User talk:Wikipelli/Archive 12

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5 ← Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15

Twiglets

Please tell me how this is not relevant to the sub heading 'In the Media' for Twiglets? Have you actually read the qualification of the post and link? This is not vandalism as I have already tried to explain to another editor K6a 62.255.73.187 (talk) 18:57, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

I read both and restored your edit about 5 minutes ago. Wikipelli Talk 18:58, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, an apology would be nice! Can I presume the needless warnings on vandalism are henceforth revoked?

You don't have to assume... Checking your talk page will show that they have been removed. I left the first warning as valid because you didn't cite the information. I removed the second one. And, FWIW, I don't think it should be in the article. It represents 1 person's opinion on the taste of the product. You can envision (I hope) that the article could quickly become littered with 'opinions' on the taste - both good and bad - with no end. Cited or not, I don't think the opinions should be included. However, I'll leave that for editors that are more interested in the article. My concern was only that your first revision was not cited. It is now so I'm satisfied. Wikipelli Talk 19:05, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

It was a presumption, not an assumption and the apology request seemingly in vain. Taking the high ground I apologise for the lack of citation on my initial postings, call it a learning curve if you will be so kind. I understand your feelings on the opinion and possible littering of the article, but it nevertheless falls appropriately under the sub-heading of 'in the media'. Seeing as it is voiced by a world famous celebrity and is very much in the public domain, via the powerful medium of television, I believe the opinion is of interest. Interestingly the company markets the product in the UK along the lines of another product called Marmite (which it uses in the manufacture of Twiglets) with the line 'you either love them or hate them' which allows for the dichotomy in peoples opinion on taste. A celebrity endorsement, good or bad, may well be used in future marketing given this fact. Maybe you should try one and see whether you agree with his opinion? 62.255.73.187 (talk) 19:18, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

I note that the warnings still stand on the following page http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:62.255.73.187&redirect=no — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.255.73.187 (talk) 19:30, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

um...Ok. Wikipelli Talk 19:32, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

A measured response indeed. 'an educator' who has 'taught in public schools and universities for over 30 years.In my work with students and teachers, I spend a great deal of time concentrating on the importance of being critical users of information.' Tibi ipsi esto fidelis ;o) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.255.73.187 (talk) 19:42, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

My edit on Kazu Kibuishi

Hey, you undid an edit that I made on Kazu Kibuishi, and I have reverted those changes. Let me make my case:

1. The first change I made was changing his birthday from 1950 to 1978. If you look elsewhere on the page, it says his birthday is 1978. This is a conflict within the page itself. I believe 1978 is the correct birth date.

2. I changed that he moved to Russia to the United States. Not only does the paragraph conflict with itself (you can infer that he did not move to Russia, but the States), you can actually visit the citation at the end of the paragraph (an interview with Kazu Kibuishi himself) and see that he moved to the United States from Japan, and NOT to Russia.

I recommend you leave the changes I made.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.197.12.183 (talk) 20:40, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with you changing those items back. In the future, it would be very helpful for those looking for vandalism, if you would use the Edit Summary at the bottom of the editing window. A short description of the changes/reasons for changes would alert editors to the conflicts within the article and the cites. Sorry for the bother! Wikipelli Talk 20:46, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Maybe if Wikipedia needs money they should take the Bitcoins I've been trying to give them

192.0.133.61 (talk) 16:39, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 15:59, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 December 2013

Moodle page vandalized again...

Hi, I just read the page on Moodle and found that it has been vandalized again (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Moodle&oldid=584669882). Best regards, Bernd — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.196.237.21 (talk) 15:05, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

thanks! It looks like someone has reverted it already. Wikipelli Talk 17:16, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 December 2013

Please let my change of NP into P

Please read about the definition of P complexity on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P_(complexity) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.237.142.17 (talk) 17:27, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 December 2013

The Signpost: 01 January 2014

The Signpost: 08 January 2014

Meetups coming up in DC!

Hey!

You are invited to two upcoming events in DC:

  • Meetup at Capitol City Brewery on Saturday, January 25 at 6 PM. Please join us for dinner, drinks, socializing, and discussing Wikimedia DC activities and events. All are welcome! RSVP on the linked page or through Meetup.
  • Art and Feminism Edit-a-Thon on Saturday, February 1 from Noon – 5 PM. Join us as we improve articles on notable women in history! All are welcome, regardless of age or level of editing experience. RSVP on the linked page or through Meetup.

