User talk:Mythic Writerlord

Welcome!

Hello, Mythic Writerlord, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Talkback

Hello, Mythic Writerlord. You have new messages at Jimbo Wales's talk page.
Message added 20:47, 28 September 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

(talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:47, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

September 2011

Your addition to Triangle Studios has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. See my edit. If this is incorrect, please explain why on the article talk page, Talk:Triangle Studios.  Chzz  ►  12:07, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I may have taken some things off the site but I have changed the words. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 12:13, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but that specific section was virtually the same as the website. For example, you wrote,
  • Triangle Studios has been creating new and innovative games and multimedia applications since it's creation in 2005. With the recent release of their latest projects...
And the website says,
  • Triangle Studios has been creating new and innovative games and multimedia applications since 2005. With the recent release of our latest projects...
The only difference in that part is removal of "it's creation in" - that is far too close to be permissible.
Even if it was amended further, it could still fall foul of our plagiarism guideline, and neutrality policy. Sorry.
There's some good advice in Wikipedia:Your first article.  Chzz  ►  12:32, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CLOSEPARAPHRASE is also a good guide. If the final result of the AFD is to delete, and you don't get a WP:USERSPACEDRAFT before then, please let me know and I'll help with that (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:31, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

November 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please be aware of Wikipedia's policy that biographical information about living persons must not include unsupported or inaccurate statements. Whenever you add possibly controversial statements about a living person to an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did to Justin Bieber, you must include proper sources. If you don't know how to cite a source, you may want to read Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners for guidelines. Thank you. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 18:13, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Steven Seagal

There is no need to undo my edit on the page, adding a more recent image of Seagal, a photograph which I myself took once while attending a concert. The file is NOT marked for deletion - an unknown IP adress added a tag on the file on Commons as an act of vandalism, which I reverted.
The previous file did have a copyright issue, and was therefore taken down and replaced by an image from 2006, which is no longer an accurate depiction of Mr. Seagal. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 21:30, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bullshit. You claim to have taken the photograph today.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:38, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Did I? Then that was a mistake, as it was several months ago. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 21:39, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Where did I say that?
Okay, it was added automatically by the upload wizard. That's why it gave 2 December as the date it was TAKEN. Obviously, it WASN'T. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 21:42, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you are genuine and you do actually have permission to license it under that you will need a OTRS ticket in the commons and to get an email from the donor of the image fully agreeing to release it under those terms. Trust me on this. Or are you claiming to be the author yourself? Something you said about "Released by the author into the public domain" made me think you weren't the author... ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:44, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I myself took the image, and it is not anywhere else on the web. There are tools by which you can select an image and see if it is used anywhere else - if you insert thise image, you'll see it matches no existing image. I am the author, and I have waved all rights to the image. I've actually intended to release the file for quite a while now, as the older file is very much outdated and not an accurate representation of Mr. Seagal. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 21:52, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please state the venue and city in which the image was taken.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:58, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Was on the Dreamcatcher Gala, Tue Oct 11 2011, if I recall correctly. He and his band, Thunderbox, played there. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 22:06, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Where was it? What city? I thought you put down July before? Surely you would have remembered if it was only in october..♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:56, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[the same image was taken on October 13, not October 11. You really think we are mugs here on wikipedia? Its not a good image anyway, he looks about 350 pounds in it. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 23:01, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It cannot possibly be exactly the same image. And I'm pretty sure he's close to 300 pounds by now, anyway. He's a very large guy (at least 6'4", and heavily-built). Mythic Writerlord (talk) 23:02, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it is exactly the same image. Look closely at the hands, no mistake in it. It was taken by a Robin Wong. You are Mr. Wong? Yes Seagal from what I understand is about as you say, what I mean is that he looks even more bloated than normal in it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 23:05, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I see what you mean, he does look rather bloated. Maybe there is a better image out there someone can upload to commons? I myself won't, this is all I have. :) Mythic Writerlord (talk) 23:07, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
LOL if you're going to fake ownership of an image you could have at least found a better image of him, like in the early 90s in his prime LOL. The photograph was taken by Robin Wong, not you. If you took the photograph the camera details would show up at the bottom. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 23:13, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mongol/Buryat

