User talk:Uncle Dick/Archive 3

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Uncle Dick. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

To Uncle Dick

Hi, I am Robert Klonoff's son. Joshua Hershal Klonoff. I was born August 2, 1994. I was adopted from a hospital in Virginia by Robert Klonoff and Daryl Klonoff. I made the change to the page and it was definatly true if you want verification please feel free to talk to me about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jksquid52 (talk • contribs) 18:34, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Palm Beach Speedway

Hi, I am trying to work out why I got a warning for adding the information on the American court case with the 9 year old? You reverted the changes to get rid, then reverted it back to what I'd posted? Not following really. (talk) 21:41, 17 May 2010

Sorry about that. I made a mistake, but reverted it all back as quickly as possible. It happens sometimes when using Huggle due to some peculiar quirks in the user interface and good old fashioned human error. :) Uncle Dick (talk) 22:18, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up :) (talk) 22:07, 18 May 2010

To Uncle Dick

Umm yes i was was edditing NOrth Moore High School and you revoked acurate statements Why..DIck

Blackman1102 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackman1102 (talk • contribs) 23:30, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

You seem to have banned my editing of Live Oak High School even though I attempted to revert my statements. This was my new edit you have decided to change.

On May 5th, 2010, the school's administrators, led by Assistant Principal Miguel Rodriguez, decided to violate five students first amendment right by sending them home for displaying the American flag on their clothing during the Mexican holiday "Cinco de Mayo." The argument was that the act of displaying the flag would incite fights between Mexican-Americans and the five students.

Eugene Volokh, a professor of law at the University of California-Los Angeles, said the students are protected under California Education Code 48950, which prohibits schools from enforcing a rule subjecting a high school student to disciplinary sanctions solely on the basis of conduct, that when engaged outside of campus, is protected by the First Amendment . [3] [1]

How is this not neutral? Their rights were indeed violated. Do you not have understanding of the Constitution of The United States of America? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.172.164.233 (talk) 20:56, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't see any problem with quoting Volokh on the likely Constitutional ramifications, but you can't just state it as a bare fact when no court or judge has had a chance to rule on the case yet. Especially after repeatedly vandalizing the article with inflammatory language. Uncle Dick (talk) 20:59, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

My language may have been out of line, and I apologize for that. But the California Education Code is the law and it states their rights were indeed violated. No judge or jury has to agree. This Code is already law.

Even Volokh admits that the Constitutional ramifications are unclear without more information about the school's actions that day. The only thing Volokh suggests is that, if the story has been reported accurately, the school's actions seem to violate California Education Code. There's nothing wrong with including Volokh's analysis in the article. I won't complain if you want to add it back in, but any edits need to stick to facts reported in reliable sources, not emotionally charged speculation. Uncle Dick (talk) 21:08, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

As the case stands currently in this point in time. I am correct.

Mike Slocombe

if you disagre with my changes please state WHY

Please also remain civil when contacting other editors! :) Acather96 (talk) 17:37, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

My talk page

Thanks for sorting out the vandalism! 18:12, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Well hello, this is Scott van Es. I don't understand why you call what is truth and what can be found all over internet and what is known by at least the french, german and english music industry as fact, I don't understand why you call this non-constructive. This is in relation to my post on obladi-oblada, which is how it should be written. I will read your guidelines. I thought putting what is true was what wikipedia is about. I really respect this website and have been using it for years. I thought, seeing that I am one of the few who know the real story about this song people would be happy that I share that. So no disrespect, if you want to keep what is there, keep it. I won't change it again. And I am pobably not using your talk page in the right way either, so I beg yr pardon for that aswell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scott van Es (talk • contribs) 21:02, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

??? how is it unsigned when I start with "hello this is Scott van Es"???? signed Scott van Es... oops almost forgot... 3rd of may 2010, France, 23h49 77.200.63.151 (talk) 21:52, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

The Fellowship (Christian organization)

Thanks for reporting Ivananderson's vandalism on The Fellowship article. The repeated addition of biased language on that page is getting annoying. --George100 (talk) 23:52, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

No problem. It got to the point where his edit-warring went beyond mere POV-pushing and he started adding bizarre and demonstrably false information to the articles. If he starts it up again when the block ends, I'm going to request a perma-ban. Uncle Dick (talk) 23:58, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Ta!

