This is an archive of past discussions with User:DerbyCountyinNZ. 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.
Blatant 3RR violation/Blatant ignoring of edit summary request
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
Also, I said the pictures were to remain off until we get consensus when I first took them off. They are in question, so they shouldn't be there, but since I don't want to be banned again, I'll let your stubbornness slide. At least discuss on the talk page, or I can't help but think you have a self-issued control on the article. It's not the status quo for the article, it's the status quo for you. Rusted AutoParts05:26, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
The founding of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Incorporated, is of course internationally relevant, as not only was its founding a landmark moment in African-American history, but multiple world leaders share membership in the organization as well, including, but not limited to, the late Eleanor Roosevelt, Maya Angelou, Toni Morrison, and the current president of the Republic of Liberia. Although I'm not entirely certain why exactly you feel as if my addition to the page isn't relevant, I have several very good guesses why, and am willing to challenge your eradication of my edit to the page by involving whomever I feel is appropriate so that it may stay and illuminate the "1908" page alongside the absolutely vital line of text concerning the invention of the vacuum cleaner.
This needs to be discussed on the Talk:1908 page but I will answer here. Fraternities and sororities are purely American, they have no notability in any other country, therefore their foundation is not of sufficient international importance to be included in Year articles. Year articles are for international historically notable events. Also please read WP:OTHERSTUFF (the existence of something else in an article cannot be used to justify inclusion). DerbyCountyinNZ (TalkContribs)05:59, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Well, for one, Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Incorporated, has hundreds of international chapters. Secondly, regardless of whatever that rule says, the Collinwood school fire is a purely American historical event with purely American consequences, and, yet, there it is, right there on the page - but, that's fine. To whom do I complain?
I was a bit taken aback by your instantaneous deletion of my addition of Phil Everly to the list of notable deaths in the article on 2014. I did read the notice stating that only people with articles written on them in Wikipedia can be included. OK, so there is no article on Phil Everly as an individual, but of course there is one on the Everly Brothers, and it's not like he was an unknown, so why be so technical?Josephew (talk) 20:40, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
WP:RY attempts to achieve consistency between Recent Year articles and as part of this previous discussions on this topic the consensus has been that any person who is not notable enough to have an article in their own right is not notable enough for inclusion. This can be overridden by consensus in individual cases, but as you can see from the talk page discussion there is no such consensus yet. I for one was surprised that Phil does not have his own article as he IMHO he is more worthy than say Cory Monteith, but that's the way wiki works sometimes. DerbyCountyinNZ (TalkContribs)21:07, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
maori-in-golden-bay/#.UtMSb56SzNk The Prow :The first meeting - Abel Tasman and Māori in Golden Bay]</ref> Tasman's ships depart without landing. The Dutch chart the west of the [[North Island]].
"Universal Carrier", also known as the "Bren Gun Carrier"
Please don't just say the UC is incorrectly known as the BGC. Who is calling it as such? Why is it incorrect? That they are different vehicles, okay - but this needs to be explained. And why then call it something that it isn't? What's the origin of this name confusion?
All questions raised and left unanswered. If they're not answered, it's better IMHO to leave out the "(incorrect)" note altogether. CapnZapp (talk) 20:44, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Some people seem to have great difficulty in distinguishing between historically notable events and news. DerbyCountyinNZ (TalkContribs)07:33, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
You should not league yourself with a person who has on many occasions harassed, bullied, and has a known history of being disruptive such as User:68.231.15.56. He has been blocked before for violations and needless accusations. He acts like he owns the 2014 in the United States article and sees fit to delete content as he pleases, often under vague and manipulative principles. Now, I've come into conflict with you before Derby and I abandoned the primary 2014 article because of certain 'authoritative' actions overseen by you. It is "your" article after all at this point, where you have the final say as to what stays. I have never deleted information / erased history to the level that you or User:68.231.15.56 has done. It is damaging to the foundation upon Wikipedia was founded, you know, the whole "free-to-use, online encyclopedia where anyone can contribute." What began as a fun hobby has certainly turned into a bureaucratic mess where "some" information is just not good enough to merit inclusion based upon the 'opinions' of certain editors and not the overall goal of free knowledge. And my contributions are NOT spam! (Tigerghost (talk) 10:59, 1 April 2014 (UTC))
You see, this user is rude and disruptive. He's engaged in a personal vendetta against me and other users that contribute (as evidenced in the talk page of 2014 in the United States and other pages). If his erratic and disruptive behavior continues, he'll be blocked again, as he was before for the same reasons. He's no good Shepard as he claims, but a bully. (Tigerghost (talk) 01:10, 2 April 2014 (UTC))
Where to start? 1. I am not "in league" with any editor on here, I don't need to be as I have sufficient faith in my own interpretation of such topics as notability to not require support from others to justify my wikipedia editing.