Awesome, I always knew he had something Far East Asian/eskimo about him but never found anything about it. You don't look like that being just Jewish!! That makes a lot of sense. Know which TV programme he said that on though?♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:52, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I always knew it couldn't have been Italian, that's for sure. :)
Anyway, per: this page, for instance, it says:
"The Film director and actor was born to an Irish Catholic mother, Patricia and a Jewish Russian father, Stephen. Seagal also has a Mongolian grandfather who was either of Kalmyk or Buryat descent. Seagal mentioned this in a Russian interview."
Other sources include: this one, on how is NOT Italian and this one, in Russian. His appearance seems to verify it. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 10:11, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:ScreenshotCotD.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:ScreenshotCotD.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 14:06, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The description used is fitting: it does belong to Triangle Studios and the file can be used on the page of the article alone. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 14:21, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

December 2011

Your recent editing history at Encyclopedia Dramatica shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. 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. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block.

If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 15:55, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring and violation of the three-revert rule at Encyclopedia Dramatica. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 18:43, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Death of Johannes Heesters

Hi. I would rather do it, but the template is protected and only admins can post new items. Since I'm no admin I cannot do it and you should ask any of the admins active in ITN, preferably those who have previously done it and marked the nominations as posted. Best regards.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:33, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I asked one of them, two days ago, but he has not responded. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 20:34, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I will make a comment to justify the slight consensus that has been reached through the discussion.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:36, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Any help will do. Maybe you could ask one of the administrators you mention - I do not know which admins you referred to but I'm pretty sure you do. In any case, all help is welcome and I am glad for your time. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 20:37, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings,

Regarding your request per Heesters, I think you should take up this matter. I want to avoid COI. Thanks.Ryoung122 02:49, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Mythic Writerlord. You have new messages at Swarm's talk page.
Message added 20:57, 27 December 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Swarm X 20:57, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DNFTT

Regarding this edit, please remember WP:DENY. --Saddhiyama (talk) 11:12, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, it just cracked me up that's all. :) Mythic Writerlord (talk) 11:15, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

February 2012

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living persons, as you did to Stellan Skarsgård. Thank you. -- Doniago (talk) 13:24, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I fully agree. To do this edit in biografie of a living person is irresponsible. Best regards, Sir Statler (talk) 09:27, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Terrorist"s?

I don't understand why you're arguing at Talk:Anders Behring Breivik that we should keep in that the man is a terrorist, despite possible psychological issues, but reverting my description of Carlos the Jackal as a terrorist. I don't agree with Quinacrine's point of view, but for just that reason I would like to avoid being in the situation where he is right. There is a discussion thread open, but neither you nor Youreallycan has discussed your motivation for reverting my change at all (nor has Quinacrine put his comments there to support it for that matter). I just don't get it - Carlos the Jackal is pretty much the person who would have come up at the top of the Family Feud list for "name a famous terrorist" before 1995 or so (not that some groups like Black September wouldn't have been deserving, but as individuals they were/are practically anonymous). Wnt (talk) 07:35, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly the fact that he is seen as a terrorist should have a more prominent place in the lead, but that could be done by adding just one or two lines to the lead and not removing quite as much. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 09:08, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think I removed anything, though I shifted a sentence back to put his viewpoint in one paragraph, and joined some adjacent sentences into another. Wnt (talk) 14:11, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

March 2012

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Shooting of Trayvon Martin. 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.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
  2. 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. VQuakr (talk) 08:13, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, You're the one in Trouble with Wik for Starting an Edit War!

