary [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:User_pages&oldid=683172647&diff=prev | here ]. [[User:KoshVorlon|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">'''Kosh'''<span style="color:#CC4E5C"></span><span style="color:#008000">'''Vorlon'''</span></span>]] 17:22, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
{{od}}As I said: Blocked for disruptive behavior. You should have seen it coming. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 17:26, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
== Outing Attempt ==
I've warned the IP once more and sent a message to get this stuff suppressed. Is there something I'm missing here? Thanks for your vigilance.
Best, [[User:GeneralizationsAreBad|GAB]]<sup>[[User talk:GeneralizationsAreBad|Hello!]]</sup> 21:25, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
:Have no idea what the mission here is, but the IP does seem determined. Annoyingly so. Their quoting of policy and use of Wiki-speak tells me they are not new here. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 21:29, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
::Suppress, indef, rinse and repeat. [[User:GeneralizationsAreBad|GAB]]<sup>[[User talk:GeneralizationsAreBad|Hello!]]</sup> 21:31, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
== Deletion of others' talk page comments ==
[[File:Information orange.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Please do not [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#Editing comments|delete or edit]] legitimate talk page comments, as you did at [[: User talk:Stephkollm]]. Such edits are disruptive and appear to be [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalism]]. If you would like to experiment, please use the [[Wikipedia:Sandbox|sandbox]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-tpv2 --> [[Special:Contributions/32.218.35.60|32.218.35.60]] ([[User talk:32.218.35.60|talk]]) 21:26, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
:Nope. It's [[WP:OUTING]], and that's strictly prohibited. [[User:GeneralizationsAreBad|GAB]]<sup>[[User talk:GeneralizationsAreBad|Hello!]]</sup> 21:27, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
::Correct. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 21:27, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
== Ronald Reagan ==
Hello,
I'm confused about the "lack of citation" on my post about Ronald Reagan. I attempted to cite the Economics/Finance blog Calculated Risk. Does the citation not come up? If so, what are the steps necessary to properly include the citation?
Thanks,
[[User:Waltersjoe86|Waltersjoe86]] ([[User talk:Waltersjoe86|talk]]) 01:22, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
:Thanks for stopping by. The cite was there. The problem, {{U|Waltersjoe86}}, is a blog is not a reliable source. This was stated in the edit summary where I reverted your addition. There needs to be a reliable source accompanying such content -- especially a change in statistical content. Please see [[WP:CITE]] for a better understanding on what is acceptable reference-wise in Wikipedia. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 01:25, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Great, thanks for the clarification! I'll find a different source to cite.
[[User:Waltersjoe86|Waltersjoe86]] ([[User talk:Waltersjoe86|talk]]) 21:54, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
== Edit warning? ==
You placed a [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Checkingfax&diff=684843021&oldid=684831601 stern edit warning] on my Talk page. Care to elaborate? [[User:Checkingfax|Checkingfax]] ([[User talk:Checkingfax|talk]]) 03:51, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
:Looks pretty clear to me. What's confusing you? -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 03:55, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
== AfDs of blocked editor's articles ==
Please comment [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:JackTheVicar#From_Anna here], if you like. [[User:Anna Frodesiak|Anna Frodesiak]] ([[User talk:Anna Frodesiak|talk]]) 20:12, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
:No desire to comment there and dive headfirst into the drama. Especially since the user has previously told me to stay off his talk page. But thanks for the thoughtful notifcation/invitation, {{U|Anna Frodesiak|Anna}}. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 20:14, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
::Fair enough. What are your thoughts on holding off for a couple of days until it is sorted out? I have yet to start checking to see if his claim of innocence may be true. Are you planning on nominating more? Best, [[User:Anna Frodesiak|Anna Frodesiak]] ([[User talk:Anna Frodesiak|talk]]) 20:21, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
:::I'm finished with that work for now, {{U|Anna Frodesiak|Anna}}. As far as his claims to not be the banned user, I find it highly doubtful MikeV would have blocked JTV without an SPI and by using CU only if it were not certain they are one and the same. CU is about more than IP addresses for clues. There had to be very solid evidence against JTV for him to block in the manner he did. Regardless, even with simple steps of investigation regarding the usual signs of sockpuppetry taken, this could have easily been a good case for a [[WP:DUCK|Duck Block]]. I have faith in MikeV's determination, I imagine ArbCom will as well. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 21:30, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
::::I trust [[User:Mike V|Mike V]]'s judgement, of course. I first posted at JTV to start a dialogue with the view that the block is right. DENY is for trolls and vandals. Socks who sock because they think it is the right thing to do should be engaged. Nobody wants to hurt other people, especially volunteers. We spend time here that could be spent with puppies in the park. When someone socks, it hurts us, personally. It steals our time. And it hurts the project they are trying to help. I want socks to make a choice: Own up, make a deal, and come in from the cold ...or... understand that they are really causing harm even though they think they are helping, and stop. [[User:Anna Frodesiak|Anna Frodesiak]] ([[User talk:Anna Frodesiak|talk]]) 21:43, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
== G5 category ==
According to [[WP:G5]], "G5 should not be applied to transcluded templates or to '''categories that may be useful''' or suitable for merging." (emphasis added).
You nominated [[:Category:Papakating Creek watershed]], presumably because it was created by JackTheVicar. It looks to me like it might be a useful category. Do you disagree?--[[User:Sphilbrick|<span style="color:#000E2F;padding:0 4px;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">S Philbrick</span>]][[User talk:Sphilbrick|<span style=";padding:0 4px;color:# 000;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">(Talk)</span>]] 01:39, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
:I deleted [[:Category:Wildlife Management Areas in New Jersey]] before realizing the exception to G5, so let's discuss that one as well.--[[User:Sphilbrick|<span style="color:#000E2F;padding:0 4px;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">S Philbrick</span>]][[User talk:Sphilbrick|<span style=";padding:0 4px;color:# 000;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">(Talk)</span>]] 01:43, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
::I agree it's a useful category, {{U|Sphilbrick}}. I don't, however, agree that it should be kept and should be deleted per G5 but also the spirit behind [[WP:DENY]]. It appears that JTV/ColonelHenry is a long-time sockmaster who should really go into the [[WP:LTA]] category. Take a look at everything (several sections worth of discussion) at AN/I last year regarding this individual [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard&oldid=605351222#Checkuser_block_of_ColonelHenry_and_socks]. His antics (and they are quite extensive and messy) go back over a decade. After you take a look there, and you still think the category should stay with JTV as the category creator, I won't protest. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 01:45, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
:::I don't really need to review the history. I'm comfortable with the concept of DENY (while recognizing that editors have good faith disagreements with the policy.) It is my understanding that G5 exists specifically for the purpose of DENY. I think the transclusian exception exists because we don't want sensible policies generating unreasonable amounts of headache, and deleting trancluded templates would be cutting off our nose to spite your face. However, G5 specifically has an exception for useful categories. I don't know the history of the inclusion of that exception. It may simply be that while no particular article is critical to the encyclopedia and therefore the exclusion won't cause major harm and will achieve our goal of denying recognition, if a category was created that turns out to be useful, it may create more problems than it is worth to delete it. I don't want to belabor this too much but I'd be interested to know if anyone can shed light on the rationale for this exception in case I'm missing something important.
:::One other possibility is that I delete it and then someone perhaps you are I immediately then re-creates it. Does no copyright infringement for a single word or two, and perhaps that would achieve the goal of DENY while not depriving the encyclopedia of the useful category. Any thoughts?
:::I may post this at ANI to get broader input.--[[User:Sphilbrick|<span style="color:#000E2F;padding:0 4px;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">S Philbrick</span>]][[User talk:Sphilbrick|<span style=";padding:0 4px;color:# 000;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">(Talk)</span>]] 02:19, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
::::Your proposal to recreate it is one I have recommended to other editors when they balk at deleting an article or category due to G5/DENY, {{U|Sphilbrick}}. I see it as a win-win for Wikipedia as it keeps the legitimate category but removes the banned/blocked sock from the equation and any history in the creation of it. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 02:22, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
::::: It's a bigger challenge in the case of an article. If you save the text and then simply re-create it you've violated copyright. If you don't say the tax credit from scratch good for you but that's a lot of work. At least with a three word category you don't have to worry about either.
::::: This isn't a rush.
::::: I want to emphasize, because sometimes text doesn't convey the right connotation, that I'm not criticizing your nomination. I'm genuinely puzzled that an apparently clear-cut CSD category has two exceptions, one I understand (I think) while the other isn't quite so clear to me.
::::: There are also some additional complications. The editor in question denies being the originally blocked editor. I think that's being discussed behind the scenes and we shall hear at some time what they conclude. In addition to the two categories there is a good article in the mix.