2. I am not "in league" with User:68.231.15.56, while we agree on many things we certainly do not always agree. 3. I suspect there is some wiki guideline somewhere about threatening other editors on here (which is effectively what your post amounts to), but as you've wasted enough of my time I'm not going to bother searching for it. 4. If you and I have "come into conflict" then your posting on my talk page is hardly likely to be constructive. 5. If you have "abandoned" the parent article that is your problem not mine. 6. I do not "own" the parent article. I am probably the editor with the longest continuous participation in Year article discussions but there are still often inclusions which I deem trivial and I am not even the most extreme when it comes to what deserves to be excluded. 7. Any problem you have with User:68.231.15.56 is not down to me so don't imply that it is. 8. I have avoided Year in US articles precisely for the reason that I have no expectation that they will be kept clear of trivial events. That there is a virtual edit war over an earthquake which caused neither deaths nor "major damage" only confirms that opinion. 9. As this discussion has wasted enough of my time, DO NOT POST HERE AGAIN unless you have a contribution which specifically addresses a problem with an article rather than an editor. DerbyCountyinNZ (TalkContribs)07:38, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1900, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Temperance (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
You're probably aware of this, but you've reverted that one entry three times in four hours. I'm not getting involved in the edit war over the listing, just thought you should know you're close to violating WP:3RR. Calidum06:19, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
As I requested that users discuss this on the talk page after all the reverts and only one user has chosen to do I believe I have followed WP:CYCLE and the status quo ante applies and this overrides 3RR. DerbyCountyinNZ (TalkContribs)06:34, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
That's cute. You revert five separate editors in 18 hours and I'm the acting in bad faith. I appreciate a good chuckle, but that's too much. CalidumGo Bruins!14:34, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
Calidum, I would suggest Derby was replying to my more recent question about arbitration than your message about being in possible violation. Though it's possible I am wrong. FourTildes (talk) 20:04, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Longevity, 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.
This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ruakura may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
''Ruakura''' is a semi-rural [[[[Suburbs of Hamilton, New Zealand|suburb]] of [[Hamilton, New Zealand|Hamilton City]], in the [[
You used the {{Help me}} template, but asked a question that can only be answered by an admin. If you still need help, please add the {{Admin help}} template instead. Alternatively, you can ask your question at the Teahouse, the help desk, or join the #wikipedia-en-helpIRC help channel to get real-time assistance. Click here for instant access.
This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page.
Sorry, but no: see WP:Protection policy#User talk pages. We are very reluctant to semi-protect user talk pages, and you would need to provide a link to another unprotected page, so the attacker could carry on anyway. These Japanese IPs seem to be static, so I think this is better dealt with by blocking. I will watchlist this talk page and block the source of any new attacks, or you could report them to WP:AIV,saying something like "persistent harassment, see talk page history". JohnCD (talk) 10:58, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
It's completely trivial. Please read the guidelines at WP:RY for what is considered notable enough for inclusion. DerbyCountyinNZ (TalkContribs)17:37, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
No disrespect, but do you know how much anticipation those games have received within 24 hours from their announcement? Latias1290 (talk) 15:40, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Games are released frequently. NONE of them is ever likely to be considered a historically notable event as required for Year articles. The appropriate place for them is 2014 in video gaming. DerbyCountyinNZ (TalkContribs)04:57, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Supercentenarians
Hi, DerbyCountyinNZ, I just wanted to say I think you are a good editor and I would really like to work with you over time on these articles. I believe you must have an interest in supercentenarian as do I. I certainly may put in content that is trivial, but I think some level of detail on lifestyle is important for these article, but my mind is not completely closed :) Cheers. --I am One of Many (talk) 05:00, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
A cup of tea for you!