Just admit he's Hispanic and that you CHERRY-picked his dad's statements. Here's another legit source affirming his father's statements -- http://www.wftv.com/news/news/sanford-readies-travon-martin-rally-council-votes-/nLZZk/

PS Yes, you ARE a liberal. Liberals always deny what they are...lol 99.185.56.156 (talk) 17:34, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, he's Hispanic. Whatever, describe him as Hispanic. But he's still not a white man. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 17:40, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free content violation

I had to remove the picture of George Zimmerman you added to Talk:Shooting of Trayvon Martin in the discussion about his racial description here. Per WP:NFCC point 9 Restrictions on location, we cannot use non-free content on talk pages. Sorry. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 09:35, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, if it's against the rules it's against the rules. I thought it could be relevant but it's not that important to the discussion. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 09:36, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cross of the Dutchman (game) (from RfC Request board)

I really need some help with this page. It is not very well written or may not be entirely neutral and I really require the help of some more expierenced user(s). Thanks a lot! Mythic Writerlord (talk) 14:28, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Robert B. Bell

In response to your post on my talk page, it is not vandalism. In the recent past, information about this Christian Weston Chandler has been continually removed and kept from Wikipedia, and I see no reason why it should be added to Mr. Bell's page. I am not vandalizing it, but rather keeping it clean from the unacceptable information you have added. 98.111.207.202 (talk) 03:03, 9 August 2012 (UTC) Forgive me, it wasn't your contribution (unless I'm mistaken). Regardless, it does not belong on Mr. Bell's page, as that information has been removed from similar pages on Wikipedia in the past. Sorry for any confusion. 98.111.207.202 (talk) 03:06, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the above post on the RfC Request board, please consider:

Coastside (talk) 09:22, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

September 2012

Hello, I'm Alcmaeonid. I noticed that you made an edit to a biography of a living person, Paula Fox, but that you didn’t support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. Wikipedia has a strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Alcmaeonid (talk) 16:45, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fact is: Courtney Love DID claim to be Brando's granddaughter, and there are many sources for her making this claim. Her mother has apparantly denied the rumours and Love's grandmother never responded them one way or another. There is plenty of reason to at least include that fact that she claimed this. A claim that, to my knowledge, Love herself never retracted. It does not have to be stated as a fact, but there is enough reason for at least including the claim. I believe it to be significant. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 18:37, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Linda Carroll. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Alcmaeonid (talk) 00:49, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

March 2013

Hello, I'm Mushroom. I wanted to let you know that I removed an external link you added to the page Pope Francis, because it seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. Mushroom (Talk) 22:38, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well I think it is inappropriate because it is not a well-established news organization as defined in our reliable sources guideline. The website was created just a few months ago, it doesn't name its editorial staff, and the owner of the site self-identifies as "a journalist in training". Please don't add it back. Mushroom (Talk)
Please do not link to that website from any other page. It cannot be used as a reliable source on Wikipedia. Mushroom (Talk) 23:05, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I explained to you why that website is not a reliable source, yet you keep adding it back. This is citation spam, and if you have a vested interest in the site you are also violating our conflict of interest guideline. Furthermore, our verifiability policy clearly states that English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones. I have now replaced all citations with better English ones. If you add them back you might get blocked from editing. Mushroom (Talk) 10:16, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 2013

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Adolf Hitler shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 10:03, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that the Loret issue was discussed last year when this same information was reported in the continental press. The consensus was not to include it. See here. Paul B (talk) 12:16, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]


IP's voting

Hi, could you show me where I can see these IPs voting? All I can find/see is http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Involuntary_celibacy_(2nd_nomination) ? Is this what you meant? I am new to Wikipedia so I don't know. I can guarantee you I'm doing this alone and I try to provide arguments. MalleusMaleficarum1486 (talk) 11:54, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you, Dante, and I really mean no harm. No bad feelings whatsoever. Still curious to see your sources, however. Would you be kind enough to show them? The one on how feminists and atheists are somehow out to get you I find particularly interesting. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 12:11, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it is nice that you "mean no harm" but you're effectively trying to cause harm by wanting to delete these two articles on flimsy grounds. As much I was disappointed by the article on love-shyness being deleted that, unfortunately, had some grounds. I find the deletion of incel and Gilmartin articles much less grounded. Anyway, here are the sources on what I was saying about atheists and feminists (what other sources did you have in mind?)