::::: In terms of timing, I'm signing off for the evening, have a meeting in the morning, then have to rush off to another family meeting in another state. Expect to be back in the afternoon and will look to see if there's any update on the functionary review. Depending on the results of that, I may post something at ANI to see if the possibility of deleting and re-creating is a good idea or not.--[[User:Sphilbrick|<span style="color:#000E2F;padding:0 4px;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">S Philbrick</span>]][[User talk:Sphilbrick|<span style=";padding:0 4px;color:# 000;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">(Talk)</span>]] 02:54, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
::::::In terms of the article, considering what you have pointed out, it would be impractical and unwise, {{U|Sphilbrick}}. I'm not quite sure what the solution is, however, I have seen articles deleted but re-drafted later and then recreated. I do want to make it clear: my actions in regard to the articles and such created and edited by the editor in question, have been nothing less than honorable and never for the purpose of anything other than what is right and for the good of the encyclopedia. Certainly not a personal vendetta. I state this only because I am being accused by some of having nefarious motives with the reverts and AfDs and speedy deletion noms I have made today. As far as that editor now blocked, this ''will'' all be clear in time. As I have said elsewhere in the last several hours, I have faith in MikeV's decision to block and why. I am confident that the CU he performed was correct and that he wouldn't have blocked in the manner he did unless the results were without question. And yes, no rush. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 03:06, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
:::::::I saw, without looking closely, that there were other aspersions cast at you. That was part of the reason I made the comment I did. Without comment on any of the other issues, I fully support the action you took in this case and we are, as editors are supposed to do, talking it through, to make sure that conflicting priorities are handled correctly.--[[User:Sphilbrick|<span style="color:#000E2F;padding:0 4px;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">S Philbrick</span>]][[User talk:Sphilbrick|<span style=";padding:0 4px;color:# 000;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">(Talk)</span>]] 12:57, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
== ''The Signpost'': 28 October 2015 ==
<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2015-10-28}}
</div><!--Volume 11, Issue 43-->
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
* '''[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost|Read this Signpost in full]]'''
* [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Single/2015-10-28|Single-page]]
* [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe|Unsubscribe]]
* [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 18:12, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
</div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:LivingBot@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Tools/Spamlist&oldid=688317023 -->
== Advice ==
I'm looking for a more experienced editor to help me with a potential BLP issue. I made this edit [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=A_Voice_for_Men&diff=689297849&oldid=687774391] to remove a claim implying (if not directly claiming) criminal fraud. The source for the claim is a single buzzfeed article, which I understood as insufficient for negative BLP claims. My removal was reverted [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=A_Voice_for_Men&diff=next&oldid=689297849]. Is my understanding of sourcing requirements wrong? If not, can you advise me on how to proceed? I don't intend to edit war. Thank you. [[Special:Contributions/107.150.94.5|107.150.94.5]] ([[User talk:107.150.94.5|talk]]) 06:02, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
:As the reverting editor pointed out in his edit summary, previous discussion on the article talk page is in regard to Buzzfeed being a reliable source. I don't think you can do anything more, considering such. And be careful not to violate [[WP:3RR]] should you continue editing there over the next 24 hours. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 06:10, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
== ''The Signpost'': 04 November 2015 ==
<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2015-11-04}}
</div><!--Volume 11, Issue 44-->
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
* '''[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost|Read this Signpost in full]]'''
* [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Single/2015-11-04|Single-page]]
* [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe|Unsubscribe]]
* [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 18:29, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
</div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:LivingBot@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Tools/Spamlist&oldid=689126237 -->' |
New page wikitext, after the edit (new_wikitext) | '{{Rollback topicon
|icon_nr=1}}
{{reviewer topicon
|icon_nr=2}}
{{CVU topicon|status=member|icon_nr=3}}
{{Twinkle topicon | icon_nr =4}}
{{trout me}}
<br/>
{{talkheader}}
<br>
{{editnotice
| header = Hi, welcome to my talk page!
| headerstyle = font-size: 150%; color: #9900FF; font-family: 'Copperplate Gothic Light'
| text =
*You will often find me patrolling the [[WP:Recent changes|"Recent changes"]] page, looking for vandalism by IP addresses and [[WP:Reviewer|reviewing]] to either accept or reject pending changes.
*I'm only human and I make plenty of errors - if you are here to complain about a tag, a warning, a deletion, or something I've said, please [[WP:AGF|'''assume good faith''']].
* If you've had any kind of issue or misunderstanding in your dealings with me, there is an excellent article/essay on Wikipedia editors with Asperger Syndrome found [[Wikipedia:High-functioning autism and Asperger's editors|here]] that might help.
:{{User:UBX/Aspergers}}
*'''If you're here because of an editing issue or a revert I've made to one or more of your edits and you feel I've made an error, please leave me a ''[[WP:CIVIL|civil]]'' message on my [[User talk:Winkelvi|talk page]]. '''Being '''rude''' will [[WP:BAIT|get you nowhere]].
*If ''you'' have erred, chances are I'll help you get round it and over it, but [[WP:GAME|'''I don't like game players''']]
*If you're here to whine, complain, or express anger, please go elsewhere. Any whining, complaining, angry or trolling posts are subject to immediate deletion.
*When you leave a message on my talk page and a response from me is appropriate, I will reply to you here, not on your talk page. Having half a conversation on a talk page and going back and forth between pages is unnecessarily confusing and a pain in the ass.
*Thanks for stopping by! -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span>
| textstyle = font-size: 100%; color: #555555; background-color: #DDDDDD
| image = {{Veteran Editor III}}
}}
<br>
== Request for advice on whether to report potential edit warring ==
I would like to ask your advice on whether or not I should report Ring Cinema for edit warring, since his editing may not explicitly violate the 3RR, but as I understand it you have [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RRArchive256#User:Ring_Cinema_reported_by_User:Rationalobserver_.28Result:_locked.3B_Ring_Cinema_warned.29 noted he is a persist edit warrer (around September 19, 2014]. The edits in question on his current edit warring revolve around two Michael Caine films, [[Deathtrap (film)]] and [[Sleuth (1972 film)]] Two days ago I added a sentence to the leads of both of these article noting the similarities of these films, and providing citations of reviews by Roger Ebert and Janet Maslin that explicitly mention the similarities between these films, as well as three published books that mention the similarities. Yesterday Ring Cinema repeatedly reverted these changes on the Deathtrap article. At that point, I attempted to start a discussion with him. Since then, he has reverted the change again. This is his third revert. His first revert was 16:25, 4 August 2015, and his last revert was 16:51, 5 August 2015. At 16:51, 5 August 2015, he also reverted the almost exact same sentence in the Sleuth article. So while it's two different articles, it is the exact same issue with the exact same editors in the two articles, and he is at 4 reverts of it in barely over 24 hours. This feels like edit warring if not a cut-and-dried violation of 3RR. I have opened a discussion of the content dispute on [[WP:DRN]], but do you think I should also go to ANI/3rr? [[User:Mmyers1976|Mmyers1976]] ([[User talk:Mmyers1976|talk]]) 20:31, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
:Report him if you think his actions are deserving of being reported, {{U|Mmyers1976}}. I have no opinion one way or the other. Yes, he and I have tangled previously, but I don't hold any animosity toward him and I'm certainly not looking for reasons to see him taken to a noticeboard. If you believe it's as cut and dried as you say, do what you think is appropriate. If you, however, have been edit warring as well, be prepared for a possible [[WP:BOOMERANG]]. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 20:34, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
::I asked because I believe it's not cut and dried, it's more of those ambiguous situations like he was warned about before, and also because of the open DRN discussion, I don't want to look like I'm forum-shopping. I counted and have 3 reverts on the Deathtrap article, and then I stopped and discussed. Even though he has reverted me again on that article, I have let it stand pending the DRN. I have not reverted at all on the Sleuth article, and I have let his revert stand pending the DRN, so I ''believe'' I'm clear of an edit warring boomerang charge. [[User:Mmyers1976|Mmyers1976]] ([[User talk:Mmyers1976|talk]]) 20:43, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
:::I see you have also asked {{U|Drmies}} for advice. I would go with whatever he says. I've found his advice wise and unbiased as well as trustworthy. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 20:48, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
::::Thanks, will do. [[User:Mmyers1976|Mmyers1976]] ([[User talk:Mmyers1976|talk]]) 20:50, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
:::::Too much praise, Winkelvi. I'm a bit mobile and the keyboard is sticky (it's in Alabama, as am I), and I haven't looked at diffs yet, so pardon the brevity. But y'all, realize that [[WP:AN3]] is also [[WP:EWN]], that is, [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring]]--in other words, while the template may suggest it's all about three reverts, it's a noticeboard for edit warring, and that's a broader thing than just 3R violations. You might say that's more liberal, but it's also intended, I believe, to bring to admin attention the more persistent edit warriors who tend to work long-term, outside of the clear bright line of 3R. So if you're suspecting someone of such edit warring, and if, of course, you're not the only one reverting them, you may well report it--just write up a good report in which you lay out the case.<p>It may be (but this is possibly not of any interest to you) that the "punishment" is different. Clear 3R violations are frequently met with a short block to prevent 4R, 5R, etc.; long-term edit warring violations sometimes call for different matters, and it may be that the matter ends up on ANI for POV editing or whatever. But don't be afraid to report edit warring: {{U|Bbb23}} and {{U|EdJohnston}} know what they're doing. Thanks, [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 22:06, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
::::::Thanks, great info, helped my understanding a lot. replied in full on your talk. [[User:Mmyers1976|Mmyers1976]] ([[User talk:Mmyers1976|talk]]) 22:41, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I just received your message. The reason I changed the information regarding Meredith's date of birth, which I'm assuming is the reason for your message, is because of a photo Josh Duggar just posted of his daughter. In the caption of the photo he says that Meredith is one month old today which would indicate that she had been born on July 16th and not July 19th. I think they simply announced the birth on July 19th in order to give Anna time to rest and the children a chance to bond with their new sister. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Beckym1983|Beckym1983]] ([[User talk:Beckym1983|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Beckym1983|contribs]]) 17:40, 16 August 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
==Duggar date==
Hi, I just received your message. The reason I changed the information regarding Meredith's date of birth, which I'm assuming is the reason for your message, is because of a photo Josh Duggar just posted of his daughter. In the caption of the photo he says that Meredith is one month old today which would indicate that she had been born on July 16th and not July 19th. I think they simply announced the birth on July 19th in order to give Anna time to rest and the children a chance to bond with their new sister. ([[User:Beckym1983|Beckym1983]] ([[User talk:Beckym1983|talk]]) 17:42, 16 August 2015 (UTC))
:Thanks for responding, {{U|Beckym1983}}. It's important that when content is changed -- especially dates -- that you give a reason for the change in the [[WP:EDITSUMMARY|edit summary]] and that a reliable source is provided to support the change. As far as I know (without looking first), I believe the 19th date is sourced. I will check to make sure that's the case. If not, then we can look into the 16th date for accuracy and change that content accordingly. Thanks for wanting to edit for accuracy! -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 17:46, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
== Ted Cruz Edit ==
Thanks for your note regarding my recent edit to Ted Cruz. I saw that resource you flagged referenced on a page for another candidate and thought it was useful for establishing ideological context, do you have suggestions on how to be able to provide that type of information from resources like Crowdpac in a way that isn't promotional? Thank you. [[User:Dapcrescendo9|Dapcrescendo9]] ([[User talk:Dapcrescendo9|talk]]) 18:09, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
:{{U|Dapcrescendo9}}, the addition of the content was problematic from three aspects: It's not from a reliable source, it's from a biased source, and the source is promotional/spam in nature. You may not have intended for it to be "spammy", but it would likely be seen as such, regardless. The biased nature of the source you provided is also not acceptable. If you are able to find an unbiased, reliable source that can support that content, you are welcome to add it to the article. As it is, however, we cannot accept the content. Please see [[WP:SPAM]], [[WP:REF]], and [[WP:NPOV]] for more. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 18:14, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
::{{U|Winkelvi}}, thanks very much for your response, very helpful. Can you help me understand how the source is biased? One of the things I found useful about them is that they appear to be very objective politically outside of the issue of money in politics. I found their scoring model to be useful in that it is based on objective analysis of campaign contributions, and have seen them cited a few different places. I've seen similar methodology to the one they used from sources like fivethirtyeight.com<ref>{{cite web|title=Is Jeb Bush Too Liberal To Win The Republican Nomination In 2016?|url=http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/jeb-bush-president-republican-primary-2016/|date=August 18, 2015}}</ref> and have seen their data cited in a few major media outlets<ref>{{cite web|title=Crowdpac in the news|url=https://www.crowdpac.com/about/media|date=August 18, 2015}}</ref>. I very much appreciate you taking the time to respond to me and am just looking to better understand how bias is being defined. Would it be better to combine that data with other sources that have included that data or similar data? Thanks again. [[User:Dapcrescendo9|Dapcrescendo9]] ([[User talk:Dapcrescendo9|talk]]) 18:50, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
{{reflist}}
:::It's biased because it is a pro-Conservative political action group, even though they claim to be non-partisan, the group's founder is a strong Conservative and much of their reports are anti-Liberal. Beyond this, addition of the source you provided is promotional. At the top of the chart was a solicitation for funds to the Conservative candidates listed. The inclusion of such is inappropriate. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 19:08, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
==Walker==
Hi Winkelvi. FYI: [[Wikipedia:Graphics_Lab/Photography_workshop#Scott_Walker]][[User:Anythingyouwant|Anythingyouwant]] ([[User talk:Anythingyouwant|talk]]) 01:44, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
== George Takei ==
Could you please let me know what you were referring to as "relevant information" for the George Takei article I edited. Both sections I edited seemed to have nitpicking information that wasn't necessarily relevant to the page. Thanks!