For your excellent work on Athletics articles, particularly the commonwealth rankings, which I love, I award you the classic commonwealth drink :) Kafuffle (talk) 00:00, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
July 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Nick Willis may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "[]"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
Over a 66-day period (15 May - 20 July) leading up to the [[2014 Commonwealth Games|Glasgow Commonwealth Games]), Willis ran his best times over four different distances. Two of those runs doubled as new
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Julia Ratcliffe may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Someone that might go under year of death missing now?
So I was looking up the category "Possibly Living People" some people I clicked on seemed unlikely as there careers were just too far back. But this one I think actually might go under "year of death missing" now. João Pereira (swimmer), born in 1905, that would make him one of the oldest people ever, and can't find any proof he is alive. So what do you think? (Another one that I can't remember where it was said someone was a political person in the 20s which I doubt they are alive as well.) (I did find a person listed under year of death missing who was alive though-it was odd as there years active was until the 90s so I thought something was off)
A person I've been trying to find the date of death for
So I moved Raymond DeWalt out of possibly living people given the fact he would be at least 110. But I have yet to find a accurate source for when he might of died. 2 dates that seem plausible was one in the 1960s (with a birth in the 1880s) and one that was born in 1902 and died in 1982.
(I have moved a few people tonight actually that I have found here!)
I have made some pages for some Oscar nominated tech cats that some might be alive/dead as well!
Okay now-here are some that I can't find evidence if they are alive or dead-not all of them but some. (I also moved some out last night-I moved out every 1898 birth and almost all the 1899 births that were listed there) (As well as one guy that was in the 1920 Olympics who was playing at 1914 which I knew he couldn't be alive any more)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to 1906 may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
* [[August 4]] – The first [[German Imperial Navy]] [[submarine]], [[SM U-1 (Germany)|''U-1'']]), is launched.
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to B. K. S. Iyengar may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
| children = [[Geeta Iyengar|Geeta]]<br>Prashant]]<br>Sunita
Okay so Arnulf Solvoll is listed under living people but not as a centenarian. In most of these cases I have moved this to possibly living. But it seems likely this guy could be alive and unlike the other ones I am not sure if I should move him or not-so yeah can you look this guy up? Thanks.
Wgolf (talk) 18:55, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Oldest people working in film (not just actors/actresses/directors)
Do you know if there is any sandbox for this? I've been trying to find one-I don't mean just the classic ones like Luis Rainer but people that were screenwriters, even stuff like editors (like Elmo Williams is still alive), costume designers, ect. (The oldest nominated set director I can find who is alive is a guy who worked on Bedknobs and Broomsticks who is 97!)
Thanks!
Wgolf (talk) 17:18, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Misao Okawa
Hi,
Please can you respond to what I've written on Misao Okawa's talk page.
Please take a closer look at the Table E page. On the top right, it says "Last Updated On: Aug 23 2014 3:31PM", but you keep saying it was last updated on August 29. IT DOES NOT SAY IT WAS LAST UPDATED ON AUGUST 29. IT SAYS AUGUST 23. I do not see how it was published on August 29 because it says "Last Updated On: Aug 23 2014 3:31PM". I am not the one in error, you are. 173.17.92.6102:14, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
You are Wrong! The date Table E was last updated was the 23rd. The date it was accessed was the 29th. My fixes are exactly correct. If you don't understand then don't don't edit! DerbyCountyinNZ (TalkContribs)02:26, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
It doesn't say that! It says it was last UPDATED on the 23rd. It was last ACCESSED (i.e. the date on which a wiki editor changed the date of the update) was the 29th. It's simple, if you actually understand English. DerbyCountyinNZ (TalkContribs)05:21, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alan Simpson (athlete), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kingston. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. I found this source [1] that says Anne Josephine Ponde (born 30 June 1908) is oldest living person in Montserrat at the age of 106. But is this source enough reliable although it has picture about her and it is posted as governor's office in Montserrat? 62.72.229.12 (talk) 17:39, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Unfortunately Facebook is not usually considered a reliable source. It is possible that as the page appears to be an official government page an exception could be made but I do not know the procedure for this. DerbyCountyinNZ (TalkContribs)17:50, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Reply to your comment about my user page being in violation of a guideline
Similar user pages have been taken to Mfd and would have been deleted if they had not been moved to an appropriate page. DerbyCountyinNZ (TalkContribs)04:03, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Okay. Well, I don't think my user page is any problem, except for "Japanese limbo supercentenarian cases", which is probably the only thing that I will change, but I will not do that right now. Deaths in 2013 (talk) 01:16, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
I already put a copy of my user page in my user sandbox, so my user page is ready to be deleted, and this way here, my work can forever stay in my sandbox, or until I can find another place to have all of it.. Deaths in 2013 (talk) 01:13, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Lecharlier Maximilien
I have the death certificate of Lecharlier Maximilien but i can't put in on wiki.
