User talk:Tom Morris/Archive 11
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | → | Archive 15 |
Merry Christmas!
– Plarem (User talk contribs) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Holiday cheer
.jpg)
ϢereSpielChequers is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Xmas, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec11}} to your friends' talk pages.
Notice
Redirecting
Hi. When redirecting schools as you did at [1], please remember to include the {{R from school}} template. It populates an important category that is used for statistical purposes. Thanks.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk)
UTRS Account Request
I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. —Tom Morris (talk)
Documentation for gadget authors
I saw you had done some work on heavily-used gadgets. We're trying to start a library for gadget authors to use. Please check it out and post any questions or comments there. -- ☠MarkAHershberger☢(talk)☣
Ping!
This request goes for you as well, mister. :) Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 00:00, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello Tom,
Recently you reviewed my new page and wrote this >
Comment: The sources need to show why the product is notable per the general notability guidelines. Usually this is done by showing that there are third-party reliable independent sources that discuss the product. —Tom Morris (talk) 08:37, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
I put additional link, from independent editor. There are more links like that on the net, but I found inpropriate to "spam" References section with the list. If that's necessage I will add more additional links.
Thanks for your help.
Sincerely, Jovan Despic — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdespic (talk • contribs) 06:29, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
Bani Mustafa Article
I am the author of the article "Bani Mustafa", and I would like to make some points regarding the unfair deletion process of the article.
1. The deletion proposal was made by the user JohnRak as part of the dispute reagrding the contents of the article Jerash here. The relation between the two users is quiet obvious, as the user JohnRak admitted that he works with the user Historyfeelings in the real life as shown here. This made him if not socketpuppet a hired crowd.
2. The PROD deletion proposal overpassed the Articles for Deletion (AfD) process which is against Wikipedia policy as stated here
3. The PROD deletion proposal was made by the user JohnRak whose creation was dedicated solely for the deletion of the article Bani Mustafa as shown in the history of his contributions as the first contribution for the user was the deletion proposal. Please check here
4. The PROD deletion proposal was made while I was in the process of responding to the AfD. In my response to I depended on the information which I had on hand during that time, which I admit it was not complete.
5. The article was subject to a continuous vandalism since the beginning of the dispute between me and HistoryFeelings over the article Jerash, where the vandalism was made by anonymous IP addresses.
6. I can assure that all the information, which I have included in the article were genuine and authentic. However, most of the sources provided in the article are written in Arabic and are not available on the internet. These resources are available in Jordan and can be obtained from many public libraries, however as I am away now, I have no access to these sources as they are not available online.
7. An article which was written on the website of the Jordanian news agency "Almadenahnews" confirms that, please see the English translation of this article here.
Banimustafa (talk) 09:59, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- You seem to not get it. If the article is unsourced, all of these concerns are irrelevant. As for your source in concern in (7), it's not in English. There's only one thing Wikipedia demands of you: find some sources. If you can't find sources, bureaucratic worries about whether or not a deletion went through exactly the right process or not are utterly irrelevant. —Tom Morris (talk) 15:27, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks!
Thanks for participating in my RFA! I appreciate your support. Zagalejo^^^ 06:39, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
That Twitter thing...
I know you're only incidentally connected to all this, but I'd appreciate the perspective of someone good at summaries and bullet-pointed lists. Darryl from Mars (talk) 08:25, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
AFD for Heroes and Villains Entertainment
Hi,
I'm just seeking clarification on the reason for the no consensus close of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heroes and Villains Entertainment. Is it primarily due to WP:NOQUORUM? I'll may renominate in the near future. Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 14:58, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
- Bascially, yes. We can't keep on relisting forever. —Tom Morris (talk) 17:45, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: June 2012
| ||||||
Please comment on Template talk:Religion topics
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Religion topics. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 22:16, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low 
to High 
.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:57, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
A barnass for you!
|
You earned this |
| For being a total badass. Nice running into you. Drmies (talk) 04:53, 13 July 2012 (UTC) |
Some stroopwafels for you!
