User talk:Danielklotz/Archive 1

YCP seal

Let me know if you have any questions or need any help with anything. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Universities can also help.--GrapedApe (talk) 04:48, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

WP:AfD

Hi. Thanks for commenting on the G.I.D deletion debate. However, the talk page is not the place to do this. Could you please repost you !vote or comment on the main page at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/G.I.D. Thanks. --Kudpung (talk) 05:52, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for helping me get it right. I've moved my comment/vote and also added my rationale for supporting deletion. -- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 05:58, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. Happy editing! Kudpung (talk) 09:15, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Your note

Hi. I'm wondering why you left this warning for this new user? The user hasn't created any articles. Was it under another account? Thanks. -- Mufka ^{(u) (t) (c)} 14:33, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

He added himself to the list of birthdays in [[1]]. I recognize there's probably a better warning template. Can you direct me to it? Thanks. -- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 14:37, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Sure. WP:DOY/uw-date1. I left him a welcome in response to his edit. He's probably just a drive-by. -- Mufka ^{(u) (t) (c)} 15:41, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the help and guidance. -- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 15:43, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Antonietta

Hi. Can you please edit as follows:

Antonietta is a Italian given name, meaning priceless, inestimable, highly praised. The feminine form of Antoine which is a form of Anthony(from Latin Antonius -- meaning beyond praise or highly praise-worthy). form of Antoinette, which is a form of antoine which is a form of Anthony, which is a form of antonius form of Antonia, which is a form of Antonius form of Anthos meaning flower. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ourbabynamer (talk • contribs) 14:47, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I've made the change as best I can. You can see it at Antonietta (given name). Note that I've added a "citation needed" note at the end of the sentence. If you find a reputable, published source for this information, it would be great to add that as a reference to substantiate the facts. Thanks. -- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 14:57, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I was told .... Antoine which is a form of Anthony, which is a form of Antonius... thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ourbabynamer (talk • contribs) 14:57, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Gotcha. So you know, being told by someone else doesn't quite count for Wikipedia. If you're interested in the type of sources that do count, check out this article: Wikipedia:Verifiability. -- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 15:00, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Please change it to form of Antoine, which is a form of Anthony, which is from Latin Antonius ... Thank you. Also, include in the sidebar. The meaning and include Toni. Thank you so very much. Appreciated! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ourbabynamer (talk • contribs) 15:04, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Ourbabynamer, I highly recommend you check out and familiarize yourself with Help:Contents/Getting started. -- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 15:06, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Daniel. Sorry, I don't use this site much. The correct wording for this entry , since it is an Italian name reference, instead of form of Antoine [ from Latin "Antonius" ] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ourbabynamer (talk • contribs) 15:16, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

How to Add Badges

Hiaaa, Just wanted to thank you for the nice welcome, :) i saw that some people get badges on there home page. How can you get these? and also how can you send them to others? i would also like to know how you can become a higher person, i dont know what the name is for them. Maybe you can tell what im talking about. They can like block people and help to make everything a bit safer. Maybe that could be my goal? Thanks again Love your knew friend ;) (Hector1000 (talk) 13:47, 20 March 2011 (UTC))

Thank you!

hello. Thanks for your words of encouragement. And for the cookies! lol Cheers. Art and Muscle (talk) 03:38, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine

I trimmed Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine substantially and edited some text. I think the copyvio stuff is all gone; the directory stuff (lists of departments and research centers) may be worth keeping. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 23:47, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Excellent, thank you for saving the article from deletion by making these good edits. -- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 02:03, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

The Man Who Would Be Queen

Hi Danielklotz-- thanks for taking time to look at The Man Who Would Be Queen. The book's publication and response have come to mean many things to many people, and it's a complex matter spanning over 8 years. The Wikipedia article has been a source of great contention for many years. There are several factions on Wikipedia, each of which has a specific POV:

• User:WhatamIdoing leads the "academic freedom" faction and believes that Bailey suffered unconscionable abuses that could lead to a chilling effect on academic freedom/scientific inquiry/trans healthcare. She has created her own interpretation of the story that contains a number of factual errors.
• User:98.149.114.34 takes issue with the POV of User:WhatamIdoing, and they have been involved in a slow-motion revert/edit war for years. This editor also has an interpretation that contains some errors and has a hard time working toward consensus with WhatamIdoing.
• Several other editors with personal knowledge/involvement have weighed in, including myself, though we have all voluntarily avoided editing article content for a while now.