Thanks for this. Cheers, TFOWR^This flag once was red 17:09, 27 April 2010 (UTC) literally get a real academic career stop chanigng pointless edits read some acutal books not crap wikipedia articles and write real articles in journals —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.73.22.142 (talk) 16:01, 4 May 2010 (UTC) getout uncle dick and stop dickin me —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.157.233.143 (talk) 20:59, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Billie Jackson

Hi

Can I just ask why you reverted this edit to Billie Jackson? It's just that it's a storyline that aired last night and I can't see anything wrong with the edit that the IP made? --5 albert square (talk) 20:19, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Oops. I thought it was a BLP issue. Didn't realize it was a fictional character. It's been fixed. Thanks for the heads up. Uncle Dick (talk) 20:22, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

That's ok. I know what it's like reverting via Huggle :). I was just going to revert it but as you're a fellow rollbacker thought I'd check there wasn't some other reason it had been reverted. Another heads up though, you might also get the same sort of edit flash up on Huggle for Jack Branning via the same IP :) --5 albert square (talk) 20:31, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

HOW CAN I PUT USER BOXES ON MY TALK PAGE?

user:Eikipitiki

I do not mind, you do not have to revert this user's comments on my talk page (unles s/she starts talking me, but it has not reached that level yet). Thanks, thoug. Slrubenstein | Talk 17:11, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Will some one tell me how to put useer boxes on my talk page?thank you--Brian Greenwell 18:45, 29 April 2010 (UTC)Eikipitiki

peter mui

please see page, and help. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.224.5.28 (talk) 23:19, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Permafrost

As far as I can tell, my edit didn't remove any content. My intention was to restore a section that had been blanked. In any event, it looks like you've restored all the content yourself, so no harm, no foul. Just wanted to clear up any misunderstanding. 70.144.221.105 (talk) 16:11, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Rick Rolld!

Pwnt!1!one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.225.179.87 (talk) 20:04, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Excuse ME

your reverting was unnecessary. The exec confirmed it himself today via Twitter, And same for season 9. He said it will air on much may 10th with one new episode a week so stop it mkay? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jampackofun (talk • contribs) 22:01, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

U-74

Re this reversion of an IPs edit, the IP was correct, source states September, which is also verified by the Empire Burton article. Mjroots (talk) 04:48, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction. Uncle Dick (talk) 05:55, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Tireless!

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Noticed your huge efforts at keeping this wiki clean! It's inspiring to say the least. Keep on going, your work is greatly appreciated! Jujutacular ^T · C 16:55, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Reverting Vandalism.

I don't know how you are so fast but I wanted to thank you for the work that you do on Wikipedia. You are extremely fast at reverting vandalism. Might I suggest you use an add-on like Twinkle to report vandalism? --Triesault (talk) 17:38, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

You can't ask a Huggle user to ever use Twinkle, Triesault! They will waste no time in telling you all of Huggle's advantages. ALI ^nom nom 17:41, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations

Fanfare please:

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For outstanding vandalism-related contributons to Wikipedia, and beating me to the rollback button many a time, I award you this barnstar Acather96 (talk) 17:48, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Keep up the good work :) Acather96 (talk) 17:48, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Ditto, good job recently. Bearian (talk) 20:29, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Two warnings

These are not official warnings, but just a heads-up because they can get you into trouble in the future:

1. Be careful when you accuse others of bad faith (see here). My edits were not in any way bad faith, and therefore your insult can be taken as a personal attack.
2. Please look over WP:3RR. You are only allowed a maximun of three reverts to a page in a 24 hour span, and you crossed that mark with 6 reverts. If you do so again in the future, you will be temporarily blocked.