|
Thanks for fixing the M. Walter Pesman/Michiel Pesman thing :). Callanecc (talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 13:54, 13 July 2012 (UTC) |
- No problem. —Tom Morris (talk) 13:54, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
AfD closing script
I've noticed that somewhat frequently AfD discussions are being closed, the talk page is being templated with the result, but the actual AfD template has not been getting removed. The most recent example was after your close at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leah Kauffman, but as I have seen it with other editors, I presume there is a common script responsible. So I can leave a note in the right place, what script are you using to close them? Monty845 22:27, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
- I use User:Mr.Z-man/closeAFD.js. Thanks for sorting it out. —Tom Morris (talk) 02:01, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
999
Tom, I was browsing through some entries and ended up clicking on your name. Now I have a better understanding of how Wikipedia stays so current. Anyway, I noticed an entry: This user has been on Wikipedia for 9 years, 9 months and 8 days. So tomorrow 15-Jul-2012 will be 9 years, 9 months and 9 days! Seemed a totally random yet not insignificant number. Take care and thank you for your contributions! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.174.237.34 (talk) 01:01, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Scripts
Hey Tom - after Wikimania I have noticed that my scripts allowing me to view user information that you added isn't working anymore. (As are none of the Teahouse scripts I added). Any thoughts or ideas on how we can magically fix this? Thank you =) Sarah (talk) 16:37, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
- Weird. It's working for me. Have you cleared your cache? Might be some kind of weird temporary browser blip resulting from weird caching stuff. Otherwise, I'd suggest that you might want to try asking on #wikimedia-tech on Freenode. —Tom Morris (talk) 16:40, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:List of vegans
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of vegans. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 01:15, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Wikimania 2012
Awesome meeting you @ Wikimania 2012. Piandcompany (talk) 23:12, 20 July 2012 (UTC) / Jason
AFD question
Shouldn't Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sigma Alpha Kappa be closed as a de-facto PROD?--GrapedApe (talk) 03:53, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
- No, I don't see any particular reason to do that. If there's no consensus to delete something, at AfD, we don't delete it. —Tom Morris (talk) 11:59, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:45, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Barnstar
Thanks! I think I applied for JSTOR and still haven't had it yet..♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:24, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:God
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:God. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:15, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Mozilla Editathon Saturday 18 August
You are invited to attend the Mozilla Editathon, where, among the like minded people, we will look at improving the Mozilla related articles on Wikipedia. For more information visit http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Editathon
Thanks! Daria Cybulska (talk) 10:48, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
Aidan Burley
Re the above - I added one of the initial twitter comment posts. UK news is now reporting on it (ITV news source has tweeted https://twitter.com/itvnews) - happy to accept that there has also been vandalism but twitter account in question is self-evidently his own, and level of retweets/comments to his comment is high and vitriolic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.108.139.198 (talk) 22:24, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
- Sure, there's no hurry though. If it's as big a controversy as it seems, it'll be in some reliable sources tomorrow. —Tom Morris (talk) 22:29, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
Quora
I saw your post on Quora and just thought I would introduce myself. I actually run a firm called EthicalWiki, focused on helping companies improve Wikipedia articles they have a conflict of interest with through transparent community collaboration. I've also been really active in contributing to the Signpost, helping improve a new essay, sparking discussion on improving the clarity of the COI guideline and tons of other stuff (like speaking here) and other ideas. If it's an area you have an interest in, there's definitely a lot of discussions about it going on and we can use hands.
Cheers User:King4057 (EthicalWiki) 21:34, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
- Hey, King4057. I believe we met briefly at Wikimania! I don't actually have very strong opinions on COI and paid editing other than "I wish it would go away and leave me alone". Anyway, glad to see there's productive discussions going on about it. —Tom Morris (talk) 21:43, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
- I thought you looked familiar. Were the guy from the UK at the paid editing table with DGG? I like to think my approach to paid editing is actually worth encouraging and appreciating rather than tolerating or shooing away, but it wouldn't be the first time my ego and sense of self righteousness has been bruised. ;-) User:King4057 (EthicalWiki) 22:15, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
- Yep! The very same. I definitely think that there needs to be have a conversation and that it's a conversation worth having, and your voice seems to represent a reasonable and sensible one. So, yep, keep on keeping on.
—Tom Morris (talk) 22:38, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
- Yep! The very same. I definitely think that there needs to be have a conversation and that it's a conversation worth having, and your voice seems to represent a reasonable and sensible one. So, yep, keep on keeping on.
- Ooh, "voice of reason." My fragile ego is restored! User:King4057 (EthicalWiki) 17:41, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
- Ooh, "voice of reason." My fragile ego is restored!