I hope to see you there!

(Note: If you do not wish to receive talk page messages for DC meetups, you are welcome to remove your username from this page.)

Harej (talk) 00:07, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Hughes H-4 page modification?

I just got a note stating that you had changed my modification to the H-4 flying boat article. I am not mad at all and If I made a mistake, I am sorry. The part I changed was the absence of an Empty Weight, to show the weight that I finally found after decades of research! I have a MSG from the Evergreen museum where the plane now resides listing that weight and a second, but less interesting number for the planes weight/mass on it's maiden and only flight of 276,000 pounds, including 2000 pounds of Avgas. I still do not know how to post links and foot notes to references and the foot note themselves. Again, if I stepped on anyone's toes, please forgive me. Sincerely, Stewart Davies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.213.132.223 (talk) 23:52, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello! and thanks for your note. Actually, I'm not sure what happened. I DID revert your edit and then, within seconds, I restored what you had included. I admit I realized that I was hasty so I undid it. Your edit is still a part of the article. Now, when I restored your edit, I also removed the warning on your talk page. I can see from the page history that it was gone... and now it is there again. Please feel free to remove the warning if you wish. I use a piece of software to quickly scan edits from unregistered users. I will confess that there are occasions where I am too hasty. In this case I tried to undo what I had done. I apologize for the confusion. Your edit is completely appropriate. Thanks! Wikipelli Talk 03:01, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 January 2014

The Signpost: 22 January 2014

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
I was originally going to give you the anti-vandalism barnstar, but your userpage claims that you are an educator. You are one of the very few educators that have faith in Wikipedia, and actually help it, not hurt it. After Vsauce, CGP Grey, and my Grade 8 teacher, I think I'd like you as my teacher... creepy. Anyways, wear this on your wall with pride! K6ka (talk | contribs) 18:10, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks very much for that! I appreciate it. I'm actually getting ready to retire after 35 years and hope that I've made some progress with other teachers and the school system where I work. I think I have some looking positively about it. Though, the other day a teacher asked that I remove the link to Wikipedia from our division site because she encourages her students to only use 'reliable' sites. Sigh.. maybe I haven't reached everyone.  :) Thanks again. Wikipelli Talk 18:17, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

How did you undo a whole bunch of edits in one fell swoop?

How did you revert three consecutive vandal edits in one stroke as you just did here? In such cases why do I have to use three consecutive undos? Contact Basemetal here 14:12, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi... I use Huggle to quickly scan for vandalism. It allows for single-click reverts of all of a user's last edits. In order to use Huggle, though, you first need to have Rollback rights. Wikipelli Talk 17:06, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 January 2014

The Signpost: 29 January 2014

Coming up in February!

Hello there!

Our February WikiSalon is coming up on Sunday, February 23. Join us at our gathering of Wikipedia enthusiasts at the Kogod Courtyard of the National Portrait Gallery with an optional dinner after. As usual, all are welcome. Care to join us?

Also, if you are available, there is an American Art Edit-a-thon being held at the Smithsonian American Art Museum with Professor Andrew Lih's COMM-535 class at American University on Tuesday, February 11 from 2 to 5 PM. Please RSVP on the linked page if you are interested.

If you have any ideas or preferences for meetups, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Meetup/DC.

Thank you, and hope to see you at our upcoming events! Harej (talk) 18:42, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your help on Jim Bridger

Thank you Wikipelli, for your help to revert to the latest vandalism-free revision of Jim Bridger. Huggle is giving me problems tonight. Thanks once again. Optakeover(Talk) 15:59, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

No problem. It's been buggy for me, too. Cheers! Wikipelli Talk 16:00, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 February 2014

The Signpost: 19 February 2014

126 Regiment of foot reply

I saw your message.

