|
User talk:Doniago/Archive 11
Pay attentionI did not change content in Jew's harp. --Opus88888 (talk) 21:39, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Dispute resolution survey
HairsprayHello, I have made several edits to hairspray 2007 all of which had good intention to add to the page. However everfy single time you delete them and say it's not essential etc. well surely it makes the article more interesting and people should be allowed to add to the article unless you own copyright over it. Also although broadcast can be alright broadcasted sounds better and reads better. I hope I don't offend you in this but hope I get my point across. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stiarts erid (talk • contribs) 09:46, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Total Eclipse of the HeartHave reverted your change and added link to "The Original Bootlegs" article. Incidentally, please see above for a debate which began over this very subject. Lack of citation or sources isn't strictly a reason to remove material from Wikipedia. If it was, 90% of Wikipedia would be eligible for deletion. If everyone went around just deleting unsourced material, there wouldn't be a need for a "source" tag, would there? The Cosby Show.PacificBoy 16:42, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
Re: April 2012Hello. I was just trying to help. And I'm not new here, so I know what should go in or out. The article (Harry Potter 5 (movie)) is missing a lot in its plot, very important stuff, and I added it. And now it's gone. Without a consensus. Why shouldn't I revert it again? The info that I added was good. --WKMN? Later [ Let's talk ] 22:53, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
InsultsPlease do not insult me. What the hell is "original research"? It is your way of saying that I am a liar? How dare you, Sir! Wallie (talk) 16:40, 11 April 2012 (UTC) Erased my edit again!You are determined, aren't you. This is an encyclopedia being written, not a pathetic trading of insults. You are now saying that need a reference! You do, if something is not provable. In this case, it is obvious, and you know it. Wallie (talk) 17:00, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotWe 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 quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low 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) 13:03, 19 April 2012 (UTC) In recognition of your integrity
ReplyI was actually in the process of submitting a source when you undid me, resulting in an edit conflict. RAP (talk) 15:24 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Help DeskDid you intend to delete my answer at the Help Desk?--ukexpat (talk) 15:54, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Re: Serenity (film)Regarding this revert, as far as I can tell, Rusted AutoParts (talk · contribs) was trying to cleanup and prepare the article for a GAN, since he nominated it for GA at 15:25, four minutes after removing it.[1] While you are correct in correcting the user by pointed out that there is difference between unsourced and uncited content, the material remains uncited and, from my POV, trivial. In your restoration of the material, is there a reason you did not add a citation? Viriditas (talk) 06:45, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Star Trek Two Judson ScottHi - Scott's name does appear in the end credits of the movie contradicting what the other person posted - Additionally only Paramounts Startrek.com website is remoteley accurate and any other should be regarded as what anyone can post online - a bit like Wikipedia until someone challenges it. Regards and feel free to message me back if you disagree Alphacatmarnie (talk) 15:12, 27 April 2012 (UTC) super size meno need to be snotty, I do believe that I was discussing information I think should belong in the article. Tinynanorobots (talk) 16:04, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy (film)This film was directed by the team Hammer & Tongs. I edited the page to reflect this. You have edited it to show Garth Jennings directed the film, yet he is one half of the directorial team. Please explain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.77.127.65 (talk) 13:47, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
I provided the link to the song, and the artist. What more do you need ? These were both removed by BigBird on 4/12/12 after being there since August 2009. Ghostrdr (talk) 15:15, 2 May 2012 (UTC)I didn't see any actual links/diffs in the Talk page note I responded to, and I'm not sure what article was the subject of the discussion. As I noted there, I imagine that what's needed is a third-party source that establishes the significance of the song, not merely its existence. As I haven't heard anything from Big Bird as of the time I'm writing this, I'm just venturing a guess. Doniago (talk) 15:18, 2 May 2012 (UTC) Wow, you're fast. The article was "Lake Okeechobee", and the song refs were placed under "Popular Culture". As a musician I was greatly offended when they were removed w/the comment, "removed irrelevant trivia". The songs written about Lake O are neither. With Wiki being riddled with reference to irrelevant TV shows like the Simpsons, I took offense to this indiscriminate removal of relevant information. I think BigBird got tired of vandalism placed by immature adolescents who can't appreciate country music. There must be a better way to do this, removing the song references is contrary to the whole purpose of Wiki, as I understand it. Ghostrdr (talk) 15:35, 2 May 2012 (UTC) Thanks. Slow day at work. :) As far as other articles including this sort of thing, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS - the references are probably