[[User:Mitchmasontim|Mitchmasontim]] ([[User talk:Mitchmasontim|talk]]) 17:50, 20 August 2015 (UTC)Mitchmasontim
:If it happened and is written in a manner consistent with policy on [[WP:BLP|Wikipedia biographies of living persons (BLPs)]], [[WP:NOTABLE|notablity]], and [[WP:REF|citing reliable references]], then it's inclusion-worthy. We don't keep negative content out of BLPs just because it's negative (which was the reasoning for removal you cited in the edit summary). -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 17:54, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
== Jared Fogle ==
Hasn't Jared publicly admitted to having sex below the age of consent (which is 16, 17 or 18 depending on what state you're in). Well, I still find the pedophilia category inaccurate. Pedophilia is a medical diagnosis and while it has been said he has a medical condition and will be receiving treatment for sexual disorders, they haven't specifically said he has pedophilia. [[User:Clr324|Andrea Carter]] ([[User talk:Clr324|at your service]] | [[Special:Contributions/Clr324|my good deeds]]) 22:57, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
:Yes, he has had sex with minors and that is one of the things he was charged with. He was not charged with rape. He has also been charged with being in possession of and distributing child pornography. You could be right about the pedophilia category, however, you are incorrect to add a category for rape. Categories, of course, have to be supported by article content as well as reliable sources. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 23:00, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
::Isn't sex with people under 16 considered rape? I am probably right about the pedophilia category. In order to be diagnosed with pedophilia you must be '''primarily''' attracted to people under 11 (something that doesn't appear to be true with him). He has a sexual disorder but until he has a diagnosis he shouldn't be in the pedophilia category. [[User:Clr324|Andrea Carter]] ([[User talk:Clr324|at your service]] | [[Special:Contributions/Clr324|my good deeds]]) 23:10, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
:::Rape has different definitions. That said, if the sources don't support that he raped anyone, and the charges don't say he raped anyone, then we don't say he raped anyone. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 23:16, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
::::You're right. [[User:Clr324|Andrea Carter]] ([[User talk:Clr324|at your service]] | [[Special:Contributions/Clr324|my good deeds]]) 23:18, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
== Canvassing ==
Hi, I just read your post on [[WP:RSN]]. Informing noticeboards of RFC's that have questions are normally dealt with on those boards is not canvassing. You can [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment#Publicizing_an_RfC read here] for other appropriate places to publicise a RFC that are not canvassing. [[User:AlbinoFerret|<span style="color:white; background-color:#534545; font-weight: bold; font-size: 90%;">AlbinoFerret</span>]] 00:22, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
:Thanks for the heads-up, {{U|AlbinoFerret}}. With the other comments left in conjunction with the RfC notification, there was an intent for something else. Trust me on this. As always, it's good to hear from you - I hope you are well. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 00:25, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
::Yes, the statement was not neutral, but I wanted you to know what is acceptable so that you dont make unintentional false statements. I'm doing good, hope you are also. [[User:AlbinoFerret|<span style="color:white; background-color:#534545; font-weight: bold; font-size: 90%;">AlbinoFerret</span>]] 00:40, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
:::I appreciate it. Glad you are doing well -- I am, also! -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 00:41, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
== FrozenFan2? ==
You might want to look at Meg0n00by as a possible sock. [[User:Beyond My Ken|BMK]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 14:43, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
:I will. Thanks for letting me know, {{U|Beyond My Ken|BMK}}. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 18:33, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
== Duggar ==
Hello,
"In 1984, Duggar Michelle Ruark." doesn't sound grammatical to me.
Is there a quirk of the English language that makes it correct to omit the word "married"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jim_Bob_Duggar&diff=679158632&oldid=679156228
[[Special:Contributions/15.211.201.85|15.211.201.85]] ([[User talk:15.211.201.85|talk]]) 20:27, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
That was an error on my part, thought I corrected it, but didn't. My apologies for any confusion. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 20:38, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
== On Denali ==
Come on, you know it's true. [[Special:Contributions/24.255.44.92|24.255.44.92]] ([[User talk:24.255.44.92|talk]]) 05:47, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:{{tps}} Which is completely beside the point. Follow the link he helpfully provided to you and learn how to use article talk pages correctly. ―[[User:Mandruss|<span style="color:#775C57;">'''''Mandruss'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Mandruss|<span style="color:#AAA;">☎</span>]] 05:57, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:[[User:24.255.44.92]], you're being disruptive just for the sake of being disruptive. Talk pages are [[WP:NOTAFORUM|not a forum]]. If that's what you're looking for, do it outside Wikipedia, not here. And if you didn't come to my talk page to truly discuss, rather, to just stir the pot some more, please stay off this page. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 15:40, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
::(Notifications - any kind of ping, reverts, etc - don't work for IPs. However, as I understand it, they do get the yellow "you have new messages" bar if you post on their talk page.) ―[[User:Mandruss|<span style="color:#775C57;">'''''Mandruss'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Mandruss|<span style="color:#AAA;">☎</span>]] 05:20, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
== [[Sidney Blackmer]] ==
Sorry, his house is probably notable enough for an article.— [[User:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#070">Vchimpanzee</span>]] • [[User talk:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#FA0"> talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contribs/Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#700">contributions</span>]] • 16:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:{{U|Vchimpanzee}}: What is the point of your message here? -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 16:46, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
::You reverted my split. You want this discussed first, Meanwhile, I'm going ahead and finishing the separate article and then we can decide what to do.— [[User:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#070">Vchimpanzee</span>]] • [[User talk:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#FA0"> talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contribs/Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#700">contributions</span>]] • 16:48, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:::Do whatever you feel you must do, {{U|Vchimpanzee}}, (as long as it complies with policy, that is). Removing a large section of an established article all on your own isn't a great idea. Please discuss per [[WP:BRD|BRD]] at the Blackmer article talk page as to why you believe the content doesn't belong in the Sidney Blackmer article. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 16:53, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
::::Okay. The article I am creating is about the man's house, not the man. I was waiting until I felt sure the house on its own was notable. I'm working on the talk page discussion now.— [[User:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#070">Vchimpanzee</span>]] • [[User talk:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#FA0"> talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contribs/Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#700">contributions</span>]] • 16:55, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:::::The template is in the article but due to a glitch repeatedly discussed on [[WP:VPT]] I can't see it. It may need fixing.— [[User:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#070">Vchimpanzee</span>]] • [[User talk:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#FA0"> talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contribs/Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#700">contributions</span>]] • 17:00, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
::::::Looking at the part of the article I removed before you reverted, Blackmer's name is hardly mentioned. His last name is used only as part of the name of the house, and his son who is of course not the subject of the article is mentioned. And by the way, I've learned to be suspicious of [[IPv6]] edits, and I noticed you restored to a version by an IPv6, which turned out to be vandalism.— [[User:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#070">Vchimpanzee</span>]] • [[User talk:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#FA0"> talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contribs/Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#700">contributions</span>]] • 17:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:::::::No one has commented on the split, but I believe I'm justified in my action. As long as I doubted the notability of the house, it was probably all right to have the details in the article. now, no one has questioned the house's notability and I think we are okay. — [[User:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#070">Vchimpanzee</span>]] • [[User talk:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#FA0"> talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contribs/Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#700">contributions</span>]] • 18:55, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
== Undid ==
I made a recent edit to Jesse Ventura's page changing his unit affiliation and using a website address that had 3 pages of factual interviews from various Vietnam era SEALs that was copyrighted by Bill Salsibury yet you deleted the footnote citing it wasnt a credible website, yet several other attached footnotes from other websites were left alone and thus were deemed credible. What is your criteria for credibility on a website? <small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/66.87.75.69|66.87.75.69]] ([[User talk:66.87.75.69|talk]]) 13:27, 17 September 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Well, it's not my criteria, it's Wikipedia's criteria for [[WP:VERIFY|verification of references]] and [[WP:REF|referencing]]. The The reference you provided is a self-published source and that's not acceptable for referencing. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 00:15, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
== Ahmed Arrest ==
I think you are misreading the press release. There's a possible distinction with juveniles regarding custody but the reasons for taking him to a juvenile detention center for processing is functionally equivalent to an arrest. <s>"Taking him into custody" = "Arrested."</s> They cited the law he was arrested and that would have been the probable cause for taking into custody. For adults, they would not have been able to take a person into custody like that without an arrest. A [[Terry stop]] is a detention. People are making more out of handcuffing, though. It's generally policy in police departments that anyone arrested is handcuffed with hands behind their back while being transported unless a medical condition prevents it. After arrest and further investigation, they chose not to charge him but it doesn't negate the arrest. --[[User:DHeyward|DHeyward]] ([[User talk:DHeyward|talk]]) 05:05, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
:And I stand corrected that in Texas, for juveniles they explicitly state that "taken into custody" is not considered an "arrest" under the law. --[[User:DHeyward|DHeyward]] ([[User talk:DHeyward|talk]]) 05:16, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