Honestly I don't remember putting that message into the article. must have been a glitch. 90.201.196.121 (talk) 13:11, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Article Isrg Rajan

Dear Sir, there are lots of conflicts going on Wikipedia about this article which is created by me. Every one is questing and none of them are willing to find some good sources and help me out. This is my bad experience on wikipedia as an editor. Every admin is warning for some or the other reason. As like I am in a jail. Firstly they asked me to add some reliable sources under the article Isrg Rajan and later they nominated it for speedy delectation. It is as if they are making fun of me :'( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iraag (talk • contribs) 19:41, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

The only reason that I reverted your edits and gave you a warning is that you removed all of the content of the page without giving an explanation in the Edit Summary. If you created the page and wish to have it all deleted, you can just do nothing and it will be deleted. If you wish it to remain, you can follow the link and give your reasons. Wikipelli Talk 19:45, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Sir, my article has been already deleted by admin and now I'm helpless thanks. Iraag (talk) 19:48, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 February 2014

DC Meetups in March

Happy March!

Though we have a massive snowstorm coming up, spring is just around the corner! Personally, I am looking forward to warmer weather.

Wikimedia DC is looking forward to a spring full of cool and exciting activities. In March, we have coming up:

  • Evening WikiSalon on Wednesday, March 12 from 7 PM – 9 PM. Meet up with Wikipedians for coffee at the Cove co-working space in Dupont Circle! If you cannot make it in the evening, join us at our...
  • March Meetup on Sunday, March 23 from 3 PM – 6 PM. Our monthly weekend meetup, same place as last month. Meet really cool and interesting people!
  • Women in the Arts 2014 meetup and edit-a-thon on Sunday, March 30 from 10 AM – 5 PM. Our second annual Women in the Arts edit-a-thon, held at the National Museum of Women in the Arts. Free lunch will be served!

We hope to see you at our upcoming events! If you have any questions, feel free to ask on my talk page.

— Harej (talk) 05:11, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

My disruptive editing habit

I am sorry for my disruptive editing habit. I know I do it, but I am aware it's not very nice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IloveGT5 (talk • contribs) 17:46, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

(test) The Signpost: 05 March 2014

sup wikipelli, i just edited mars volta's noctourniquet and praised it as a true gem, for what it is, i guess wikipedia has a policy on keeping this site monitored but as a rule, you shouldn't do that, society is mostly corrupt, dont you know. thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.193.48 (talk) 15:52, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 March 2014

why did you delete my factual edits about sandy point?

Why did you delete my changes? I added historical and factual information about the suburb in Sydney - Sandy Point NSW. It is all true information, and a lot of other suburbs have so much history on all their pages, and no one ever fixes the Sandy point page, so I did, and I spent ages doing it.. Why did you delete it??? you said it wasn't relevant! but plenty of other suburbs have information on their pages!??? please let me know ASAP sarah.beth.hall@hotmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.116.95.142 (talk) 13:25, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

There were a couple of issues with your edit to the article. First, though you call it factual, you don't cite any verifiable references. For the encyclopedia, it is not enough to simply state what you think about something or relate what you observe. Second, it is inappropriate to include what amounts to advertising for a facebook page about the subject. Finally, and this relates to the first point, you include qualifying words in your description ("wonderful community"). This, obviously, is your opinion and opinions shouldn't be part of an encyclopedia entry. I hope this is helpful for you to understand why I reverted your edit. If you have any other questions, please let me know! (ps. It is generally not a good idea to include your personal email address in a wikipedia page. This leaves you open to spam messages as it is public). Wikipelli Talk 13:31, 19 March 2014 (UTC)


OK Fine, so then why did you delete the "facts" about the surrounding suburbs too? you clearly didn't read ALL of the entry??? that is no one's observations - they are actual facts! those are surrounding suburbs!! and what is wrong with directing people to the newsletter? that's ridiculous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.116.95.142 (talk) 13:36, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

You might want to take a look at Verifiable, and Reliable sources. Wikipelli Talk 13:41, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

how am I supposed to reply to this thing? I don't understand - I only put my email because It was a contact us page - how else is someone supposed to reply?? 101.116.95.142 (talk) 13:44, 19 March 2014 (UTC) how am I supposed to know how these things work