http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/incel -incel tag on Tumblr, full of negative posts

http://manboobz.com/category/incel/ - quite a popular site, also negative content, take a lot at this recent discussion on it there http://manboobz.com/wtf-is-a-mgtow-a-glossary/comment-page-21/#comments

http://betweentwowaves.com/loveshy.html - this is more about love-shyness but these people have a similar opinion about incel

Also, I run a blog on incel (maybe you know about it, it's quite... infamous) and I've received thousands of negative comments, just like I've seen many more negative comments on places like LS.com. All of them are doing something similar to what you're doing - denying incel is a disease (despite nobody claiming it), claiming that nobody in the world is in that situation (despite proof that many people are), plainly saying that incel doesn't exist (despite its definition ensuring that it does), saying that everything call be solved by therapy (experiences of incel and common sense say differently), confusing love-shyness with incel, accusing all posting on such sites in being Gilmartin's cronies though most haven't even read his books and he didn't come up with a term incel etc.

If you want to belong to such people that is very unfortunate.

Also, you haven't replied to my original question at all- is there a place where more people are voting and their IPs can be seen? 

MalleusMaleficarum1486 (talk) 12:32, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You know what? It's cool. Let us forget about the whole ordeal, then. I don't think this is a discussion I really want to get involved in. You said your piece and I said mine. Good luck on editing wikipedia. I will try not to engage in this discussion any further. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 17:17, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dishonest? Agenda? Oh how uncivil. I have no "hidden agenda" I assure you. Even though you seem very sure of the fact I am an atheist feminist propagandist, are you not? :) Ah well, live and let live. I don't believe I "lost" the debate, per se. I merely engaged in a discussion that I at some point gave up on. To stretch the argument seemed, in my mind, futile. You are quite accusatory in your way of discussing. So I choose to disengage from that situation. A unilateral retreat. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 11:12, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some notes

Hi Mythic Writerlord, I am writing regarding the interaction you've had with another editor regarding "incel", and the subject of civility came up. The essence of civility is maintaining respect for the people you're interacting with on Wikipedia, even if you disagree with their views. This can be tough to do, believe me I know, especially if you really don't respect their views: it's easy to think, 'You hold an idiotic view therefore you must be an idiot too.'

I also know that on Wikipedia it's easy to get away with hurling insults in someone's direction by insulting their actions or views instead of the person. You can't say 'You're an idiot and a jerk' but saying 'You write idiotic things a jerk would write' gets you through an WP:NPA loophole. However doing that doesn't meet with the core civility principle of maintaining respect, so please don't do it. If you do it, whatever message you were trying to get across will be totally lost, and if your goal was really to try to convince someone of something, you will have failed.

Please contact me on my User Talk if you have any questions. Zad68 14:51, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Mythic, I raised a question about your redirect of "Not getting any" here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:32, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not getting any listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Not getting any. Since you had some involvement with the Not getting any redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Epicgenius (talk) 01:09, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi ! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 04:18, Wednesday, January 8, 2025 (UTC)

Mission 1 Mission 2 Mission 3 Mission 4 Mission 5 Mission 6 Mission 7
Say Hello to the World An Invitation to Earth Small Changes, Big Impact The Neutral Point of View The Veil of Verifiability The Civility Code Looking Good Together


Vandalizing

Stop vandalizing Wikipedia by removing any notions of involuntary celibacy, both with this nickname and as an IP. I will report it if I see this again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MalleusMaleficarum1486 (talk • contribs) 10:44, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User Talk pages

Hi Mythic, regarding this, it's acceptable for an editor to remove messages like that from their User Talk without comment. It's considered acknowledgement of the message but the editor has chosen not to respond. They will have to live with the consequences if bad behavior continues after the note. But they can choose to remove the message, please do not restore it. Zad68 20:36, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just making you nervous

Buuu Hafspajen (talk) 15:32, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dude! You found what seems to be the perfect article for a merger\redirect. Well done, I never even knew that existed. Is the thing well sourced outside Japan? Fascinating. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 16:29, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unexplained reverts and WP:BLP