I think his detention does constitute "arrest". The law in question (as I understand it) says that when someone has been arrested but is free not to disclose it, they can say "no" and be considered to have answered truthfully. I think that's because requiring them to say "yes but I'm not required to disclose this fact" would be incoherent: it would require them to disclose the fact in the course of saying that they're not required to. As I understand it, there is instead an implicit clause, in effect: it says only "Have you ever been arrested?", but it means "Have you ever been arrested, that isn't privileged from disclosure?" Furthermore, if I read it correctly, the Texas statute on kidnapping and unlawful restraint makes exception "when it is for the purpose of effecting a lawful arrest or detaining an individual lawfully arrested" -- not when it's either arrest or the substitute-for-arrest applicable a juvenile. (There are a bunch of clauses saying it's lawful to restrain a child, or for a child to restrain another child without force, intimidation, or deception. So I might have missed a pseudo-arrest clause in there. But I don't think so.) Nor do I think that this detention constitutes a ''Terry'' Stop. Here's how ''Terry'' describes arrest: ''An arrest is the initial stage of a criminal prosecution. It is intended to vindicate society's interest in having its laws obeyed, and it is inevitably accompanied by future interference with the individual's freedom of movement, whether or not trial or conviction ultimately follows.'' That's what they were doing. At that point, they suspected that he had perpetrated a bomb hoax, and were acting toward a possible prosecution for that offense. Finally, there's video of the police chief being asked about the "arrest", and not objecting to that description of what happened. --[[User:Dan Wylie-Sears 2|Dan Wylie-Sears 2]] ([[User talk:Dan Wylie-Sears 2|talk]]) 02:32, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
:I disagree. There is so much about this incident the media has gotten wrong (for instance, saying charges were dropped - there were never any charges filed) that I'm sick of reading the distortions of the truth in the news. Nothing personal, but I'm also sick of talking about whether he was arrested or not arrested, to be honest. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 02:36, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
== You really templated me ? ==
Nice going, but no. I'm enforcing WP:POLEMIC, consensus exists that his writing is polemic and per the policy, it needs to be removed, full stop. [[User:KoshVorlon|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">'''Kosh'''<span style="color:#CC4E5C"></span><span style="color:#008000">'''Vorlon'''</span></span>]] 16:43, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
:Yeah. Twice now. Cut the bullshit. You were told to move on. Do it before you get taken to a noticeboard and will surely be blocked. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 16:45, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
:: Yeah, cool story bro, but I have both consensus and policy on my side, you don't have anything except WP:ILIKEIT. Take it there, if you dare! [[User:KoshVorlon|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">'''Kosh'''<span style="color:#CC4E5C"></span><span style="color:#008000">'''Vorlon'''</span></span>]] 16:51, 28 September 2015 (UTC) PS: You reverted me with Twinkle and you referred to me edit as vandalism, which it wasn't. That's a mis-use of Twinkle, better read the manual again sport! [[User:KoshVorlon|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">'''Kosh'''<span style="color:#CC4E5C"></span><span style="color:#008000">'''Vorlon'''</span></span>]] 17:06, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
:::Where is this alleged consensus to be found and viewed? -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 17:08, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
::::It was in the edit summary [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:User_pages&oldid=683172647&diff=prev | here ]. [[User:KoshVorlon|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">'''Kosh'''<span style="color:#CC4E5C"></span><span style="color:#008000">'''Vorlon'''</span></span>]] 17:22, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
{{od}}As I said: Blocked for disruptive behavior. You should have seen it coming. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 17:26, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
== Outing Attempt ==
I've warned the IP once more and sent a message to get this stuff suppressed. Is there something I'm missing here? Thanks for your vigilance.
Best, [[User:GeneralizationsAreBad|GAB]]<sup>[[User talk:GeneralizationsAreBad|Hello!]]</sup> 21:25, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
:Have no idea what the mission here is, but the IP does seem determined. Annoyingly so. Their quoting of policy and use of Wiki-speak tells me they are not new here. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 21:29, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
::Suppress, indef, rinse and repeat. [[User:GeneralizationsAreBad|GAB]]<sup>[[User talk:GeneralizationsAreBad|Hello!]]</sup> 21:31, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
== Deletion of others' talk page comments ==
[[File:Information orange.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Please do not [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#Editing comments|delete or edit]] legitimate talk page comments, as you did at [[: User talk:Stephkollm]]. Such edits are disruptive and appear to be [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalism]]. If you would like to experiment, please use the [[Wikipedia:Sandbox|sandbox]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-tpv2 --> [[Special:Contributions/32.218.35.60|32.218.35.60]] ([[User talk:32.218.35.60|talk]]) 21:26, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
:Nope. It's [[WP:OUTING]], and that's strictly prohibited. [[User:GeneralizationsAreBad|GAB]]<sup>[[User talk:GeneralizationsAreBad|Hello!]]</sup> 21:27, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
::Correct. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 21:27, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
== Ronald Reagan ==
Hello,
I'm confused about the "lack of citation" on my post about Ronald Reagan. I attempted to cite the Economics/Finance blog Calculated Risk. Does the citation not come up? If so, what are the steps necessary to properly include the citation?
Thanks,
[[User:Waltersjoe86|Waltersjoe86]] ([[User talk:Waltersjoe86|talk]]) 01:22, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
:Thanks for stopping by. The cite was there. The problem, {{U|Waltersjoe86}}, is a blog is not a reliable source. This was stated in the edit summary where I reverted your addition. There needs to be a reliable source accompanying such content -- especially a change in statistical content. Please see [[WP:CITE]] for a better understanding on what is acceptable reference-wise in Wikipedia. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 01:25, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Great, thanks for the clarification! I'll find a different source to cite.
[[User:Waltersjoe86|Waltersjoe86]] ([[User talk:Waltersjoe86|talk]]) 21:54, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
== Edit warning? ==
You placed a [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Checkingfax&diff=684843021&oldid=684831601 stern edit warning] on my Talk page. Care to elaborate? [[User:Checkingfax|Checkingfax]] ([[User talk:Checkingfax|talk]]) 03:51, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
:Looks pretty clear to me. What's confusing you? -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 03:55, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
== AfDs of blocked editor's articles ==
Please comment [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:JackTheVicar#From_Anna here], if you like. [[User:Anna Frodesiak|Anna Frodesiak]] ([[User talk:Anna Frodesiak|talk]]) 20:12, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
:No desire to comment there and dive headfirst into the drama. Especially since the user has previously told me to stay off his talk page. But thanks for the thoughtful notifcation/invitation, {{U|Anna Frodesiak|Anna}}. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 20:14, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
::Fair enough. What are your thoughts on holding off for a couple of days until it is sorted out? I have yet to start checking to see if his claim of innocence may be true. Are you planning on nominating more? Best, [[User:Anna Frodesiak|Anna Frodesiak]] ([[User talk:Anna Frodesiak|talk]]) 20:21, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
:::I'm finished with that work for now, {{U|Anna Frodesiak|Anna}}. As far as his claims to not be the banned user, I find it highly doubtful MikeV would have blocked JTV without an SPI and by using CU only if it were not certain they are one and the same. CU is about more than IP addresses for clues. There had to be very solid evidence against JTV for him to block in the manner he did. Regardless, even with simple steps of investigation regarding the usual signs of sockpuppetry taken, this could have easily been a good case for a [[WP:DUCK|Duck Block]]. I have faith in MikeV's determination, I imagine ArbCom will as well. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 21:30, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
::::I trust [[User:Mike V|Mike V]]'s judgement, of course. I first posted at JTV to start a dialogue with the view that the block is right. DENY is for trolls and vandals. Socks who sock because they think it is the right thing to do should be engaged. Nobody wants to hurt other people, especially volunteers. We spend time here that could be spent with puppies in the park. When someone socks, it hurts us, personally. It steals our time. And it hurts the project they are trying to help. I want socks to make a choice: Own up, make a deal, and come in from the cold ...or... understand that they are really causing harm even though they think they are helping, and stop. [[User:Anna Frodesiak|Anna Frodesiak]] ([[User talk:Anna Frodesiak|talk]]) 21:43, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
== G5 category ==
According to [[WP:G5]], "G5 should not be applied to transcluded templates or to '''categories that may be useful''' or suitable for merging." (emphasis added).
You nominated [[:Category:Papakating Creek watershed]], presumably because it was created by JackTheVicar. It looks to me like it might be a useful category. Do you disagree?--[[User:Sphilbrick|<span style="color:#000E2F;padding:0 4px;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">S Philbrick</span>]][[User talk:Sphilbrick|<span style=";padding:0 4px;color:# 000;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">(Talk)</span>]] 01:39, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
:I deleted [[:Category:Wildlife Management Areas in New Jersey]] before realizing the exception to G5, so let's discuss that one as well.--[[User:Sphilbrick|<span style="color:#000E2F;padding:0 4px;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">S Philbrick</span>]][[User talk:Sphilbrick|<span style=";padding:0 4px;color:# 000;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">(Talk)</span>]] 01:43, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
::I agree it's a useful category, {{U|Sphilbrick}}. I don't, however, agree that it should be kept and should be deleted per G5 but also the spirit behind [[WP:DENY]]. It appears that JTV/ColonelHenry is a long-time sockmaster who should really go into the [[WP:LTA]] category. Take a look at everything (several sections worth of discussion) at AN/I last year regarding this individual [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard&oldid=605351222#Checkuser_block_of_ColonelHenry_and_socks]. His antics (and they are quite extensive and messy) go back over a decade. After you take a look there, and you still think the category should stay with JTV as the category creator, I won't protest. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 01:45, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
:::I don't really need to review the history. I'm comfortable with the concept of DENY (while recognizing that editors have good faith disagreements with the policy.) It is my understanding that G5 exists specifically for the purpose of DENY. I think the transclusian exception exists because we don't want sensible policies generating unreasonable amounts of headache, and deleting trancluded templates would be cutting off our nose to spite your face. However, G5 specifically has an exception for useful categories. I don't know the history of the inclusion of that exception. It may simply be that while no particular article is critical to the encyclopedia and therefore the exclusion won't cause major harm and will achieve our goal of denying recognition, if a category was created that turns out to be useful, it may create more problems than it is worth to delete it. I don't want to belabor this too much but I'd be interested to know if anyone can shed light on the rationale for this exception in case I'm missing something important.
:::One other possibility is that I delete it and then someone perhaps you are I immediately then re-creates it. Does no copyright infringement for a single word or two, and perhaps that would achieve the goal of DENY while not depriving the encyclopedia of the useful category. Any thoughts?