You're replying just fine! Simply add your response here as you've been doing.
Wikipedia definitely takes some getting used to and there's a learning curve. Many people make simple errors their first time out editing. I understand completely that you'd like to add information about your community, but you have to understand that the point of the encyclopedia is to include verifiable information that is relevant to the subject. It is just my opinion, but the only information about Sandy Point is that many people have lived there and some still do. The rest of your addition is promoting a facebook page that was created to promote the community. It would be more appropriate to include information about the community in the article rather than have people join a Facebook community related to Sandy Point.
Here is another source of information that might be helpful to you as you edit. It's helpful to take some time to read the tutorials and ask questions. Most editors here are more than happy to help! Wikipelli Talk 13:54, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
I restored much of the information that you included and I took the liberty to clean it up somewhat (to remove some of the biased language .. "great", "wonderful", etc). I also created references to the sites that you included originally. Unfortunately, Facebook links are discouraged because they are not accessible to those that do not have an account. I hope this is alright with you. Wikipelli Talk 14:16, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

My ancestors from the French Wikipedia

Why does Wiki keep deleting my ancestors? Is there some sort of clearance I can receive?

A relationship with Helene of Brossard (1250- ?) They had three children:

·Marguerite Brossard (1286-1352) married in 1300 to William IV of Beaumont-Glenay ( ~ 1270-1328), of the house of Beaumont-Bressuire

·Antoine Brossard (1289-1346) married to Judith de Ponthieu

·Jeanne of Brossard (1290- ?)

Reference: Nobility of Normandy, Ed. de Magny, Paris and located in the National Library of Paris, 1864. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wnicholas70 (talk • contribs) 17:53, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello! You don't need any clearance, but I would recommend that you take a look at some information about editing before making substantial changes. In particular, I reverted your most recent edits because they removed a substantial amount of information ("Ancestry") without any explanation. At the very least, such a change should be accompanied by an Edit Summary to let other editors know why you are removing it. If the change is likely to significantly change the article, you should explain it on the article's talk page. I believe that you are editing in Good Faith, but you want to be careful about major changes without explanation.  :) That will save you a lot of time and grief. Please let me know if I can help with anything. Wikipelli Talk 17:57, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 March 2014

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
For reverting so much vandalism but still maintaining civility and pointing editors in the right direction. Thanks! BethNaught (talk) 19:51, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Vandalism warning

Re-posting here working on the assumption that this warning was posted in a semi-automated way, and as such, you won't have added it to your watchlist and therefore seen my response. Apologies if that assumption is false. Repeating verbatim my response there:

Care to explain how this is vandalism? While it may be a large change, it is not a malicious one

— Eric Wieser (talk) 17:28, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Eric Wieser (talk) 10:57, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Eric... My apologies! I believe I must have been going too fast and mistook the exclamation marks for, well, exclamation marks and not table code. Your edit is fine. I'll remove the warning on your page. Sorry about that! Wikipelli Talk 12:19, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Neil Steinberg

My alcoholism and arrest are mentioned already, once, on the page, in context, near the book I wrote about them. Putting them at the end of a brief intro bio gives them too much weight, and is malicious. They have no bearing on my life, and would not be placed for other people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.102.105.179 (talk) 20:45, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

road to 911 very poor biased article

Thank you for taking an interest in my comment on road to 911. But I think if your looked at the biased bro Clinton nature of the article I think you'll find my aside was more than helpful. In fact I think the article needs revision desperately, and I think given your desire to remove bias from wikipedia and you clearly take an interest in this page your clearly the person to initiate root and branch improvement of this poor article. Which appears to have been "captured" by Clinton party associates. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.133.67 (talk) 22:28, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

An exciting month of wiki events!

Hello there,

I am pleased to say that April will be a very exciting month for Wikipedia in Washington, DC. We have a lot of different events coming up, so you will have a lot to choose from.

First, a reminder that our second annual Women in the Arts Edit-a-Thon will take place on Sunday, March 30 at the National Museum of Women in the Arts.

Coming up in April, we have our first-ever Open Government WikiHack with the Sunlight Foundation on April 5–6! We are working together to use open government data to improve the Wikimedia projects, and we would love your help. All are welcome, regardless of coding or editing experience. We will also be having a happy hour the day before, with refreshments courtesy of the Sunlight Foundation.