Hey, you don't remember the username of that lawyer that was the table with us do you? User:King4057 (EthicalWiki) 19:37, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
- No, sorry, can't recall. —Tom Morris (talk) 19:59, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Ramadan
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ramadan. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:15, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:List of temples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of temples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:15, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:19, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: July 2012
| ||||||
Page Triage newsletter
Hey all. Some quick but important updates on what we've been up to and what's coming up next :).
The curation toolbar, our Wikimedia-supported twinkle replacement. We're going to be deploying it, along with a pile of bugfixes, to wikipedia on 9 August. After a few days to check it doesn't make anything explode or die, we'll be sticking up a big notice and sending out an additional newsletter inviting people to test it out and give us feedback :). This will be followed by two office hours sessions - one on Tuesday the 14th of August at 19:00 UTC for all us Europeans, and one on Wednesday the 15th at 23:00 UTC for the East Coasters out there :). As always, these will be held in #wikimedia-office; drop me a note if you want to know how to easily get on IRC, or if you aren't able to attend but would like the logs.
I hope to see a lot of you there; it's going to be a big day for everyone involved, I think :). I'll have more notes after the deployment! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 19:54, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
The Tea Leaf - Issue Five
Hi! Welcome to the fifth edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!
- Guest activity increased in July. Questions are up from an average of 36 per week in June to 43 per week in July, and guest profile creation has also increased. This is likely a result of the automatic invite experiments we started near the end of month, which seeks to lessen the burden on hosts and other volunteers who manually invite editors. During the last week of July, questions doubled in the Teahouse! (But don't let that deter you from inviting editors to the Teahouse, please, there are still lots of new editors who haven't found Teahouse yet.)
- More Teahouse hosts than ever. We had 12 new hosts sign up to participate at the Teahouse! We now have 35 hosts volunteering at the Teahouse. Feel free to stop by and see them all here.
- Phase two update: Host sprint. In August, the Teahouse team plans to improve the host experience by developing a simpler new-host creation process, a better way of surfacing active hosts, and a host lounge renovation. Take a look at the plan and weigh in here.
- New Teahouse guest barnstar is awarded to first recipient: Charlie Inks. Using the Teahouse barnstar designed by Heatherawalls, hosts hajatvrc and Ryan Vesey created the new Teahouse Guest Barnstar. The first recipient is Charlie Inks, for her boldness in asking questions at the Teahouse. Check out the award in action here.
- Teahouse was a hot topic at Wikimania! The Teahouse was a hot topic at Wikimania this past month, where editor retention and interface design was heavily discussed. Sarah and Jonathan presented the Teahouse during the Wikimedia Fellowships panel. Slides can be viewed here. A lunch was also held at Wikimania for Teahouse hosts.
As always, thanks for supporting the Teahouse project! Stop by and visit us today!
You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. Sarah (talk) 08:38, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
WikiProject Mozilla
WikiProject Mozilla has finally been created! We hope you will help out in the development of all the necessary WikiProject pages. Thank you so much for your support, and we look forward to seeing you at the WikiProject! WP:WikiProject Mozilla ҭᴙᴇᴡӌӌ 01:38, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Smiles for you!
TheGeneralUser (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:User:Cowman109/Smile2}} or {{subst:User:Cowman109/Smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!
Just came around to say Hi :). Regards and Happy Editing! TheGeneralUser (talk) 21:38, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High .
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:14, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
New Pages newsletter
Hey all :)
A couple of new things.
First, you'll note that all the project titles have now changed to the Page Curation prefix, rather than having the New Pages Feed prefix. This is because the overarching project name has changed to Page Curation; the feed is still known as New Pages Feed, and the Curation Toolbar is still the Curation Toolbar. Hopefully this will be the last namechange ;p.