:::I may post this at ANI to get broader input.--[[User:Sphilbrick|<span style="color:#000E2F;padding:0 4px;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">S Philbrick</span>]][[User talk:Sphilbrick|<span style=";padding:0 4px;color:# 000;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">(Talk)</span>]] 02:19, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
::::Your proposal to recreate it is one I have recommended to other editors when they balk at deleting an article or category due to G5/DENY, {{U|Sphilbrick}}. I see it as a win-win for Wikipedia as it keeps the legitimate category but removes the banned/blocked sock from the equation and any history in the creation of it. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 02:22, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
::::: It's a bigger challenge in the case of an article. If you save the text and then simply re-create it you've violated copyright. If you don't say the tax credit from scratch good for you but that's a lot of work. At least with a three word category you don't have to worry about either.
::::: This isn't a rush.
::::: I want to emphasize, because sometimes text doesn't convey the right connotation, that I'm not criticizing your nomination. I'm genuinely puzzled that an apparently clear-cut CSD category has two exceptions, one I understand (I think) while the other isn't quite so clear to me.
::::: There are also some additional complications. The editor in question denies being the originally blocked editor. I think that's being discussed behind the scenes and we shall hear at some time what they conclude. In addition to the two categories there is a good article in the mix.
::::: In terms of timing, I'm signing off for the evening, have a meeting in the morning, then have to rush off to another family meeting in another state. Expect to be back in the afternoon and will look to see if there's any update on the functionary review. Depending on the results of that, I may post something at ANI to see if the possibility of deleting and re-creating is a good idea or not.--[[User:Sphilbrick|<span style="color:#000E2F;padding:0 4px;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">S Philbrick</span>]][[User talk:Sphilbrick|<span style=";padding:0 4px;color:# 000;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">(Talk)</span>]] 02:54, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
::::::In terms of the article, considering what you have pointed out, it would be impractical and unwise, {{U|Sphilbrick}}. I'm not quite sure what the solution is, however, I have seen articles deleted but re-drafted later and then recreated. I do want to make it clear: my actions in regard to the articles and such created and edited by the editor in question, have been nothing less than honorable and never for the purpose of anything other than what is right and for the good of the encyclopedia. Certainly not a personal vendetta. I state this only because I am being accused by some of having nefarious motives with the reverts and AfDs and speedy deletion noms I have made today. As far as that editor now blocked, this ''will'' all be clear in time. As I have said elsewhere in the last several hours, I have faith in MikeV's decision to block and why. I am confident that the CU he performed was correct and that he wouldn't have blocked in the manner he did unless the results were without question. And yes, no rush. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 03:06, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
:::::::I saw, without looking closely, that there were other aspersions cast at you. That was part of the reason I made the comment I did. Without comment on any of the other issues, I fully support the action you took in this case and we are, as editors are supposed to do, talking it through, to make sure that conflicting priorities are handled correctly.--[[User:Sphilbrick|<span style="color:#000E2F;padding:0 4px;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">S Philbrick</span>]][[User talk:Sphilbrick|<span style=";padding:0 4px;color:# 000;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">(Talk)</span>]] 12:57, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
== ''The Signpost'': 28 October 2015 ==
<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2015-10-28}}
</div><!--Volume 11, Issue 43-->
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
* '''[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost|Read this Signpost in full]]'''
* [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Single/2015-10-28|Single-page]]
* [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe|Unsubscribe]]
* [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 18:12, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
</div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:LivingBot@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Tools/Spamlist&oldid=688317023 -->
== Advice ==
I'm looking for a more experienced editor to help me with a potential BLP issue. I made this edit [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=A_Voice_for_Men&diff=689297849&oldid=687774391] to remove a claim implying (if not directly claiming) criminal fraud. The source for the claim is a single buzzfeed article, which I understood as insufficient for negative BLP claims. My removal was reverted [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=A_Voice_for_Men&diff=next&oldid=689297849]. Is my understanding of sourcing requirements wrong? If not, can you advise me on how to proceed? I don't intend to edit war. Thank you. [[Special:Contributions/107.150.94.5|107.150.94.5]] ([[User talk:107.150.94.5|talk]]) 06:02, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
:As the reverting editor pointed out in his edit summary, previous discussion on the article talk page is in regard to Buzzfeed being a reliable source. I don't think you can do anything more, considering such. And be careful not to violate [[WP:3RR]] should you continue editing there over the next 24 hours. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 06:10, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
== ''The Signpost'': 04 November 2015 ==
<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2015-11-04}}
</div><!--Volume 11, Issue 44-->
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
* '''[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost|Read this Signpost in full]]'''
* [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Single/2015-11-04|Single-page]]
* [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe|Unsubscribe]]
* [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 18:29, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
</div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:LivingBot@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Tools/Spamlist&oldid=689126237 -->
== Discretionary sanctions notice - American politics ==
{{subst:alert|ap}} ~~~~' |
Unified diff of changes made by edit (edit_diff) | '@@ -274,3 +274,7 @@
</div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:LivingBot@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Tools/Spamlist&oldid=689126237 -->
+
+== Discretionary sanctions notice - American politics ==
+
+{{subst:alert|ap}} ~~~~
' |
Unified diff of changes made by edit, pre-save transformed (edit_diff_pst) | '@@ -274,3 +274,14 @@
</div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:LivingBot@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Tools/Spamlist&oldid=689126237 -->
+
+== Discretionary sanctions notice - American politics ==
+
+{{Ivm|2=''This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does '''not''' imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.''
+
+'''Please carefully read this information:'''
+
+The Arbitration Committee has authorised [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions|discretionary sanctions]] to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2|here]].
+
+Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means [[WP:INVOLVED|uninvolved]] administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the [[Wikipedia:Five pillars|purpose of Wikipedia]], our [[:Category:Wikipedia conduct policies|standards of behavior]], or relevant [[Wikipedia:List of policies|policies]]. Administrators may impose sanctions such as [[Wikipedia:Editing restrictions#Types of restrictions|editing restrictions]], [[Wikipedia:Banning policy#Types of bans|bans]], or [[WP:Blocking policy|blocks]]. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
+}}{{Z33}}<!-- Derived from Template:Ds/alert --> [[User:Slakr|<span style="color:teal;font-weight:bold;">slakr</span>]]<small><sup>\ [[User talk:Slakr|talk]] /</sup></small> 07:16, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
' |
New page size (new_size) | 50207 |
Old page size (old_size) | 50124 |
Size change in edit (edit_delta) | 83 |
Lines added in edit (added_lines) | [
0 => false,
1 => '== Discretionary sanctions notice - American politics ==',
2 => false,
3 => '{{subst:alert|ap}} ~~~~'
] |
Lines removed in edit (removed_lines) | [] |
New page wikitext, pre-save transformed (new_pst) | '{{Rollback topicon
|icon_nr=1}}
{{reviewer topicon
|icon_nr=2}}
{{CVU topicon|status=member|icon_nr=3}}
{{Twinkle topicon | icon_nr =4}}
{{trout me}}
<br/>
{{talkheader}}
<br>
{{editnotice
| header = Hi, welcome to my talk page!
| headerstyle = font-size: 150%; color: #9900FF; font-family: 'Copperplate Gothic Light'
| text =
*You will often find me patrolling the [[WP:Recent changes|"Recent changes"]] page, looking for vandalism by IP addresses and [[WP:Reviewer|reviewing]] to either accept or reject pending changes.
*I'm only human and I make plenty of errors - if you are here to complain about a tag, a warning, a deletion, or something I've said, please [[WP:AGF|'''assume good faith''']].
* If you've had any kind of issue or misunderstanding in your dealings with me, there is an excellent article/essay on Wikipedia editors with Asperger Syndrome found [[Wikipedia:High-functioning autism and Asperger's editors|here]] that might help.
:{{User:UBX/Aspergers}}
*'''If you're here because of an editing issue or a revert I've made to one or more of your edits and you feel I've made an error, please leave me a ''[[WP:CIVIL|civil]]'' message on my [[User talk:Winkelvi|talk page]]. '''Being '''rude''' will [[WP:BAIT|get you nowhere]].
*If ''you'' have erred, chances are I'll help you get round it and over it, but [[WP:GAME|'''I don't like game players''']]
*If you're here to whine, complain, or express anger, please go elsewhere. Any whining, complaining, angry or trolling posts are subject to immediate deletion.
*When you leave a message on my talk page and a response from me is appropriate, I will reply to you here, not on your talk page. Having half a conversation on a talk page and going back and forth between pages is unnecessarily confusing and a pain in the ass.