What i wrote before was correct, why always erase it without asking something?
Don't forget i'm a GRG correspondent therefore i'm not here to played the fool.
As another correspondent found out (the hard way) working for GRG does not give anyone dispensation to add material to wikipedia without an appropriate citation. Perhaps if the GRG bothered to update its webpages more often such issues might be less frequent. DerbyCountyinNZ (TalkContribs)04:17, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Gallai Rezső
Okay, maybe he isn't the oldest people ever in Hungary, BUT he's the oldest MAN ever, and the reference is verified.So I don't understand what is the problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.97.41.29 (talk) 10:05, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
The citation you used says he is the oldest man in Hungary, not that he is the oldest man EVER in Hungary and his age is NOT verified, yet, he is currently only on the pending list of supercentenarians. If his age is verified then he can be added to the list. DerbyCountyinNZ (TalkContribs)10:39, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Oldest Faroese ever
Theodor Thomassen from Faroe islands is now older than Johannes Tauser. But I think that next time we hear him when he is 106. His birthday is 28 October. 85.134.25.113 (talk) 03:50, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Anniversaries at year articles
Hi DCinNZ, hope you're all well. Could you guide me to the section where Wikipedia:RY states that anniversaries don't belong there? I can't see anything of that sort. Perhaps you could also tell me where else I could put it. Cheers, Horst-schlaemma (talk) 09:11, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Anniversaries are not specifically mentioned (though perhaps they should be) but there is longstanding consensus that they fall under: "Events which are not cited at all, or are not Wikilinked to an article devoted to the event, may be removed." That is, unless the anniversary itself has an article it should not be included. DerbyCountyinNZ (TalkContribs)22:36, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
September 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Cliff Bourland may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
gold medal in the Athletics at the 1948 Summer Olympics – Men's 4 × 400 metres relay|4x400 m relay]] at the [[1948 Summer Olympics]].
The Year in aviation articles should be used for a summary of internationally significant events. If neither of the wikilinked articles (Curtiss Model H or RNAS) includes mention of the event you added (i.e. the actual shipment of them, not merely their use) then I would not consider it significant, and it certainly needs a reference. Even with reference this seems somewhat trivial (the same of which can be said for many of the entries in early Year in Aviation articles). DerbyCountyinNZ (TalkContribs)03:12, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1866 in New Zealand, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Napier. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello. I would like to know why you made two edits to the History section of the Auckland page. In the first, you dropped the "t" from the word "result" and did nothing else. In the second, you removed sentences on the establishment of Catholic schools. In light of many complaints above, I would like you to justify why these edits should not be regarded as vandalism. Akld guy (talk) 21:37, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Because neither edit was anything like vandalism, such a suggestion is ridiculous. Removing the t from result was accidental, as should have been obvious from my edit summary which showed that my intention was to remove an unnecessary comma. The second edit is also clearly explained in my edit summary: the material I removed is trivia, its inclusion in a general history of Auckland is not justified. DerbyCountyinNZ (TalkContribs)03:01, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
It's not unusual for vandals to delete text and state a convincing but irrelevant reason, hence my query over the dropped "t". Please take more care. The spelling is "earlier", not "eraliuer". I realise that word appears only in your edit summary, but a spelling mistake like that doesn't inspire confidence. As it happens, I think you were justified in removing the other text on the grounds of trivia, and it was probably also out of context. Akld guy (talk) 03:52, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
A typo's a typo, big deal. I have little faith in users who make unfounded accusations of vandalism. Each to their own. DerbyCountyinNZ (TalkContribs)04:00, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Myanmar supercentenarians
I have found two supercentenarians from Myanmar (former Burma). Daw Mya Kyi who is 122 years old (born 16. October 1892) and grandpa U Thwin who is 111 years old. Here is source [3]. But someone should remove that protect so I could add both myself to longevity claims list. 62.72.229.12 (talk) 17:06, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
They can't be added to Longevity claims because the citation does not give a claimed date of birth. They could be added to Incomplete longevity claims. That article has review protection so if you make a change a registered user will need to accept the changes. If you make a properly cited change I see no reason it wouldn't be accepted, although it won't be me; I don't bother watching the page as it's full of fanfluff and other drivel. DerbyCountyinNZ (TalkContribs)07:06, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
This youtube video [4] claims that The Oldest person in Samoa Mitavale Sione Tita'e was celebrating his 105:th birthday at 20. April 2012. According to one message in conversations, she has passed away 10 months ago in January 2014 so she was almost 107 when she died. I know that the source is unreliable, but she could be oldest woman ever from Samoa. I guess her obituary is written in Samoan language and I havent found any other article which tells about her. The only way to confirm her death would be to travel Afega, Saleaula and Sasina Savai'i region and ask that to locals? 62.72.229.12 (talk) 16:59, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
I have no idea what criteria apply to Deaths by Month articles but recent (2002 onwards) come under the scope of WP:RY which has a minimum standard of articles in 9 non-English languages (at the time of death); over 7 months after his death Pinette only has 6, 4 of which were created after he died. Cheers, DerbyCountyinNZ (TalkContribs)08:10, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Your sig
Hi there. What I meant about your sig was that what I see when editing after you looks like this:
(Can you please let me know once you've seen this and I'll ask for the file to be deleted).