On the subject of the Curation Toolbar (nice segue, Oliver!) - it's now deployed on Wikipedia. Just open up any article in the New Pages Feed and it should appear on the right. It's still a beta version - bugs are expected - and we've got a lot more work to do. But if you see something going wrong, or a feature missing, drop me a note or post on the project talkpage and I'll be happy to help :). We'll be holding two office hours sessions to discuss the tool and improvements to it; the first is at 19:00 UTC on 14 August, and the second at 23:00 on the 15th. Both will be in #wikimedia-office as always. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:01, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Grandpallima and potential edit war
Hi! Tom,
Am asking for help as it seems I'm having a bit of trouble with the following contributor. It seems there seems to be a bit of reverting articles I edited as part of the GOCE copy edit drive. Here's a good example: [2] Geraldine Page. I am notifying you that I reverted the edits and left a clear explanation on the contributor's talk page. Please advise on what to do next. I do not wish to be in an edit war, but I do not want to have my good-faith edits reverted either. I spent several hours trying to improve the Page article. I've also had problems with the Rebecca Zahau article concerning this contributor who does not seem to understand how the child died from fatal injuries not life-threatening. I have patiently explained the differences between fatal and life-threatening. Sigh...Advice needed. On a personal note, my sister died last week from cancer so I have a bit more time to contribute at WP. I'm still dealing with my aging parents.... :-) Thanks! Quill and Pen (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:09, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
- I'd be happy to see an admin weigh in and give User: Quill and Pen some help. Quill and Pen seems to need some additional mentoring on how to edit (or "copy edit" as he prefers to call his efforts) on Wikipedia. I discovered this editor while cleaning up quite a bit of a mess on Death of Rebecca Zahau that involved the deletion of quite a bit of sourced material and some insertion of POV material by another editor entirely. [3] In the course of doing so, I noticed that a couple of the issues had been caused by Quill and Pen (incorrect name in lede while inserting some irrelevant material about the historicity of the Spreckels estate; deletion of sourced material surrounding Max's injuries [4]). Figuring this might be a new user, since most of the edits were positive and the effort was clearly good faith, I did a routine check of other contributions. Geraldine Page was the only other article edited recently by the user that contained content I might be familiar with, and I immediately saw that similar problems existed here, most notably again the deletion of sourced material [5], but also minor issues, like a lack of awareness when copyediting [6].
- Seeing a pattern but recognizing good faith editing, this seemed like an opportunity to mentor. I left a friendly caution on Quill and Pen's page [7] explaining that I had made some changes correcting his edits. This was, however, immediately met with reversions on his part to a version that predated my own edits and which included the edits of the bad faith editor (for Zahau) [8] and to a version which included the inappropriately deleted material (for Page). [9] Quill and Pen then became quite upset over some of material in the Zahau article (obviously), and attempted to suggest I caused the initial problems with the article (even though he was now, of course, looking at a version that didn't even have my changes in it). His odd focus on "fatal injuries" vs. "life-threatening" injuries above is typical of my interactions with him over the past week in which he has become so zeroed in on some of his minor edits (I'm perfectly fine with "fatal" or "life-threatening," by the way) that he continues to overlook the much more serious issues of deleting sourced material and introducing errors into the article which I have raised with him.
- I did initially revert his reversions (especially since in the Zahau article they undid all of my work), but that seems to only have intensified his confusion about who did what and to have convinced him (though not a single diff supports it) that I set about haphazardly reverting all of his work in these articles (again, unsupported by any of my earlier editing diffs which left much of his editing untouched).
- This is clearly a good faith editor. He clearly wants to make substantive and positive improvements to Wikipedia. He also clearly is in need of more mentoring and guidance, since he doesn't seem to understand policies involving the deletion of relevant, sourced material or the fact that he may need to double check his own edits for errors before finalizing them. His own high estimation of his writing abilities (mentioned twice on my page) may not make such mentoring easy.
- Per my comment on his own talk page today [10], though I will continue to be alert to the kind of (unintentionally) disruptive edits he has made, I am done interacting with him. I recommend a mentor with a similar interest in copyediting and a bit of patience. He bears some watching. Grandpallama (talk) 15:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Sorry I haven't responded. I've been meaning to. I've felt really pretty crappy physically for the last few days, with constant headaches. I haven't had the focus necessary to look into anything in depth. Additionally, I'm sorry to hear about your sister's cancer, Quill and Pen.
So, from a brief look at the Geraldine Page diff, I'd say that the first thing is that the rewriting to put "Academy award winner" as the opening words go against MOS:LEAD. I think the important thing to learn with Wikipedia, Quill and Pen, is the BRD cycle. When there's an issue, people will revert, don't take that personally, but try and have a productive discussion as to what particular parts of the article change need fixing. So, in the Geraldine Page case, the lead was fine, but there are a few changes in there worth keeping (saying she died 'from' rather than 'of' etc.).