On Friday, April 11 we are having our first edit-a-thon ever with the Library of Congress. The Africa Collection Edit-a-Thon will focus on the Library's African and Middle East Reading Room. It'll be early in the morning, but it's especially worth it if you're interested in improving Wikipedia's coverage of African topics.

The following day, we are having our second annual Wiki Loves Capitol Hill training. We will discuss policy issues relevant to Wikimedia and plan for our day of outreach to Congressional staffers that will take place during the following week.

There are other meetups in the works, so be sure to check our meetup page with the latest. I hope to see you at some of these events!

All the best,
James Hare

(To unsubscribe, remove your username here.) 01:29, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Okey, that's it! I have had it with you beating me to all reverts!

One thing you should know it that you have made a big (friendly) enemy today....no, I'm just kiddin'.

I love that you go above and beyond to catch vandals, and I think that I talk for (almost) every other vandalism-hunter out there when I say: Thank you! (t) Josve05a (c) 13:41, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for nothing

dude — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.87.19.222 (talk) 19:08, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

EyethuMall

Please Don't Delete The Article,Because it is Going To Be Edited And inserted Reliable Source by The Owners And Residents This Is Just A Start of An Article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Funzo lekgwareng (talk • contribs) 20:47, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 March 2014

Tendar66

Thank you for this. I don't watch my user page normally, and wish the Wikimedia interface would include notifications if one's own user page is modified. Sometimes these matters go unnoticed for months or even years. And BTW, you just gave me a new idea for a page notice. "My master, Annatar the Great, bids thee welcome!" 19:32, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 April 2014

I got a message for editing Criminal Stereotype of African Americans and I am new

I am mostly okay for the new edit. I think if one is going to include things like pop culture as a reason for why blacks are stereotyped(Everyone is, for better or worse. It does not have to be race), I think adding the fact that they have started many popular gangs across the country should be a large factor, yet was not included.

The main reason I have with this article is why does it have to be confined to one race? If we're going to publish articles about criminal stereotyping of African Americans, why stop there?

I find this article more informative than when I edited it, as it does show reasons why one may racially profile black people. However, I do not see any sources as to how the legal system is influenced by pop culture.

On top of this, since the topic is criminal stereotyping, I would like to see some actual claims in law enforcement. Use some citations from the references. It feels like an unproven theory, but something we're supposed to accept as truth because many feel it's just common sense or they believe it to be a fact. Leave that mentality for the Bible and other holy books, not here.

This article is very odd to me. Also this is my first time posting here, and I'm getting used to the interface.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Criminal+stereotype+of+African+Americans&diff=590981334&oldid=589172415

Thanks for your message and your thoughts on the article and on editing! I really think you might want to consider Creating an Account to edit. There are a number of things to be aware of, though, though, when you begin editing.
As I said on your talk page in January, your thoughts on the article were completely valid points, but they shouldn't be included in the article itself. One of the really great things about Wikipedia is that every article has a "Talk" page associated with it. On that page, editors can voice their opinions on how an article is being developed, what should be included (and WHY) or what should be deleted (again, always include WHY). This, to me, is where the real magic of Wikipedia happens. On those talk pages, editors collaborate - no editor is more important than another. They discuss - argue sometimes (as long as it's kept civil!) and reach consensus. The body of Wikipedia articles are developed through this consensus.
Anyway, that's more information than you were probably after. Thanks for your message, think about creating an account, and let me know if you have any problems or questions along the way! Wikipelli Talk 20:42, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello

You left a note for me to stop removing content from the Bacula Wiki page, and this seems to be based on two things: 1. A complaint from Maik Aussendorf from Bareos. 2. The fact that I don't know how to leave comments on the changes I make.

I am the project manager for the Bacula open source project. I have been working on this project full time since the beginning of 2000, and it has been released to Source Forge since April 2002. I have put a *huge* amount of work into this project and have support and many contributors from the Bacula community, and the Bacula Wikipedia page describes Bacula and the Bacula project.