This just seems to have started happening in the last day - when I commented on the timeline talk page I noticed it when adding to the section, so I added the comment by editing the whole take page noticed that your older comments didn't do it (neither do earlier comments on this page so whatever changed, must have happened in the last week). It could just be my browser and/or operating system (up to date Firefox on up to date Windows 7) acting up, but I'm sure a lot of other people would be using the same setup as me. Daveosaurus (talk) 08:13, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
Ta for the link - I will go and annoy them. It's not exactly doing any harm and I'm the only person who seems to have noticed so far, so it could well just be something weird in my system. Cheers. Daveosaurus (talk) 08:59, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello there! You seem to have fixed your signature already by reverting it to a basic signature. If you're interested, I'd be more than happy to help you come up with a new signature that meets all of the wiki guidelines and is HTML5 compliant. Just ping me and let me know. Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c)19:53, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
This issue must be the result of a recent change, presumably in wiki, as I have used this markup for my signature for years and never noticed the extramarkup before. DerbyCountyinNZ (TalkContribs)20:41, 28 November 2014 (UTC) (testing to see if the issue is still present)
You could shorten it even a little more if you were so inclined to: <span style="background:orange; color:blue">DerbyCountyinNZ</span> <sup>([[User talk:DerbyCountyinNZ|Talk]] [[Special:Contribs/DerbyCountyinNZ|Contribs]])</sup> resulting in: DerbyCountyinNZ(TalkContribs) and even add a link directly to your userpage: [[User:DerbyCountyinNZ|<span style="background:orange; color:blue">DerbyCountyinNZ</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:DerbyCountyinNZ|Talk]] [[Special:Contribs/DerbyCountyinNZ|Contribs]])</sup> resulting in: DerbyCountyinNZ(TalkContribs) Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c)21:12, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
How would I phrase "Otago, historically the most successful university." so it doesn't appear WP:WEASELly? The host says in the first episode something about Otago having won the most series (Otago has won six series of University Challenge, more than any other university), but I can't remember his exact wording, and the episode doesn't appear to be available online to reference. Ollieinc (talk) 08:29, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
If there's nothing in any online or print media then it would be best to leave it out, from that section anyway; if it was mentioned in the lead section that "Otago has the most series wins to date with 6 of 14 completed series" such a statement there would be covered by WP:CALC. DerbyCountyinNZ(TalkContribs)09:13, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Question for administrator
This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page.