inappropriate in those articles as well and should be tagged and/or removed. I would agree that "irrelevant trivia" was not the most diplomatic description. I would instead have used "third-party sourcing needed to establish significance" or such, but it sounds like I would agree with the removal on princple. WP articles should not contain lists of pop culture references/other bands that have covered a song/every time the Mona Lisa appears in a tv show/every song that mentions God/etc. unless a third-party source can be provided to establish that that reference was somehow considered significant. FWIW, if the songs had been added and I couldn't determine who had placed them, I would have tagged the section and given it three months or so, but then gone ahead and done exactly what Big Bird apparently did. Doniago (talk) 15:42, 2 May 2012 (UTC) Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotWe 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 quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low 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) 14:20, 3 May 2012 (UTC) Asus tablet grammer problem.Hello dear Doniago. my reccently view of the page: Asus, was that you are said i used a bad or poor grammer. i know about it, but i can't fix this again, because i don't know where is that problem that i have to fix. can i wish youself editting the ** TABLET ** Subject in the asus arcitle? It is: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ASUS&oldid=486686780 It's important to set on the arcitle, because it was a important news almost for Asus and Google. Really thank. Milad Mosapoor (talk) 00:06, 18 April 2012 (GMT)
Dear Doniago, Thank really for your feedback to my inqiry that i said. you said completely, but i cant convinced, you know, you saying i used a poor grammer in the sentences of the Tablet part that i made on the page. but, i thought my just problem is on the last pharageraph, look at this: Google has been based for unveiling on partnership with Asus to design an 7-inch tablet with a common brand of both companies i won to said google has a relationship with asus for some to makeing that tablet. and another querstion: in my edit you see i used at last 3-4 line, but another persons who made the subject *Essentio* OR *GPS devices* used metioned just about 1 or 2 sentence. Thank you for your guide that you interesting to showing to me. Milad Mosapoor (talk) 17:46, 18 April 2012 (GMT)
Hello dear doniago, I think you want to saying to me i talking althorgh with my primary language, to goting my correct point sharper, so please read this sentence in farsi (if you can read it or translate it or redirecting this to a person who he/she are proficient in persian/farsi language.)
Milad Mosapoor (talk) 07:16, 01 May 2012 (GMT)
A Big thanks from all of you'r assist in recent relations. please be friend with me in my facebook or yahoo! mesanger. (all of my info is on my user page) Thank you. Milad Mosapoor (talk) 16:18, 08 May 2012 (GMT) Rescue 911I had to remove something that looks suspicious to me on the page Rescue 911. There is no official source that I know of to confirm something of unaired episodes or a death that was in an unaired episode. From the looks of it, I say it's probably vandelism. That was twice that I had to do that. So you might to looked the editing history of that page and see for yourself so you can decide what to do. BattleshipMan (talk) 21:04, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Kurt CobainDear Doniago, Sorry my reversion of your undo on the Kurt Cobain page. I would like to provide significant links to keep my editing. Can you let me know what kind of links I shall provide? Thank you so much! Saocarlos (talk) 21:27, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Dear Doniago, Thank you so much for your answer! I understand but this painting was auctioned at Christie's. Christie's auctions only signicant art works. Can you reconsider this matter? Saocarlos (talk) 22:18, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Dear Doniago, the sale of this painting at Christie's is recorded in all sites of Art Pricing. This artwork was featured on the poster of Christe's auction on 15 November 2012. But I will not insist, because I'm more interested in the indisputable quality of Wikipedia. Thank you again! Saocarlos (talk) 22:54, 14 May 2012 (UTC) You've got a hub cap diamond star haloAdrian Shaw's album title [3], a blog site [4], but also this one [5]. Then we have lower breeds like [6] and the specialist like [7] and even our Hungarian sister site [8]!! So far ... Martinevans123 (talk) 20:54, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
UPSHi Doniago, I found it interesting that you reverted some edits of mine on the grounds that they were unsourced, when they were factual observations, but have no problem accepting the sections in which they appear, which are also unsourced. Only unsourced praise is allowed? Regards, Acad Ronin (talk)
Reversion of edited Velgarth page.I'm more than a bit confused here, so perhaps you can explain --and justify-- your decision to remove my changes to the "Basilisk" section and revert it back to its former condition. The rationale that you have used --unsourced, overdetailed and non-encyclopedic-- strikes me as, well, unfounded. To say the least. Let's see, the entry for "Cold Drake" uses 803 words, and reads like a short story. But that's acceptable? While the current --and reverted-- section for Basilisk ignores three-quarters of the description of the creature. But that's acceptable and appropriate, eh? Because the entry is 100% accurate to the books, that makes it "unsourced", and because a 173 word description renders it "overdetailed" (especially compared to a 803 one). I don't often edit Wiki articles, and only do so if I feel I'm actually making a correction and/or contribution. So I stand in awe of your decision, and eagerly wait with bated breath for your explanation regarding the decision to delete my edit. Masterius2011 (talk) 20:11, 18 May 2012 (UTC)Masterius