At the beginning of 2013, after 3 years of secret work, Maik Aussendorf and 4 other persons started the Bareos fork of Bacula. In doing so, they made serious copyright violations, most of which were ultimately fixed, they also removed my name from all the headers of the Bacula files, and from the Bacula manual. Much more important than those incorrect behavoirs were that they took proprietary source code and released it in Bareos. Despite this and much more I have not used Wikipedia to complain about Bareos. On the contrary, Bareos for quite some time mostly through Maik Aussendorf has been putting Bareos propaganda that criticises the Bacula project on the Bacula Wikipage. I recently tried to edit it to be more neutral, but the old disagreeable material not appropriate for Wikipedia in my opinion keeps reappearing mostly from changes by Maik Aussendorf and from a few others.

It is my believe that Wikipedia should not be used for negative publicity campaigns such as the one that is being carried out by Bareos, and that a page that describes Bacula should be reserved only for Bacula. Thus in the end, I have decided to remove all Bareos comments from the Bacula page. While the contents do not violate copyrights, Bareos has already been cited by the Free Software Foundation Europe for violation of Bacula copyrights, so should copyright violators be allowed to "deface" a Wikipedia page such as Bacula? I understand that you would like everything to be discussed and everyone should be friendly and come to a concensus, but when you are dealing with people who violate copyrights and are accused of stealing proprietary code and releasing as their own work, there is little or no chance that discussion will help. I just want them to keep their hands off the Bacula project, and I believe that is a reasonable request.

If they must be allowed to deface the Bacula project page and destroy our reputation built up over the last 12 years, I would prefer that you take down the whole Bacula page, which would be a terrible pity, but for me it is better to have nothing rather than their missinformation propagated by what I and the Bacula users have built up over the years. KernSibbald (talk) 19:36, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

The only reason that I reverted your edit was that your edit removed cited information and you did not explain your reason with an edit summary. I understand that sometimes it is difficult to understand all of the nuances of Wikipedia editing, but providing an edit summary is basic and you should read up on it. This is especially true when removing information that, apparently, you knew would be contentious.
The place to air your concerns about the writing of the article is on the article's talk page - which I see that you have done. But, as you correctly stated above, the development of Wikipedia articles depends on consensus. From my brief reading, the information that you wished to remove is cited. If you have other information about copyright violations, etc. You are free to add those to the article as well - with appropriate sources for verification.
It's clear that you feel strongly about the article but you must remember that no-one owns articles on Wikipedia. An article that you start becomes part of Wikipedia and all editors have to abide by the policies. If you have any questions, please feel free to let me know. Wikipelli Talk 19:54, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
I think I undersand now that I need to put somethign in the edit summary, which I am now doing. Hopefully, you will now let me remove inappropriate material. I understand what you are saying, but I really don't think that Wikipedia should premit itself to be used as a public forum for putting up inappropriate information about lawsuits. I have posted a lot of blogs on the bacula.org website about Bareos and what they have done. Does that really need to spread to wikipedia too? You should be neutral, and in this case the best way to be neutral is to help keep Bacula and Bareos separate. They can create their own page and put anything they like on it, I may not be happy with what they write, but I won't deface it. I ask only that they do the same for me. Yes, I agree I do not own the article on wikipedia, but I have spent 14 years working on Bacula and to see it slandered by Bareos on their website is hard, but even worse if you allow them to do the same thing on wikipedia. In that case rather than helping the world, you will be allowing people who are very clever spin-doctors with (in my opinion) low moral standards to use your platform to damage the Bacula project. I only ask that you not allow unfair competitors to deface the Bacula wikipedia project of long standing for their own material gain. KernSibbald (talk) 20:18, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
There lies the issue... You say that the material is 'inappropriate' but that's subjective. In your view it is, and in another editor's view it is not. This is exactly why we rely on discussions on the talk pages - where editors can present their views and, if possible, reach consensus. If consensus cannot be reached - and this happens - there are other ways to resolve disputes. The important thing for you to remember, I think, is that your view is neither correct nor incorrect. Please discuss the changes before you make them! Wikipelli Talk 20:22, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 April 2014

Constructive edits

You left a note saying that I made a nonconstructive edit, believing that I had vandalised the Metamodernism entry. However, my edit was simply to correct the title of the author's work to the correct one (which deliberately uses the "a**" word). This title also appears in its correct form on the wikipedia entry for Steve Roggenbuck. I can understand how you may have misinterpreted this as vandalism, but I assure you this is not the case. I also removed some misleading hyperlinks. I disagree that this is nonconstructive, and I believe these edits are useful and should stand. Esmeme (talk) 17:21, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your message.  :) I have restored your edits and removed the warning on your talk page. Wikipelli Talk 19:00, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to all mac. users to create an art. on Igor Janev on Eng. Wikipedia