It is very common for MfD discussions to have very little participation, and this one had far more participation than many I have seen. Anyway, it's closed now. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:44, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello, Why have you deleted "see also" form this page? The two bishops (Viard and Redwood) were bishops of the Cathedral and were its builders. Sacred Heart Cathedral is the successor of St Mary's and the history of the two building is intimately linked as they exist/existed on the same site, served/serve the same function and objects, furnishing, statutes from the earlier building are preserved in the present one. My reading of WP:SEEALSO is that a liberal view of this matter is encouraged. Also in relation to your deletions in 1850 in New Zealand and 1851 in New Zealand, I agree with the deletion from 1850 (the foundation stone), but I think the 1851 (the opening) one should be restored. Why should St Mary's Cathedral be treated any differently from St Mary's Cathedral in Auckland in 1897 in New Zealand? Regards, Rick570 (talk) 04:31, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
As per WP:SEEALSO "As a general rule, the "See also" section should not repeat links that appear in the article's body..." (bolding emphasis is mine). All those links are already included in the article body of St Mary's Cathedral, Wellington, I see no justification for including them again in a See also section. As for notability, Year in New Zealand articles should (supposedly) be for the most notable events in NZ history (NOT everything that happened that year) though of course opinion varies; there certainly seem to be many cases of editors adding their pet project trivia to such pages. The laying of a foundation stone or the opening of a cathedral with no other claim to notability (e.g. NZs first Cathedral) seeems to trivial to me. As for the similar inclusion in 1897, WP:OTHERSTUFF applies, and in that case a link to a sub-section in another article hardly seems notable so I'm going to delete that as well. Such entries belong in the history of the relevant city. DerbyCountyinNZ(TalkContribs)09:47, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining about the overlinking. I accept that. But you have not answered the following: Why should St Mary's Cathedral be treated any differently from St Mary's Cathedral in Auckland in 1897 in New Zealand?Rick570 (talk) 19:32, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
I notice that under the appointments and honours category in each year, all the incumbent Anglican bishops of various eras are listed. Do you think that they have any claim to notability for inclusion in such lists? Why not the hierarchs of other religions as well? Various sects such as the Presbyterian, Catholic and Methodist surely have just as much importance in NZ history as the C of E. If someone set their hand to the work involved all the sects could be well represented and they could dominate the whole of each page. Do you think it would be a very good idea to remove the Anglican bishops from the pages altogether? Of course if one of them participated in some important historical event, that could be recorded in the events sections. For example, I imagine that Bp Selwyn did something important historically for the entire nation and not just for the Anglican church. Perhaps he was at the Treaty of Waitangi meetings like Pompallier? I would be interested in your opinion. I suppose this sort of thing is someting that could be discussed more generally?Rick570 (talk) 01:25, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi. I have found two African supercentenarians whom should be in longevity claims page. Sant Pikinini Malunga-Maseko from Swaziland (died in South Africa) [6] and Nkhono Mamohlapisi Mabakole from Lesotho (born 18 May 1896, still alive) [7]. Both sources says accurate date of birth and/or date of death. 62.72.228.251 (talk) 15:12, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Hong Kong
DerbyCountyinNZ, I greet you. About Hong Kong protests, these had a world-wide impact, means of comunicacion worldwide covered becuase China is strategic and important country. I do not believe it's a local event, this is far-reaching and relevant event. Something of that magnitude that hapend at Hong Kong can´t be unimportant. Not at all.--Gustavo Parker (talk) 04:21, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Do you have any more references for this article? There is no reference for his background, i.e. being a New Zealander, born in Fiji, Swedish/Irish parentage etc. Where did all that come from?Rick570 (talk) 01:17, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
The birth of a Swedish princess who's fifth in-line to a throne, is more notable then the birth of a Monaco prince & princess who are first & second in-line to a throne? GoodDay (talk) 12:40, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
The minimum criteria for inclusion is 9 non-English wiki articles. The Monaco twins did not meet that minimum at the time of my second revert. Now they meet that minimum so I have added them back in. DerbyCountyinNZ(TalkContribs)20:25, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Fergie and Elena seem to have the required other-language article count at their 2014 death. I question international notability, but I don't think WP:RY is an adequate reason. (Please ping me; my wireless router seems to be flakey, and I'm editing on my smartphone.) — Arthur Rubin(talk)20:35, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
3RR warning
Just a friendly reminder.
Your recent editing history at 2014 shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. — Arthur Rubin(talk)20:50, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
That such DerbyCountyinNZ, I don not have bad intentions, I always want improve articles and 2014 is not exception. I improved with importants and relevant events as Hong kong protests ―follewed worldwide― (and no a local event) or the agreement reached at Sweeden, both are 2 nothing negligible events. We are full of events (relevants) in Wikipedia in Spanish language. So, I don't undestand why you revert those editiond. But, with all due respect, I sent you that you never responded at my talk page, as it should have been. Thefore it took me longer to find the answer. I hope we can solve this small misunderstanding.--Gustavo Parker (talk) 00:03, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
I'm just letting you know: The reason why I always put the access date as the date of update for GRG references is because I don't know how often the GRG access its websites, particularly Table E.