*Thanks for stopping by! -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span>
| textstyle = font-size: 100%; color: #555555; background-color: #DDDDDD
| image = {{Veteran Editor III}}
}}
<br>
== Request for advice on whether to report potential edit warring ==
I would like to ask your advice on whether or not I should report Ring Cinema for edit warring, since his editing may not explicitly violate the 3RR, but as I understand it you have [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RRArchive256#User:Ring_Cinema_reported_by_User:Rationalobserver_.28Result:_locked.3B_Ring_Cinema_warned.29 noted he is a persist edit warrer (around September 19, 2014]. The edits in question on his current edit warring revolve around two Michael Caine films, [[Deathtrap (film)]] and [[Sleuth (1972 film)]] Two days ago I added a sentence to the leads of both of these article noting the similarities of these films, and providing citations of reviews by Roger Ebert and Janet Maslin that explicitly mention the similarities between these films, as well as three published books that mention the similarities. Yesterday Ring Cinema repeatedly reverted these changes on the Deathtrap article. At that point, I attempted to start a discussion with him. Since then, he has reverted the change again. This is his third revert. His first revert was 16:25, 4 August 2015, and his last revert was 16:51, 5 August 2015. At 16:51, 5 August 2015, he also reverted the almost exact same sentence in the Sleuth article. So while it's two different articles, it is the exact same issue with the exact same editors in the two articles, and he is at 4 reverts of it in barely over 24 hours. This feels like edit warring if not a cut-and-dried violation of 3RR. I have opened a discussion of the content dispute on [[WP:DRN]], but do you think I should also go to ANI/3rr? [[User:Mmyers1976|Mmyers1976]] ([[User talk:Mmyers1976|talk]]) 20:31, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
:Report him if you think his actions are deserving of being reported, {{U|Mmyers1976}}. I have no opinion one way or the other. Yes, he and I have tangled previously, but I don't hold any animosity toward him and I'm certainly not looking for reasons to see him taken to a noticeboard. If you believe it's as cut and dried as you say, do what you think is appropriate. If you, however, have been edit warring as well, be prepared for a possible [[WP:BOOMERANG]]. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 20:34, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
::I asked because I believe it's not cut and dried, it's more of those ambiguous situations like he was warned about before, and also because of the open DRN discussion, I don't want to look like I'm forum-shopping. I counted and have 3 reverts on the Deathtrap article, and then I stopped and discussed. Even though he has reverted me again on that article, I have let it stand pending the DRN. I have not reverted at all on the Sleuth article, and I have let his revert stand pending the DRN, so I ''believe'' I'm clear of an edit warring boomerang charge. [[User:Mmyers1976|Mmyers1976]] ([[User talk:Mmyers1976|talk]]) 20:43, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
:::I see you have also asked {{U|Drmies}} for advice. I would go with whatever he says. I've found his advice wise and unbiased as well as trustworthy. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 20:48, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
::::Thanks, will do. [[User:Mmyers1976|Mmyers1976]] ([[User talk:Mmyers1976|talk]]) 20:50, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
:::::Too much praise, Winkelvi. I'm a bit mobile and the keyboard is sticky (it's in Alabama, as am I), and I haven't looked at diffs yet, so pardon the brevity. But y'all, realize that [[WP:AN3]] is also [[WP:EWN]], that is, [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring]]--in other words, while the template may suggest it's all about three reverts, it's a noticeboard for edit warring, and that's a broader thing than just 3R violations. You might say that's more liberal, but it's also intended, I believe, to bring to admin attention the more persistent edit warriors who tend to work long-term, outside of the clear bright line of 3R. So if you're suspecting someone of such edit warring, and if, of course, you're not the only one reverting them, you may well report it--just write up a good report in which you lay out the case.<p>It may be (but this is possibly not of any interest to you) that the "punishment" is different. Clear 3R violations are frequently met with a short block to prevent 4R, 5R, etc.; long-term edit warring violations sometimes call for different matters, and it may be that the matter ends up on ANI for POV editing or whatever. But don't be afraid to report edit warring: {{U|Bbb23}} and {{U|EdJohnston}} know what they're doing. Thanks, [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 22:06, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
::::::Thanks, great info, helped my understanding a lot. replied in full on your talk. [[User:Mmyers1976|Mmyers1976]] ([[User talk:Mmyers1976|talk]]) 22:41, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I just received your message. The reason I changed the information regarding Meredith's date of birth, which I'm assuming is the reason for your message, is because of a photo Josh Duggar just posted of his daughter. In the caption of the photo he says that Meredith is one month old today which would indicate that she had been born on July 16th and not July 19th. I think they simply announced the birth on July 19th in order to give Anna time to rest and the children a chance to bond with their new sister. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Beckym1983|Beckym1983]] ([[User talk:Beckym1983|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Beckym1983|contribs]]) 17:40, 16 August 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
==Duggar date==
Hi, I just received your message. The reason I changed the information regarding Meredith's date of birth, which I'm assuming is the reason for your message, is because of a photo Josh Duggar just posted of his daughter. In the caption of the photo he says that Meredith is one month old today which would indicate that she had been born on July 16th and not July 19th. I think they simply announced the birth on July 19th in order to give Anna time to rest and the children a chance to bond with their new sister. ([[User:Beckym1983|Beckym1983]] ([[User talk:Beckym1983|talk]]) 17:42, 16 August 2015 (UTC))
:Thanks for responding, {{U|Beckym1983}}. It's important that when content is changed -- especially dates -- that you give a reason for the change in the [[WP:EDITSUMMARY|edit summary]] and that a reliable source is provided to support the change. As far as I know (without looking first), I believe the 19th date is sourced. I will check to make sure that's the case. If not, then we can look into the 16th date for accuracy and change that content accordingly. Thanks for wanting to edit for accuracy! -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 17:46, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
== Ted Cruz Edit ==
Thanks for your note regarding my recent edit to Ted Cruz. I saw that resource you flagged referenced on a page for another candidate and thought it was useful for establishing ideological context, do you have suggestions on how to be able to provide that type of information from resources like Crowdpac in a way that isn't promotional? Thank you. [[User:Dapcrescendo9|Dapcrescendo9]] ([[User talk:Dapcrescendo9|talk]]) 18:09, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
:{{U|Dapcrescendo9}}, the addition of the content was problematic from three aspects: It's not from a reliable source, it's from a biased source, and the source is promotional/spam in nature. You may not have intended for it to be "spammy", but it would likely be seen as such, regardless. The biased nature of the source you provided is also not acceptable. If you are able to find an unbiased, reliable source that can support that content, you are welcome to add it to the article. As it is, however, we cannot accept the content. Please see [[WP:SPAM]], [[WP:REF]], and [[WP:NPOV]] for more. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 18:14, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
::{{U|Winkelvi}}, thanks very much for your response, very helpful. Can you help me understand how the source is biased? One of the things I found useful about them is that they appear to be very objective politically outside of the issue of money in politics. I found their scoring model to be useful in that it is based on objective analysis of campaign contributions, and have seen them cited a few different places. I've seen similar methodology to the one they used from sources like fivethirtyeight.com<ref>{{cite web|title=Is Jeb Bush Too Liberal To Win The Republican Nomination In 2016?|url=http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/jeb-bush-president-republican-primary-2016/|date=August 18, 2015}}</ref> and have seen their data cited in a few major media outlets<ref>{{cite web|title=Crowdpac in the news|url=https://www.crowdpac.com/about/media|date=August 18, 2015}}</ref>. I very much appreciate you taking the time to respond to me and am just looking to better understand how bias is being defined. Would it be better to combine that data with other sources that have included that data or similar data? Thanks again. [[User:Dapcrescendo9|Dapcrescendo9]] ([[User talk:Dapcrescendo9|talk]]) 18:50, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
{{reflist}}
:::It's biased because it is a pro-Conservative political action group, even though they claim to be non-partisan, the group's founder is a strong Conservative and much of their reports are anti-Liberal. Beyond this, addition of the source you provided is promotional. At the top of the chart was a solicitation for funds to the Conservative candidates listed. The inclusion of such is inappropriate. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 19:08, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
==Walker==
Hi Winkelvi. FYI: [[Wikipedia:Graphics_Lab/Photography_workshop#Scott_Walker]][[User:Anythingyouwant|Anythingyouwant]] ([[User talk:Anythingyouwant|talk]]) 01:44, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
== George Takei ==
Could you please let me know what you were referring to as "relevant information" for the George Takei article I edited. Both sections I edited seemed to have nitpicking information that wasn't necessarily relevant to the page. Thanks!
[[User:Mitchmasontim|Mitchmasontim]] ([[User talk:Mitchmasontim|talk]]) 17:50, 20 August 2015 (UTC)Mitchmasontim
:If it happened and is written in a manner consistent with policy on [[WP:BLP|Wikipedia biographies of living persons (BLPs)]], [[WP:NOTABLE|notablity]], and [[WP:REF|citing reliable references]], then it's inclusion-worthy. We don't keep negative content out of BLPs just because it's negative (which was the reasoning for removal you cited in the edit summary). -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 17:54, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
== Jared Fogle ==
Hasn't Jared publicly admitted to having sex below the age of consent (which is 16, 17 or 18 depending on what state you're in). Well, I still find the pedophilia category inaccurate. Pedophilia is a medical diagnosis and while it has been said he has a medical condition and will be receiving treatment for sexual disorders, they haven't specifically said he has pedophilia. [[User:Clr324|Andrea Carter]] ([[User talk:Clr324|at your service]] | [[Special:Contributions/Clr324|my good deeds]]) 22:57, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
:Yes, he has had sex with minors and that is one of the things he was charged with. He was not charged with rape. He has also been charged with being in possession of and distributing child pornography. You could be right about the pedophilia category, however, you are incorrect to add a category for rape. Categories, of course, have to be supported by article content as well as reliable sources. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 23:00, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
::Isn't sex with people under 16 considered rape? I am probably right about the pedophilia category. In order to be diagnosed with pedophilia you must be '''primarily''' attracted to people under 11 (something that doesn't appear to be true with him). He has a sexual disorder but until he has a diagnosis he shouldn't be in the pedophilia category. [[User:Clr324|Andrea Carter]] ([[User talk:Clr324|at your service]] | [[Special:Contributions/Clr324|my good deeds]]) 23:10, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
:::Rape has different definitions. That said, if the sources don't support that he raped anyone, and the charges don't say he raped anyone, then we don't say he raped anyone. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 23:16, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
::::You're right. [[User:Clr324|Andrea Carter]] ([[User talk:Clr324|at your service]] | [[Special:Contributions/Clr324|my good deeds]]) 23:18, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
== Canvassing ==
Hi, I just read your post on [[WP:RSN]]. Informing noticeboards of RFC's that have questions are normally dealt with on those boards is not canvassing. You can [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment#Publicizing_an_RfC read here] for other appropriate places to publicise a RFC that are not canvassing. [[User:AlbinoFerret|<span style="color:white; background-color:#534545; font-weight: bold; font-size: 90%;">AlbinoFerret</span>]] 00:22, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
:Thanks for the heads-up, {{U|AlbinoFerret}}. With the other comments left in conjunction with the RfC notification, there was an intent for something else. Trust me on this. As always, it's good to hear from you - I hope you are well. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 00:25, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
::Yes, the statement was not neutral, but I wanted you to know what is acceptable so that you dont make unintentional false statements. I'm doing good, hope you are also. [[User:AlbinoFerret|<span style="color:white; background-color:#534545; font-weight: bold; font-size: 90%;">AlbinoFerret</span>]] 00:40, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
:::I appreciate it. Glad you are doing well -- I am, also! -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 00:41, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
== FrozenFan2? ==
You might want to look at Meg0n00by as a possible sock. [[User:Beyond My Ken|BMK]] ([[User talk:Beyond My Ken|talk]]) 14:43, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
:I will. Thanks for letting me know, {{U|Beyond My Ken|BMK}}. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 18:33, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
== Duggar ==
Hello,
"In 1984, Duggar Michelle Ruark." doesn't sound grammatical to me.