In addition, a copyedit generally shouldn't be removing references. People put a lot of work into finding references and generally removing sourced information is one of Wikipedia's few major sins. I'd strongly recommend taking a skim read over WP:MOS: there's lots in there, just like a style guide for a newspaper or magazine or academic journal has lots in there, and sometimes the result of MOS adherence is a sort of lowest-common-denominator "Wikipedaese", but, well, that's just how Wikipedia works. 
I'll have another look at these comments again in a little while and see what else I can say. —Tom Morris (talk) 17:14, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for your input, Tom Morris. I am now going to ask you to intervene a bit more directly as an admin, since as you can see, Quill and Pen continues to inappropriately revert and make inappropriate edits. [11] Thank you for involving yourself. Grandpallama (talk) 13:32, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks Tom. I did some research and discovered I did not quite write the lede correctly. I have since followed WP style and changed the lede. I spent approximately two (2) hours rewriting poorly written sentences and tightening up the article. I do believe those edits should remain, and the easiest approach would have been to have the lede rewritten. That was not done. Instead the whole article, and my two hours worth of work, were reverted. I hope you can understand why I attempted to keep the good writing. As I wrote earlier, I did edit the lede to match WP style once I did my research. Let's hope that remains. Thanks! Quill and Pen (talk) 15:36, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- "I have since followed WP style and changed the lede. I spent approximately two (2) hours rewriting poorly written sentences and tightening up the article. I do believe those edits should remain, and the easiest approach would have been to have the lede rewritten. That was not done. Instead the whole article, and my two hours worth of work, were reverted." False. Grandpallama (talk) 19:02, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- Note: I did receive a kind invitation to join the Tea House which I have accepted. I look forward to learning more there. Also, I have joined the GOCE and received several Barnstars for my editing. I thought I was doing an adequate job. I guess the GOCE thought so too. Quill and Pen (talk) 15:40, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- Tom here are the Page talk page comments I left: ==Since I have been warned not too edit this article this is what was removed by a contributor==
- Note: I did receive a kind invitation to join the Tea House which I have accepted. I look forward to learning more there. Also, I have joined the GOCE and received several Barnstars for my editing. I thought I was doing an adequate job. I guess the GOCE thought so too. Quill and Pen (talk) 15:40, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
The following shows what was removed from this article by an editor: [[12]] and as you can see I did NOT remove referenced material. I did remove extraneous verbiage that was not needed. I don't think anyone particularly cares, or finds all that important, about whether Page did not show up for a performance. What is important is that she died and people were notified. Funeral attendance is important too as it shows how people within in her profession viewed her work. And for word smithing: A better choice of words would be died from a heart attack NOT died of a heart attack as written. The word from indicates a cause as in "The child suffers from asthma or she died from a heart attack." The word of expresses a relationship but not a cause as the word from does.Quill and Pen (talk) 15:57, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
I am not sure where to insert these comments so I will put them here
Tom I hope you are feeling better soon. I used to suffer from migraines (and had an occasional cluster headache) but once I went through menopause the headaches have pretty well disappeared.
Page: As I stated on the talk page no one really cares, nor is it needed, about whether Page did not show up for a play performance. What is important is she died and people who attended her funeral. The reason being is how her contemporaries recognized her professional contributions. There was no need to retain the single reference, I do believe there was a single reference, for something that did nothing for the article. That reference was removed when I removed the unneeded extraneous information. There is no need, or place, for a reference once that information is removed. As you well know I learned a lot from "H*****" and how not to treat people. I would not have removed that portion of the writing unless I felt there was a real need to do so. As I volunteered to copy edit for the GOCE drive I took the responsibility seriously, and was trying to improve WP to do otherwise would have meant that I failed.
Zahau: I have patiently explained the differences between life threatening and fatal injuries. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Death_of_Rebecca_Zahau The gist of the explanation is a life threatening injury is when you are hurt and survive. A fatal injury is when you don't. In other words, you can not write life threatening when there is a fatality involved. Also, at the recommendations of Grandpalamia I did remove some extraneous sentences. I originally left them as to not ruffle feathers but have his/her suggestion they were removed. I attempted to work in good faith as demonstrated by my actions.
I know how frustrating it can be when dealing with a "H*****"
Finally, as I wrote earlier I did some research and discovered how I erred on the lede. I then changed the lede. I will review the links you have posted. Thank you! Quill and Pen (talk) 03:44, 15 August 2012 (UTC)