The accessdate is the date when you change the date of the reference on the article. This is as shown on the edit history. And there is no point changing the "reference" date unless you actually change something in the article (there's nothing "wrong", it's just pretty much pointless). DerbyCountyinNZ(TalkContribs)05:32, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Well, since I rarely make supercentenarian edits and haven't been involved with recent disputes at all, I don't hold any grudges against you or anyone else. What point would I be making here? I just thought this topic would be benificial to have in mainspace so that more people can work on it. OscarL01:06, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
I'm going to revert your edit again because the election of a national leader is clearly a notable event for the year of 2015. RoyalMate106:37, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
"National elections are not usually included unless they represent a significant change in the country (e.g., a nation's first election). Some elections gain international significance for other reasons and this can be demonstrated through several international news sources. Regular and ordinary shifts in power within the United Nations and European Union are also not sufficiently notable.
Most legislation passed in the year will not qualify unless it is of international significance."
The election is of significance because it elected a president in an off-year, to fill in a vacancy (Michael Sata's). I'm open to discussion about this. RoyalMate106:39, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
That is nowhere near internationally significant. And as you've failed to open the discussion before reverting I'm giving you another warning. I could revert again but I'll let another of the regular editors do that. DerbyCountyinNZ(TalkContribs)07:12, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
International significance has not really been established yet, regarding the election. We'll have to wait and see. RoyalMate107:17, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Incomplete longevity claims until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ricky81682 (talk) 08:33, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
While I agree with this edit[8], your reasoning is incorrect. In order to participate in SEAL training, a person has to be in the Navy, thus at some point be a Navy veteran regardless of graduation from SEAL school or not. The Bilzerian article has been a bit of a mess, I've just been trying to keep it as simple and factual as possible, leaving out hyperbole, praise, and/or criticism. --Scalhotrod(Talk) ☮ღ☺ 15:35, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
There wasn't enough space in the edit summary to put my full reasoning. If he were not notable as a gambler or actor (the latter is marginal anyway) would he have been notable for his navy career? His article suggests not in which case this is an incidental aspect of his biography, worth mentioning as background but not appropriate in the opening sentence which is there to provide the main reason for inclusion in Wiki. Cheers, DerbyCountyinNZ(TalkContribs)19:59, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Why is this not appropriate? I thought the whole point of "as of" was to put articles into a category that would remind us to update the information later. Kendall-K1 (talk) 19:34, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
The Pak 40 is in no way comparable to the 17 pounder.
That only serves to propagating false information about both guns, if people see that.
The KWW 42 is objectively more similar and gives people a better idea of the power of both guns. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.176.132.155 (talk) 02:44, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
The commas introduced into this article do not separate introductory clauses from subsequent or subsidiary clauses. The article now reads incorrectly, in all 3 cases. And you violated 3RR first yourself, so don't accuse me of it when you could, and should, have avoided it by taking it to the talk page. DerbyCountyinNZ(TalkContribs)04:09, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Commas should be used to separate introductory dependent clauses from independent clauses. "On her 117th birthday" and "When asked about the secret of her longevity" are introductory dependent clauses because they introduce the sentence and cannot stand alone as a sentence. "[S]he said that her life seemed short" and "[S]he jokingly replied, 'I wonder about that too.'" are independent clauses because they are capable of being stand-alone sentences. Therefore, commas should separate the clauses. Also, I never violated 3RR. On the other hand, with all due respect, you were the one who reverted three completely separate editors. --Biblioworm17:07, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
And FYI, I don't appreciate this sort of totally unfounded accusation from a newbie account with an obvious familiarity with Wikipedia, so unless you want a sock puppet investigation into your activity I'd stay off m ytalk page if I were you! DerbyCountyinNZ(TalkContribs)05:04, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
D'Evegroote Marie Jeanne
Man, before undid my version... I have her birth and death certificate, her first names were Marie Jeanne NOT ANNE.