Please explain your revert of several changes from the preceding edit here. Are you familiar with the Wikipedia policies about biographies of living people and citing sources? You may also want to have a look at WP:PEACOCK. Regards, HaeB (talk) 09:19, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well I do feel that Brando's family life and children are already mentioned in numerous sources, biographies and articles and would not require much more sourcing for each and every individual child he ever had IMHO, as it would require a lot of new sources to be added when I feel there are already some that include all. You even put a "citation needed" template at the two children (Rebecca and Miko Brando) he had with his second wife, even though these children are quite often mentioned in sources as it is and Miko had some form of personal success in his function as Michael Jackson's bodyguard and handler. As for the peacocking, I am not too fond of that so I removed the part where it called his grandson Tuki "succesful" (he is already known to have modeled for several big brands so it is rather redundant IMO). Thanks for messaging me. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 09:39, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

March 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Paula Fox 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:
  • loveless-family-tree-remains-mystery-as-feud-with-grandma-sizzles/ Paula Fox and Marlon Brando]]</ref> Paula gave the child up for adoption. This daughter, [[Linda Carroll]], became an author

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:24, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Walter Walsh 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:
  • Walsh was survived by his children, seventeen grandchildren and 23 great-grandchildren.<ref>[http://www.3wiresports.com/2011/05/19/americas-oldest-living-olympian-walter-walsh-104/ Walsh
  • //www.3wiresports.com/2011/05/19/americas-oldest-living-olympian-walter-walsh-104/ Walsh family[</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:15, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

!

And judging buy this, I say it is a personal problem. [1]. I don't wan't too be mean but it is such an insignificant research. We have all kind of part time people at the university doing all kinds of research... It is just normal activity for an university . But none of them would be like brilliant and outstanding and revolutionary. Hafspajen (talk) 15:11, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Which is exactly why ms. Donnelly and involuntary celibacy both have no place being on Wikipedia, least of all in the form an a standalone artice. I am positive the article is to be deleted shortly, and hopefully the discussion will end there. How many consensus' do they require to just stop trying already? It's quite silly at this point. ;) Mythic Writerlord (talk) 15:27, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Incel

Hey, just wanted to give you a head's up: I do have some other stuff about it that I was going to say, but I'd prefer if you email me so I could explain in more depth. I didn't want to really post it on the celibacy board where it could be misconstrued by people in the incel community, which could make an already messy situation messier. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 02:34, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wizardchan and Isla Vista

Please look at this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2014_Isla_Vista_massacre#Wizardchan I have provided a source that proves that Rodger never posted on Wizardchan. If you really want to name a website that he browsed on then puahate is the main place he browsed on and bodybuilding.com's forums.

Here is an image collection that proves where he posted on. Notice Wizardchan s not there. http://imgur.com/a/Qf8Dn 188.220.88.53 (talk) 14:27, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pier Gerlofs Donia and Piracy promotional/advertisement edits

Hello. If you are going to re-add the material in these articles that I removed under WP:ADVERT, material that has gone unsourced for over five years and appears to reflect WP:ADVERT edits to promote a piece of computer software, please add reliable secondary sources such as scholarly articles. References to Web sites that cite the same Wikipedia article you are attempting to support will not suffice. Thank you. Universaladdress (talk) 20:20, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

September 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mark Gil 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:
  • ~businfk5/index.php/en/lifestyle/show/38087-mark-gil-52-succumbed-to-cirrhosis Mark Gil survived by]</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:42, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to Benjanun Sriduangkaew

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, 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.

Hi, this is in response to your edits to Benjanun Sriduangkaew. Plese refer to Talk:Benjanun Sriduangkaew#RequiresHate, where the issue of sourcing has been discussed. In brief, your edit introduces various self-published sources such as blogs, which per our policy WP:BLPSPS are strictly forbidden to be used as a source for material about living persons, even if (as here) they are written by reputable people and there is no real disagreement about their accuracy. We must limit ourselves to what not self-published sources write.

In addition, your edits introduce factual inaccuracies, such as that "Sriduangkaew admitted to being behind the "Requires Only That You Hate" blog". The cited source, the author's own blog, does not mention "Requires Only That You Hate". The assertion is therefore inaccurate: Sriduangkaew did make an apology, but did not identify herself as "Requires Only That You Hate".