Is there a quirk of the English language that makes it correct to omit the word "married"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jim_Bob_Duggar&diff=679158632&oldid=679156228
[[Special:Contributions/15.211.201.85|15.211.201.85]] ([[User talk:15.211.201.85|talk]]) 20:27, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
That was an error on my part, thought I corrected it, but didn't. My apologies for any confusion. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 20:38, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
== On Denali ==
Come on, you know it's true. [[Special:Contributions/24.255.44.92|24.255.44.92]] ([[User talk:24.255.44.92|talk]]) 05:47, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:{{tps}} Which is completely beside the point. Follow the link he helpfully provided to you and learn how to use article talk pages correctly. ―[[User:Mandruss|<span style="color:#775C57;">'''''Mandruss'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Mandruss|<span style="color:#AAA;">☎</span>]] 05:57, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:[[User:24.255.44.92]], you're being disruptive just for the sake of being disruptive. Talk pages are [[WP:NOTAFORUM|not a forum]]. If that's what you're looking for, do it outside Wikipedia, not here. And if you didn't come to my talk page to truly discuss, rather, to just stir the pot some more, please stay off this page. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 15:40, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
::(Notifications - any kind of ping, reverts, etc - don't work for IPs. However, as I understand it, they do get the yellow "you have new messages" bar if you post on their talk page.) ―[[User:Mandruss|<span style="color:#775C57;">'''''Mandruss'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Mandruss|<span style="color:#AAA;">☎</span>]] 05:20, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
== [[Sidney Blackmer]] ==
Sorry, his house is probably notable enough for an article.— [[User:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#070">Vchimpanzee</span>]] • [[User talk:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#FA0"> talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contribs/Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#700">contributions</span>]] • 16:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:{{U|Vchimpanzee}}: What is the point of your message here? -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 16:46, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
::You reverted my split. You want this discussed first, Meanwhile, I'm going ahead and finishing the separate article and then we can decide what to do.— [[User:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#070">Vchimpanzee</span>]] • [[User talk:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#FA0"> talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contribs/Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#700">contributions</span>]] • 16:48, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:::Do whatever you feel you must do, {{U|Vchimpanzee}}, (as long as it complies with policy, that is). Removing a large section of an established article all on your own isn't a great idea. Please discuss per [[WP:BRD|BRD]] at the Blackmer article talk page as to why you believe the content doesn't belong in the Sidney Blackmer article. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 16:53, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
::::Okay. The article I am creating is about the man's house, not the man. I was waiting until I felt sure the house on its own was notable. I'm working on the talk page discussion now.— [[User:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#070">Vchimpanzee</span>]] • [[User talk:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#FA0"> talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contribs/Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#700">contributions</span>]] • 16:55, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:::::The template is in the article but due to a glitch repeatedly discussed on [[WP:VPT]] I can't see it. It may need fixing.— [[User:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#070">Vchimpanzee</span>]] • [[User talk:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#FA0"> talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contribs/Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#700">contributions</span>]] • 17:00, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
::::::Looking at the part of the article I removed before you reverted, Blackmer's name is hardly mentioned. His last name is used only as part of the name of the house, and his son who is of course not the subject of the article is mentioned. And by the way, I've learned to be suspicious of [[IPv6]] edits, and I noticed you restored to a version by an IPv6, which turned out to be vandalism.— [[User:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#070">Vchimpanzee</span>]] • [[User talk:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#FA0"> talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contribs/Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#700">contributions</span>]] • 17:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
:::::::No one has commented on the split, but I believe I'm justified in my action. As long as I doubted the notability of the house, it was probably all right to have the details in the article. now, no one has questioned the house's notability and I think we are okay. — [[User:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#070">Vchimpanzee</span>]] • [[User talk:Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#FA0"> talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contribs/Vchimpanzee|<span style="color:#700">contributions</span>]] • 18:55, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
== Undid ==
I made a recent edit to Jesse Ventura's page changing his unit affiliation and using a website address that had 3 pages of factual interviews from various Vietnam era SEALs that was copyrighted by Bill Salsibury yet you deleted the footnote citing it wasnt a credible website, yet several other attached footnotes from other websites were left alone and thus were deemed credible. What is your criteria for credibility on a website? <small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/66.87.75.69|66.87.75.69]] ([[User talk:66.87.75.69|talk]]) 13:27, 17 September 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Well, it's not my criteria, it's Wikipedia's criteria for [[WP:VERIFY|verification of references]] and [[WP:REF|referencing]]. The The reference you provided is a self-published source and that's not acceptable for referencing. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 00:15, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
== Ahmed Arrest ==
I think you are misreading the press release. There's a possible distinction with juveniles regarding custody but the reasons for taking him to a juvenile detention center for processing is functionally equivalent to an arrest. <s>"Taking him into custody" = "Arrested."</s> They cited the law he was arrested and that would have been the probable cause for taking into custody. For adults, they would not have been able to take a person into custody like that without an arrest. A [[Terry stop]] is a detention. People are making more out of handcuffing, though. It's generally policy in police departments that anyone arrested is handcuffed with hands behind their back while being transported unless a medical condition prevents it. After arrest and further investigation, they chose not to charge him but it doesn't negate the arrest. --[[User:DHeyward|DHeyward]] ([[User talk:DHeyward|talk]]) 05:05, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
:And I stand corrected that in Texas, for juveniles they explicitly state that "taken into custody" is not considered an "arrest" under the law. --[[User:DHeyward|DHeyward]] ([[User talk:DHeyward|talk]]) 05:16, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
I think his detention does constitute "arrest". The law in question (as I understand it) says that when someone has been arrested but is free not to disclose it, they can say "no" and be considered to have answered truthfully. I think that's because requiring them to say "yes but I'm not required to disclose this fact" would be incoherent: it would require them to disclose the fact in the course of saying that they're not required to. As I understand it, there is instead an implicit clause, in effect: it says only "Have you ever been arrested?", but it means "Have you ever been arrested, that isn't privileged from disclosure?" Furthermore, if I read it correctly, the Texas statute on kidnapping and unlawful restraint makes exception "when it is for the purpose of effecting a lawful arrest or detaining an individual lawfully arrested" -- not when it's either arrest or the substitute-for-arrest applicable a juvenile. (There are a bunch of clauses saying it's lawful to restrain a child, or for a child to restrain another child without force, intimidation, or deception. So I might have missed a pseudo-arrest clause in there. But I don't think so.) Nor do I think that this detention constitutes a ''Terry'' Stop. Here's how ''Terry'' describes arrest: ''An arrest is the initial stage of a criminal prosecution. It is intended to vindicate society's interest in having its laws obeyed, and it is inevitably accompanied by future interference with the individual's freedom of movement, whether or not trial or conviction ultimately follows.'' That's what they were doing. At that point, they suspected that he had perpetrated a bomb hoax, and were acting toward a possible prosecution for that offense. Finally, there's video of the police chief being asked about the "arrest", and not objecting to that description of what happened. --[[User:Dan Wylie-Sears 2|Dan Wylie-Sears 2]] ([[User talk:Dan Wylie-Sears 2|talk]]) 02:32, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
:I disagree. There is so much about this incident the media has gotten wrong (for instance, saying charges were dropped - there were never any charges filed) that I'm sick of reading the distortions of the truth in the news. Nothing personal, but I'm also sick of talking about whether he was arrested or not arrested, to be honest. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 02:36, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
== You really templated me ? ==
Nice going, but no. I'm enforcing WP:POLEMIC, consensus exists that his writing is polemic and per the policy, it needs to be removed, full stop. [[User:KoshVorlon|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">'''Kosh'''<span style="color:#CC4E5C"></span><span style="color:#008000">'''Vorlon'''</span></span>]] 16:43, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
:Yeah. Twice now. Cut the bullshit. You were told to move on. Do it before you get taken to a noticeboard and will surely be blocked. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 16:45, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
:: Yeah, cool story bro, but I have both consensus and policy on my side, you don't have anything except WP:ILIKEIT. Take it there, if you dare! [[User:KoshVorlon|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">'''Kosh'''<span style="color:#CC4E5C"></span><span style="color:#008000">'''Vorlon'''</span></span>]] 16:51, 28 September 2015 (UTC) PS: You reverted me with Twinkle and you referred to me edit as vandalism, which it wasn't. That's a mis-use of Twinkle, better read the manual again sport! [[User:KoshVorlon|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">'''Kosh'''<span style="color:#CC4E5C"></span><span style="color:#008000">'''Vorlon'''</span></span>]] 17:06, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
:::Where is this alleged consensus to be found and viewed? -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 17:08, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
::::It was in the edit summary [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:User_pages&oldid=683172647&diff=prev | here ]. [[User:KoshVorlon|<span style="font-family:Segoe print; text-shadow:gray 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">'''Kosh'''<span style="color:#CC4E5C"></span><span style="color:#008000">'''Vorlon'''</span></span>]] 17:22, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
{{od}}As I said: Blocked for disruptive behavior. You should have seen it coming. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 17:26, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
== Outing Attempt ==
I've warned the IP once more and sent a message to get this stuff suppressed. Is there something I'm missing here? Thanks for your vigilance.
Best, [[User:GeneralizationsAreBad|GAB]]<sup>[[User talk:GeneralizationsAreBad|Hello!]]</sup> 21:25, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
:Have no idea what the mission here is, but the IP does seem determined. Annoyingly so. Their quoting of policy and use of Wiki-speak tells me they are not new here. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 21:29, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
::Suppress, indef, rinse and repeat. [[User:GeneralizationsAreBad|GAB]]<sup>[[User talk:GeneralizationsAreBad|Hello!]]</sup> 21:31, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
== Deletion of others' talk page comments ==
[[File:Information orange.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Please do not [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#Editing comments|delete or edit]] legitimate talk page comments, as you did at [[: User talk:Stephkollm]]. Such edits are disruptive and appear to be [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalism]]. If you would like to experiment, please use the [[Wikipedia:Sandbox|sandbox]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:uw-tpv2 --> [[Special:Contributions/32.218.35.60|32.218.35.60]] ([[User talk:32.218.35.60|talk]]) 21:26, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
:Nope. It's [[WP:OUTING]], and that's strictly prohibited. [[User:GeneralizationsAreBad|GAB]]<sup>[[User talk:GeneralizationsAreBad|Hello!]]</sup> 21:27, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
::Correct. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 21:27, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
== Ronald Reagan ==
Hello,
I'm confused about the "lack of citation" on my post about Ronald Reagan. I attempted to cite the Economics/Finance blog Calculated Risk. Does the citation not come up? If so, what are the steps necessary to properly include the citation?
Thanks,
[[User:Waltersjoe86|Waltersjoe86]] ([[User talk:Waltersjoe86|talk]]) 01:22, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
:Thanks for stopping by. The cite was there. The problem, {{U|Waltersjoe86}}, is a blog is not a reliable source. This was stated in the edit summary where I reverted your addition. There needs to be a reliable source accompanying such content -- especially a change in statistical content. Please see [[WP:CITE]] for a better understanding on what is acceptable reference-wise in Wikipedia. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 01:25, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Great, thanks for the clarification! I'll find a different source to cite.