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotWe 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 quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low 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) 10:15, 22 May 2012 (UTC) You are incorrect, unless it has been changed recentlySince an IP doesn't 'own' their talk page, they cannot remove their own warnings regardless of their editing restrictions. However, I'm not going to edit war with you to restore them. I'm just going to block the IP on sight the next time they step out of line. Regards, Syrthiss (talk) 13:57, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
I re-revised the edit you reverted, rationale is on the article's talk page. What do you think? Ellsworth (talk) 23:12, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Delta PHX-CVGThe flight is no longer bookable on delta.com. Snoozlepet (talk) 17:36, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Wes Anderson page VandalismDoniago: the Wes Anderson page vandalism is still going on. How do we proceed to get the name portion of his page locked? please see below our exchange from November 2010, these purposefully malevolent changes have serious repercussions as they end up in the press. Please help and please advise. Discussion from November 2010: Wes Anderson page is constantly vandalized by user with IP addresses in Illinois (75.57.191.220)(75.57.175.50)(71.201.120.78) changing middle name to "Mortimer" this needs to be stopped as is not factual information. What more can be done than just constantly "reverting" the info back?81.64.38.94 (talk) 06:00, 4 November 2010 (UTC) Warn them, as a start. If they keep it up they'll eventually get blocked. WP:3RR may also be applicable. If you believe the 3 IP's are definitely related, you may want to look into WP:SOCK as well. As it's just a minor vandalism I wouldn't get too riled up over it, just make sure the edit's being undone and the IP's getting incremental warnings. Eventually they'll get tagged for it one way or another. Cheers. Doniago (talk) 14:52, 4 November 2010 (UTC) Thanks, this has been going on for over a year. The IP addresses are hardly ever the same. I represent the living person in question and this false information is finding it's way into press articles and even a recent book, I think we are right to be "riled up" as this is ongoing and is a cause of distress for the person in question. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.64.38.94 (talk) 15:16, 4 November 2010 (UTC) Unfortunately, the problem with an encyclopedia that anyone's allowed to edit is that anyone's allowed to edit it. You could try asking for page protection, but if you're going to do that you should be prepared to prove that this same vandalism has been occurring repeatedly from multiple IP editors for a prolonged period of time. I'm not sure how difficult it is to get this protection, objectively speaking. As for it showing up elsewhere, it's rather unfortunate that anyone would consider unsourced material on Wikipedia to be reliable...I certainly don't. Please feel free to come to me with any other questions/concerns. (smile) Doniago (talk) 15:23, 4 November 2010 (UTC) 82.123.232.70 (talk) 15:16, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotWe 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 quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low 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) 02:18, 6 June 2012 (UTC) Michael ScottI removed the section, because it quotes an article from 2006. It's not relevant. I didn't know I had to specify on the talk page, but will do some from now on, and will be removing it again. 71.59.181.111 (talk) 21:34, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Rescue 911I want Rescue 911 to be blocked from any unregistered users. Someone has been using different IP address has been keep on posting a story about one of the deaths in an unaired episode that is never proven that it was filmed or the event of it occured. So please, tell someone on wikipedia to block that page from unregistered users. BattleshipMan (talk) 22:02, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Goth talk page undoHi Doniago Having reviewed what I actually wrote, I can see why you regarded it as discussion of the topic rather than development of the article. However, if I may quote in my own defence from my second sentence: "I don't consider myself competent to add anything to the article, but would like to request one or more of those who could, to tell us something more about Goth psychology, or a belief system...." In other words my contribution to the talk page was *intended* to be a request for expansion of the article in a specific area. I then went on to suggest some possible focus areas, with the idea of clarifying my request by giving examples. Please advise whether you think I should:
Regards David FLXD (talk) 13:56, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
Ok, thanks - will make a short, clear suggestion and leave it at that. I am perfectly happy to make a contribution, but as a non-Goth don't feel that I have the insight to answer my own questions! David FLXD (talk) 12:06, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBotWe 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 quality of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low 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) 00:00, 20 June 2012 (UTC) Template:Unsigned --> |