Invitation to all mac. users to create an art. on Igor Janev, please see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=next&oldid=603995897


Furher see sources [1]

[2]

http://mk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%98%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%80_%D0%88%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%B2

http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%AF%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%B2,_%D0%98%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%8C

He is famous Univ. professor in Macedonia , member of NYAS, he publ. 160 scholarly art., 17 books in Int. Law, Foreign policy and Diplomacy. He discovered the ULTRA VIRES act of UN in the process of admission of Macedonia in UN (published in AJIL, Vol.93. no 1.)--16:51, 11. april 2014 (CEST)

http://www.mia.mk/en/Inside/RenderSingleNews/289/105947751 or at MINA : http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/21668/45/ or http://www.makemigration.com/iselenistvoweb/index.php?page=iselenici&id=247&tip_iselenici=7

http://s241910817.onlinehome.us/html/articles/janev/janev.html

or http://www.mkd.mk/makedonija/politika/nekoj-go-brishe-igor-janev-od-vikipedija

or his contribution to US recognition of Macedonia under Republic of Macedonia

http://dobarglas.info/naslovna_v6.htm http://www.makedonskosonce.com/broevis/2008/sonce748.pdf/12_15_janev.pdf

Furthermore Macedonian media shocked on attempt to delete Janev from Wikipedia

http://www.time.mk/c/61e6ad16de/janev-postoi-praven-lek-za-imeto.html

http://www.makdenes.org/content/article/1956873.html

http://www.mkd.mk/54357/makedonija/se-ceka-na-potpisot-na-ivanov-rezolucija-janev-on

[3] LEGAL ASPECTS OF THE USE OF A PROVISIONAL NAME FOR MACEDONIA IN THE UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM [4] citation:[5]

See : https://www.google.com/search?q=Igor+Janev&btnG=Search+Books&tbm=bks&tbo=1 http://macedonianhr.org.au/wip/images/stories/pdf/1252648063581.pdf see cit.http://www.etd.ceu.hu/2009/bajalski_borko.pdf

http://sam.gov.tr/on-the-uns-legal-responsibility-for-the-irregular-admission-of-macedonia-to-un/

http://www.sar.org.ro/polsci/?p=264

http://www.makedonskosonce.com/broevis/2008/sonce713.pdf/16_17_janev.pdf

http://www.crpm.org.mk/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Policy-Brief-NatoMak.pdf

http://denesen.mk/web/2013/08/31/janev-postoi-praven-lek-za-imeto/

ULTRA VIRES act of UN organs is relevant http://www.mkd.mk/makedonija/politika/nekoj-go-brishe-igor-janev-od-vikipedija http://osaka.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/ccTLDs-TM.pdf , When we say US, p. 845, note 28. G. Ivanov, "Recalling that the International Court of Justice 1948 advisory opinion had determined that placing additional criteria on United Nations membership contravened the United Nations Charter", http://gadebate.un.org/67/former-yugoslav-republic-macedonia Thomas D. Grant, Admission to the United Nations, Martinus pub. , pp. 203-212 http://books.google.rs/books?id=5Uuv0NLNdZQC&pg=PA322&lpg=PA322&dq=Igor+Janev+Admission+to+the&source=bl&ots=6DgOwcDxtS&sig=4DlZpp7DCtAOeeMqhjvN0QviEl0&hl=sr&sa=X&ei=GERKU9ivOsXOtQaD9oGIDA&ved=0CFkQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=Igor%20Janev%20Admission%20to%20the&f=false -178.222.22.90 (talk) 11:20, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

vidi http://books.google.rs/books?id=0k-9--x9EY4C&pg=PA64&lpg=PA64&dq=igor+janev&source=bl&ots=bLE2T_1P7y&sig=-dTyINAX1zw6brN1dNraW1DIVQE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=SF1QU9u1C6HQ7AbXzoCQBA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=igor%20janev&f=false 93.87.176.103 (talk) 12:02, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

April 2014

Information icon Hello, I'm Jeffrd10. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made with this edit to Doo-wop, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Jeffrd10 (talk) 13:52, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry about that I'm testing a new anti-vandal tool and it some time does thing I don't meen. Did not mean to do that my mistake and Happy Editing! --Jeffrd10 (talk) 14:22, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 April 2014

Two edit-a-thons coming up!