[[User:Waltersjoe86|Waltersjoe86]] ([[User talk:Waltersjoe86|talk]]) 21:54, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
== Edit warning? ==
You placed a [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Checkingfax&diff=684843021&oldid=684831601 stern edit warning] on my Talk page. Care to elaborate? [[User:Checkingfax|Checkingfax]] ([[User talk:Checkingfax|talk]]) 03:51, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
:Looks pretty clear to me. What's confusing you? -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 03:55, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
== AfDs of blocked editor's articles ==
Please comment [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:JackTheVicar#From_Anna here], if you like. [[User:Anna Frodesiak|Anna Frodesiak]] ([[User talk:Anna Frodesiak|talk]]) 20:12, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
:No desire to comment there and dive headfirst into the drama. Especially since the user has previously told me to stay off his talk page. But thanks for the thoughtful notifcation/invitation, {{U|Anna Frodesiak|Anna}}. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 20:14, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
::Fair enough. What are your thoughts on holding off for a couple of days until it is sorted out? I have yet to start checking to see if his claim of innocence may be true. Are you planning on nominating more? Best, [[User:Anna Frodesiak|Anna Frodesiak]] ([[User talk:Anna Frodesiak|talk]]) 20:21, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
:::I'm finished with that work for now, {{U|Anna Frodesiak|Anna}}. As far as his claims to not be the banned user, I find it highly doubtful MikeV would have blocked JTV without an SPI and by using CU only if it were not certain they are one and the same. CU is about more than IP addresses for clues. There had to be very solid evidence against JTV for him to block in the manner he did. Regardless, even with simple steps of investigation regarding the usual signs of sockpuppetry taken, this could have easily been a good case for a [[WP:DUCK|Duck Block]]. I have faith in MikeV's determination, I imagine ArbCom will as well. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 21:30, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
::::I trust [[User:Mike V|Mike V]]'s judgement, of course. I first posted at JTV to start a dialogue with the view that the block is right. DENY is for trolls and vandals. Socks who sock because they think it is the right thing to do should be engaged. Nobody wants to hurt other people, especially volunteers. We spend time here that could be spent with puppies in the park. When someone socks, it hurts us, personally. It steals our time. And it hurts the project they are trying to help. I want socks to make a choice: Own up, make a deal, and come in from the cold ...or... understand that they are really causing harm even though they think they are helping, and stop. [[User:Anna Frodesiak|Anna Frodesiak]] ([[User talk:Anna Frodesiak|talk]]) 21:43, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
== G5 category ==
According to [[WP:G5]], "G5 should not be applied to transcluded templates or to '''categories that may be useful''' or suitable for merging." (emphasis added).
You nominated [[:Category:Papakating Creek watershed]], presumably because it was created by JackTheVicar. It looks to me like it might be a useful category. Do you disagree?--[[User:Sphilbrick|<span style="color:#000E2F;padding:0 4px;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">S Philbrick</span>]][[User talk:Sphilbrick|<span style=";padding:0 4px;color:# 000;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">(Talk)</span>]] 01:39, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
:I deleted [[:Category:Wildlife Management Areas in New Jersey]] before realizing the exception to G5, so let's discuss that one as well.--[[User:Sphilbrick|<span style="color:#000E2F;padding:0 4px;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">S Philbrick</span>]][[User talk:Sphilbrick|<span style=";padding:0 4px;color:# 000;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">(Talk)</span>]] 01:43, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
::I agree it's a useful category, {{U|Sphilbrick}}. I don't, however, agree that it should be kept and should be deleted per G5 but also the spirit behind [[WP:DENY]]. It appears that JTV/ColonelHenry is a long-time sockmaster who should really go into the [[WP:LTA]] category. Take a look at everything (several sections worth of discussion) at AN/I last year regarding this individual [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard&oldid=605351222#Checkuser_block_of_ColonelHenry_and_socks]. His antics (and they are quite extensive and messy) go back over a decade. After you take a look there, and you still think the category should stay with JTV as the category creator, I won't protest. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 01:45, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
:::I don't really need to review the history. I'm comfortable with the concept of DENY (while recognizing that editors have good faith disagreements with the policy.) It is my understanding that G5 exists specifically for the purpose of DENY. I think the transclusian exception exists because we don't want sensible policies generating unreasonable amounts of headache, and deleting trancluded templates would be cutting off our nose to spite your face. However, G5 specifically has an exception for useful categories. I don't know the history of the inclusion of that exception. It may simply be that while no particular article is critical to the encyclopedia and therefore the exclusion won't cause major harm and will achieve our goal of denying recognition, if a category was created that turns out to be useful, it may create more problems than it is worth to delete it. I don't want to belabor this too much but I'd be interested to know if anyone can shed light on the rationale for this exception in case I'm missing something important.
:::One other possibility is that I delete it and then someone perhaps you are I immediately then re-creates it. Does no copyright infringement for a single word or two, and perhaps that would achieve the goal of DENY while not depriving the encyclopedia of the useful category. Any thoughts?
:::I may post this at ANI to get broader input.--[[User:Sphilbrick|<span style="color:#000E2F;padding:0 4px;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">S Philbrick</span>]][[User talk:Sphilbrick|<span style=";padding:0 4px;color:# 000;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">(Talk)</span>]] 02:19, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
::::Your proposal to recreate it is one I have recommended to other editors when they balk at deleting an article or category due to G5/DENY, {{U|Sphilbrick}}. I see it as a win-win for Wikipedia as it keeps the legitimate category but removes the banned/blocked sock from the equation and any history in the creation of it. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 02:22, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
::::: It's a bigger challenge in the case of an article. If you save the text and then simply re-create it you've violated copyright. If you don't say the tax credit from scratch good for you but that's a lot of work. At least with a three word category you don't have to worry about either.
::::: This isn't a rush.
::::: I want to emphasize, because sometimes text doesn't convey the right connotation, that I'm not criticizing your nomination. I'm genuinely puzzled that an apparently clear-cut CSD category has two exceptions, one I understand (I think) while the other isn't quite so clear to me.
::::: There are also some additional complications. The editor in question denies being the originally blocked editor. I think that's being discussed behind the scenes and we shall hear at some time what they conclude. In addition to the two categories there is a good article in the mix.
::::: In terms of timing, I'm signing off for the evening, have a meeting in the morning, then have to rush off to another family meeting in another state. Expect to be back in the afternoon and will look to see if there's any update on the functionary review. Depending on the results of that, I may post something at ANI to see if the possibility of deleting and re-creating is a good idea or not.--[[User:Sphilbrick|<span style="color:#000E2F;padding:0 4px;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">S Philbrick</span>]][[User talk:Sphilbrick|<span style=";padding:0 4px;color:# 000;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">(Talk)</span>]] 02:54, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
::::::In terms of the article, considering what you have pointed out, it would be impractical and unwise, {{U|Sphilbrick}}. I'm not quite sure what the solution is, however, I have seen articles deleted but re-drafted later and then recreated. I do want to make it clear: my actions in regard to the articles and such created and edited by the editor in question, have been nothing less than honorable and never for the purpose of anything other than what is right and for the good of the encyclopedia. Certainly not a personal vendetta. I state this only because I am being accused by some of having nefarious motives with the reverts and AfDs and speedy deletion noms I have made today. As far as that editor now blocked, this ''will'' all be clear in time. As I have said elsewhere in the last several hours, I have faith in MikeV's decision to block and why. I am confident that the CU he performed was correct and that he wouldn't have blocked in the manner he did unless the results were without question. And yes, no rush. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 03:06, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
:::::::I saw, without looking closely, that there were other aspersions cast at you. That was part of the reason I made the comment I did. Without comment on any of the other issues, I fully support the action you took in this case and we are, as editors are supposed to do, talking it through, to make sure that conflicting priorities are handled correctly.--[[User:Sphilbrick|<span style="color:#000E2F;padding:0 4px;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">S Philbrick</span>]][[User talk:Sphilbrick|<span style=";padding:0 4px;color:# 000;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">(Talk)</span>]] 12:57, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
== ''The Signpost'': 28 October 2015 ==
<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2015-10-28}}
</div><!--Volume 11, Issue 43-->
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
* '''[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost|Read this Signpost in full]]'''
* [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Single/2015-10-28|Single-page]]
* [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe|Unsubscribe]]
* [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 18:12, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
</div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:LivingBot@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Tools/Spamlist&oldid=688317023 -->
== Advice ==
I'm looking for a more experienced editor to help me with a potential BLP issue. I made this edit [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=A_Voice_for_Men&diff=689297849&oldid=687774391] to remove a claim implying (if not directly claiming) criminal fraud. The source for the claim is a single buzzfeed article, which I understood as insufficient for negative BLP claims. My removal was reverted [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=A_Voice_for_Men&diff=next&oldid=689297849]. Is my understanding of sourcing requirements wrong? If not, can you advise me on how to proceed? I don't intend to edit war. Thank you. [[Special:Contributions/107.150.94.5|107.150.94.5]] ([[User talk:107.150.94.5|talk]]) 06:02, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
:As the reverting editor pointed out in his edit summary, previous discussion on the article talk page is in regard to Buzzfeed being a reliable source. I don't think you can do anything more, considering such. And be careful not to violate [[WP:3RR]] should you continue editing there over the next 24 hours. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 06:10, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
== ''The Signpost'': 04 November 2015 ==
<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2015-11-04}}
</div><!--Volume 11, Issue 44-->
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
* '''[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost|Read this Signpost in full]]'''
* [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Single/2015-11-04|Single-page]]
* [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe|Unsubscribe]]
* [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 18:29, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
</div></div>
<!-- Message sent by User:LivingBot@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Tools/Spamlist&oldid=689126237 -->
== Discretionary sanctions notice - American politics ==
{{Ivm|2=''This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does '''not''' imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.''
'''Please carefully read this information:'''
The Arbitration Committee has authorised [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions|discretionary sanctions]] to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2|here]].
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means [[WP:INVOLVED|uninvolved]] administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the [[Wikipedia:Five pillars|purpose of Wikipedia]], our [[:Category:Wikipedia conduct policies|standards of behavior]], or relevant [[Wikipedia:List of policies|policies]]. Administrators may impose sanctions such as [[Wikipedia:Editing restrictions#Types of restrictions|editing restrictions]], [[Wikipedia:Banning policy#Types of bans|bans]], or [[WP:Blocking policy|blocks]]. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
}}{{Z33}}<!-- Derived from Template:Ds/alert --> [[User:Slakr|<span style="color:teal;font-weight:bold;">slakr</span>]]<small><sup>\ [[User talk:Slakr|talk]] /</sup></small> 07:16, 8 November 2015 (UTC)' |
Whether or not the change was made through a Tor exit node (tor_exit_node) | 0 |
Unix timestamp of change (timestamp) | 1446967008 |