I chime in on the talk page whenever WhatamIdoing tries to canvass and spin facts with uninvolved editors on unrelated pages (like Village Pump). I wish she and 98 would stop making changes to the article and limit their involvement to talk pages. You had asked about what was really going on-- my paper Fair comment, foul play summarizes Bailey's attacks on transgender and gender-variant children, and why I got involved (I am named by name in the Wikipedia article). The main issue is the case report framing the book, a cure narrative where Bailey says he witnessed a 6-year-old cured of gender variance. Bailey had also started touring in support of the book in 2003 with a lecture mocking gender-variant children. As the book's subtitle suggests, the book was marketed as science, which was the other major point of contention. During the first Northwestern U. investigation of him (he's currently under investigation again), Bailey began claiming that the book was not science. Bailey has also gone on record to claim that the cured child is now "a happy gay man," but there's no independent corroboration that the child even exists. Bailey's book summarizes work from a Toronto mental institution that is home to the world's largest reparative therapy clinic for gender-variant children, and the home to creators of a taxonomy that says a trans woman is either a gay man, a paraphilic man, or a lying man. Anyone who takes issue with this taxonomy has another disease, called narcissistic injury, that causes them to rage.

A number of disinterested parties like you with extensive editing experience have interceded over the years, with varying results. I hope you will take a look and see what you think might be improved. I am happy to provide additional sourcing and information if you wish. Thanks again! Jokestress (talk) 02:00, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

PNT Singing Idol

Hi, thanks for your feedback on this article, dating back to March. However there was no further comment even after several citations were added and, as a newer user, am not sure if we are supposed to check back with the person who contributed the feedback, or just let the flags continue indefinitely? ThanksRWIR (talk) 00:59, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Jamal Woon

Hello Danielklotz, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Jamal Woon to a proposed deletion tag. The speedy deletion criteria are extremely narrow to protect the encyclopedia, and do not fit the page in question. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Electric Catfish 23:15, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for catching my mistake and for explaining the rationale. ---- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 02:32, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Just letting you know. Thanks!Fomeister (talk) 22:01, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Tag 'article needs additional citations'

Hi Daniel!

Thanks for your words of encouragement. In order to improve the article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralf_van_B%C3%BChren), I added citations and information as best I could.

Do I have to remove the tag "This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations..."? Or someone else has to do it? Thanks for all your help. --Sarah Rubin (talk) 08:16, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Daniel! Due to lack of response, I suspect that the tag "additional citations" is no longer necessary. Therefore I have removed it today. But if still more is needed, then please indicate what to do. Thank you very much.--Sarah Rubin (talk) 10:40, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's fine with me. Thank you for your good work! -- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 11:01, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Discretionary Sanctions Alert

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 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 here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or 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.

Please get an "uninvolved administrator" or editor to make the changes you seem incredibly intent on pushing. -- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 01:48, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

This is just a notice, because you haven't gotten one yet. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 01:49, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

I don't get it -- i.e., why you posted this on my talk page with no additional comment or context. -- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 01:50, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

I got one also yesterday. Apparently this page is under sanctions for some reason. So I got this alert so I let you know as well. Some areas in Wiki are special. It doesn't mean you did wrong, just that you should be aware that the general edit restrictions don't apply and this page and related topics have different restrictions. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 01:56, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

That makes sense. Thank you. I showed up at the article via the RfC. It does appear that I've stepped into a small-scale edit war that isn't willing to take a pause until discussions take place. For what it's worth, I don't necessarily disagree with your interpretation of policy, I just believe that the talk discussion is about the application of policy in this case, so your position of "in the meantime, let's stick to policy" seems to me to miss the point, which is that the nature and application of that policy is what's being discussed. But not worth disputing over -- I'm pretty much a neutral party on the article and wish to remain so. -- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 02:00, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

For me it's pretty straightforward, there is a difference between someone's religion and how religious they are. All the infobox is asking for is what religion they are and Bernie is Jewish. His press kit simply says, Religion:Jewish. That should have been the end of it. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 02:03, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

"For me" are the key words. I and other editors hear and understand your argument. Please continue to be patient, and please allow an uninvolved editor to review the comments and determine what the consensus is. You and I have both weighed in, so we shouldn't be the ones to identify what that consensus is. -- DanielKlotz (talk · contribs) 02:07, 4 February 2016 (UTC)