Hello there!

I'm pleased to tell you about two upcoming edit-a-thons:

  • This Tuesday, April 29, from 2:30 to 5:30 PM, we have the Freer and Sackler edit-a-thon. (Sorry for the short notice!)
  • On Saturday, May 10 we have the Wikipedia APA edit-a-thon, in partnership with the Smithsonian Asian Pacific American Center, from 10 AM to 5 PM.

We have more stuff coming up in May and June, so make sure to keep a watch on the DC meetup page. As always, if you have any recommendations or requests, please leave a note on the talk page.


Best,

James Hare

(To unsubscribe, remove your username here.) 20:39, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 April 2014

Hi

Hi, I believe you are mistaken that my edits to the page 'Set (abstract data type) are non-constructive. My data is correct and has cited sources.

Thank you, Regards, 143.239.9.1 (talk) 12:33, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, I believe you are mistaken that my edits to the page 'Set (abstract data type)' are non-constructive. My data is correct and has cited sources.

Thank you, Regards, 143.239.9.1 (talk) 12:33, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 May 2014

Meet up with us

Happy May!

There are a few meetups in DC this month, including an edit-a-thon later this month. Check it out:

  • On Thursday, May 15 come to our evening WikiSalon at the Cove co-working space in Dupont Circle. If you're available Thursday evening, feel free to join us!
  • Or if you prefer a Saturday night dinner gathering, we also have our May Meetup at Capitol City Brewing Company. (Beer! Non-beer things too!)
  • You are also invited to the Federal Register edit-a-thon at the National Archives later this month.

Come one, come all!

Best,

James Hare

(To unsubscribe, remove your username here.) 20:21, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Medieval Russia & NPOV

Medieval Russia was known for its tolerance towards homosexuality and how widespread it was. As well as other forms of homosexuality, pederasty was very common. The beardless youth was seen as an alternative to women, and shaving was seen as an invitation to sodomy for men. The banyas, traditional Russian-style bath houses in particular were places where men would go and have sex with teenage boys who worked there and beat the men with birch branches, and rubbed their backs.[70] Later on, from the 18th century onwards, the bath houses still thrived and cadet schools and the Page Corps and Imperial School of Jurisprudence were hotbeds of homosexual activity between the boys. Russia's laws were very lenient compared to those of Western Europe in that homosexuality was made illegal for soldiers at the beginning of the 18th century and was made illegal for the rest of society in the 1830s and even then, the new laws were not strictly enforced, and at the end of the 19th century, St. Petersburg had a thriving gay scene.

The foregoing is an example of how modern gay propaganda deliberately misrepresents historical facts to justify pederasty and tries to portray homosexuality as being a behavioural norm.

"not adhering to neutral point of view"

OK. But phrases like "The banyas, traditional Russian-style bath houses in particular were places where men would go and have sex with teenage boys who worked there and beat the men with birch branches, and rubbed their backs.[70]" looks like some porn fantasy. Is it adhering to neutral point of view? Is it encyclopedia or not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.221.194.202 (talk) 19:46, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Did you notice the citation at the end of the line you quoted (indicated by the #70?) That is a link to a citation verifying the statement. I can't access the link because I'm in a school right now and the site is blocked, but since it IS cited, it is therefore not the editor's opinion.
Your comment, on the other hand, is your opinion and editorializing on the text that you were editing. I don't know or care whether your opinion is right or wrong in this instance. Your edit was reverted simply because you were stating your opinion in the body of the article. If you have issues with the content, the best thing to do is to state them on the article's talk page. Then, other editors can respond and perhaps a change in the article can be made - as long as there is consensus.
In short, yes, it is an encyclopedia, and, like other encyclopedias, does not include rebuttal in the text.Wikipelli Talk 19:58, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wikipelli/Archive_12&oldid=1086267275"