When is wrote correct it's because it's man...BEFORE WROTE THAT IT IS IRRELEVANT AND THAT VIOLATE A WIKI RULES LOOK that and you will be more wiser after:
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tamaki City, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mt Wellington. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
RE your revert at List of centenarians (activists, non-profit leaders and philanthropists). What does this edit summary "no citation" mean? There are many entries in that list which have no citations. Who says that one is required, and/or why are the other entries still there? Please revert yourself. You can see at her article that she is 100 years old, and you will find sources at Twitter of people who have been to her birthday party. I just didn't add such sources, but it complies with the Jason Quinn rule: "It's verifiable if the reader can find a source at Google." (Please answer here, I'll watchlist it.) Kraxler (talk) 18:10, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
I know that Twitter is not a reliable source, but one must not generalize. We know her birthdate, it's in the article. We have an announcement of her imminent 100th birthdate, and we have the Twitter confirmation of two people who attended her birthday party, one a decade-long journalist of the New York Times, the other the current Borough President of Manhattan. I added all that to the article. I expect you to revert yourself. Feel free to add any citation you like, or leave it to be seen at the article, like the many other entries without a citation which have not been deleted. Thanks. Kraxler (talk) 23:21, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, I was going to give you a fuller explanation but given your attitude that would appear to be a waste of my time. So, lets make this clear: I will definitely NOT be reverting my edit; unless you find a reliable source (not Twitter, Facebook, a blog or any other social media) that states she has celebrated her 100th birthday I will revert any revert you make of my edit. And before you waste any more of my time read WP:RS, WP:3RR, WP:BLP and WP:HARASS before you consider responding any further on my talk page. DerbyCountyinNZ(TalkContribs)08:08, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
@Kraxler: Maybe to put things into some context, there have been a lot of instances on these centenarian lists were individuals have been touted by blogs, forums, and Twitter and Facebook posts as having reached their "100th birthdays" because people cannot find a date of death at the time, only to later discover that they have been dead for decades. Above and beyond that, there have even been explicit and intentional hoaxes about people to or near the age of 100 that have been spread via these channels, as well as IMDb and even (in at least one case) a completely fabricated obituary! So for these issues, we air on the side of caution and try not to list people that we aren't certain are alive through reliable sources, which seems like the least subjective way of determining who is really 100. While I'm pretty confident that Runyon is alive based on what you have show us, sooner or later a source that meets Wikipedia's guidelines will emerge proving that she is/was 100, even if it comes at her death, at which point she will be on the list for the rest of time and we can be confident in the material's verifiability. I always look out for potential additions to the list, so I will look for a reliable source a little later today and, if I cannot find one, I will keep an eye out in the future. CanadianPaul20:07, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks Paul, for taking the time to debate. I'm well aware of the problem outlined by you. Marie M. Runyon has been in the news occasionally during the last years, is a local celebrity, and we have 2 perfectly reliable witnesses who attended her birthday party, one with a photo taken on the occasion. Please don't forget that "Twitter" is not the source, it's a platform, a tool, people use to communicate. The sources are a decade-long NYT journalist and the Borough President of Manhattan, both not really known as hoaxsters. I quote from Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources#Context matters: "The reliability of a source depends on context. Each source must be carefully weighed to judge whether it is reliable for the statement being made in the Wikipedia article and is an appropriate source for that content." If you dispute that these Twitter accounts are used by the people they say they are, that would be one thing, but if we accept that they are who they say they are, then the sources are appropriate and reliable in this context.. Well, be that as it may, it's not something that I would edit-war about. Kraxler (talk) 23:40, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
No, I don't think so. As you appear to have used a different meaning for "Farewell" above, and have far exceeded your quota of good will for wasting time on my talk page, there is NOTHING more to be said here. DerbyCountyinNZ(TalkContribs)06:11, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
1855 in New Zealand
THIS PAGE IS NOT YOUR PROPERTY.
The line which you have just deleted has been in the page since 10:39, 7 February 2008, and has been edited about a dozen times,
with the link 1855 repeatedly inserted and removed. I think the sentence should be there, and also the link. 109.151.135.121 (talk) 04:13, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
It's unnecessary per WP:SEEALSO. It is only there because it was in the page I used as a base when I created all the Year in NZ articles before 1900. It was just one of many poor formats which have since been corrected. DerbyCountyinNZ(TalkContribs)04:34, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Your edit was not constructive. The original statement was perfectly and follows the typical format i.e. the article is under the married name and the maiden name is identified in the opening sentence and stating her name at birth is all that is required, restating/repeating the obvious is not. DerbyCountyinNZ(TalkContribs)20:41, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