I have again reverted your edits. Please make sure, before continuing to edit this or any other article about living persons, to follow applicable policy, or you may be made subject to sanctions. Thanks,  Sandstein  19:11, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Make sure you don't allow yourself to get bullied by this particular administrator. He will be very reluctant to hear what you have to say, and will undoubtedly rebuff it. Make sure what you are doing what is fine, so he won't have a leg to stand on when he wants to block you. You have made some excellent contributions to Wikipedia, so keep up the good work! Piandme (talk) 20:19, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Linda Bruckheimer

I have reverted your edit on Linda Bruckheimer's page, as it was uncited. If you are able to add an inline reference, please let me know. Thank you.Zigzig20s (talk) 18:45, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

February 2015

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to, (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed, 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.

Acroterion (talk) 12:42, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Snuggums (talk / edits) 20:45, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:ScreenshotCotD.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ScreenshotCotD.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:37, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Incels

Heads up, I nominated this for deletion, this is what I was trying to prevent. There maybe a subsection warranted in the content I was trying to restore, but this current version is purely based on manospheres. Valoem talk contrib 00:00, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse, but what do you mean "close to the heart"? Are accusing me of being an incel? Valoem talk contrib 19:03, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You are reading too much into this brother. I was merely saying it is a subject you have taken a lot of time trying to recreate. Therefore I thought I should let you know of the recent happenings. :) Mythic Writerlord (talk) 19:36, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Okay thanks for clearing that up. I am much more interested in the restoring the historic topic than the current one. I was attacked here, so I wasn't sure. Hopefully, you agree that the concept has a place on this encyclopedia, just not the fringe culture. :) Valoem talk contrib 19:55, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You know my personal opinion on the matter, I believe I have made it quite clear. With that said, I do not believe personal attacks are the way to go. Discussions should remain civil in tone and productive. I saw that link you posted before, when another editor shared it. It appears to me there are fears among some of our editors that some voters on the "incel" RfD's are somehow biased. It's gone so far that I have been accused of being "part of a feminist conspiracy", last year by another editor. Things tend to get quite heated. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 20:35, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Hey its me Valoem from my usurped account, thanks for letting me know regarding incel last time. I wanted to give you a heads up for the same reason. I intend to DRV this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Involuntary celibacy (3rd nomination) soon maybe within 24 hours. I had spoke with DGG he suggested that the primary issue is the section modern usage which I have removed. Now all sources point to a cohesive topic. I still am looking for improvements. There are two separate issues, one is love-shyness which is more regarding the fringe, but may actually be notable and involuntary celibacy. Based on the sources particularly this one [2] there is a historic topic here. The original term was involuntary abstinence before abstinence was more correlated with sobriety. This source [3], [4], and especially this source [5] suggests the term Involuntary celibacy has same meaning but the commonname has changed. I hope I am being transparent please let me know if the current version here has any issues. Omnipedia (talk) 15:59, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I am using this name due to constant harassment whenever I broach this subject. Omnipedia (talk) 16:03, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Valoem: thank you for informing me of this. I see a new AfD has been started. I will reply to that in due time, and give my thoughts. Kindly forgive me for my late reply. Although we disagree on some issues regarding this issue, I still respect you as an editor. You are very fierce in your defense of this article, and that is an admirable quality. I do, however, think you are zealous to the point that you are doing yourself a disservice. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 16:17, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, I know you are acting in good faith, I've received some serious off wiki harassment regarding this subject both privately from an anonymous person and publicly. The harassment was very political, but I have yet to publicly disclose what was said, it leads me to believe there is some non-policy based reason for its exclusion. Valoem talk contrib 21:39, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RFCs at WT:ETHNIC

There are (at least) two RFCs on that talk page. The one about galleries has been closed with the outcome formalized as WP:NOETHNICGALLERIES. The new one is about infoboxes in general. Favonian (talk) 14:56, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Mythic Writerlord. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Mythic Writerlord. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]