I'm replying to your message on the Talk:Liberal Democrat Friends of Israel page. Thanks. American Eagle (talk) 19:45, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

1. I believe that the original edits were made in bad faith by Levylevy, not you. I apologize for not clarifying that.
2. I do not believe that my edits were in violation of WP:3RR because of Levylevy's evident intent to: (a) falsely associate Nick Clegg with the Liberal Democrat Friends of Israel, (b) deliberately misrepresent the sources he cited, and (c) inject politically-charged original research into the article. If you consult the article history, you will see that I was not the only editor to think so.

You might want to consider taking a closer look at what sort of information you are restoring to an article before assuming that it is not vandalism. Just some friendly advice from one veteran editor to another. Uncle Dick (talk) 20:10, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. In the future, I recommend explaining why you are continually reverting on the user's talk page or the article's talk page if they persist, which would've cleared much of this up in the first place. It really appeared you just didn't want the info and he did. Also, I don't think his edits were entirely bad-faith; there was some good content mixed in with the bad. God bless, American Eagle (talk) 21:15, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Reverted Edits on Family Research Council Page

I'm not sure why you reverted my edits on the Family Research Council page and called them "unconstructive". You essentially reverted my possible vandalism reversion, then re-reverted back to an older edit that was exactly the same as mine except for the dated reference. The reference I provided links directly to the section discussing the Family Research Council, whereas the older link goes to a page with nothing. If you are using a bot to make these revisions, please make this apparent in those edits. --FantajiFan (talk) 20:47, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind, I see you're using Huggle. Still I'd appreciate if you'd leave the updated link, I'm not going to get into edit again because I'm sure edit warring bots would pick up on that. --FantajiFan (talk) 20:50, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

You added a redlinked category to the page. This may just have been an oversight on your part since the category was deleted within the last month. I'll go ahead and remove the warning. Uncle Dick (talk) 20:53, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Live Oak High School (Morgan Hill, California) motto

Too funny. Thanks for catching that: I had (wrongly) presumed that any change to the article today by an anon-ip was vandalism. -- Rrburke (talk) 22:01, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism

Please be careful what you consider "vandalism". WP:VANDALISM clearly states "any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism." I don't feel what this editor was injecting fits that definition of vandalism, and more specifically, he clearly stated this several times in his edit summaries and you didn't even seem to notice them. He's blocked now for violation of WP:3RR, but that's beside the point – please try to assume good faith before you start calling edits vandalism. Regards, Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 01:27, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Please see my talk page history. User was an obvious vandal, gleeful at the prospect of disrupting Wikipedia. Uncle Dick (talk) 01:28, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I see now. Still, as was stated before, a simple use of edit summaries could avoid this mess. That's what they're for. The fact that the IP editor used them and you didn't honestly makes you look worse than him. Just one simple comment could clear all that up (and I note that huggle allows for custom edit summaries for a revert; I've done it before). Cheers, Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 01:29, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Please refrain from abusing warning or blocking templates. Doing so is a violation of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia.

Uh huh. And how, pray tell, have I been abusing templates, Mr. Anonymous? Uncle Dick (talk) 15:32, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

• I wish to echo the request that you exercise chare. My move to delete the Category:Synagogues that echo the Leopoldstädter Tempel shortly after I had created it, and after discussion with a fellow editor of greater experience on how to add the material in a better way was not vandalism. I hope that you will retract your remark on my talk page.OldShul (talk) 15:50, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

No problem, OldShul. I was trying to speedy delete per your request and accidentally warned you. Thanks for the correction. Uncle Dick (talk) 15:53, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you.OldShul (talk) 16:01, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Can you help me i am blocked and wikipedia gave me on error

Shared IP

The IP address to whose talk page you posted a warning (this one) is a shared IP for a school district in the US. 209.174.182.161 (talk) 17:58, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Harriet Ruth Harman (born 30 July 1950) is a British Conservative Politician —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.122.102.80 (talk) 20:11, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Double warning

Hi Uncle Dick! When I undo or rollback, I always leave an appropriate message to the user. However, just now I saw that you also had left a message to User:41.220.141.2, even though you were not the one who undid his/her edit. I removed the duplicate warning. So I thank you for your help, but please, leave it to me to give a user a message after my own edits. With friendly regards, Lova Falk 16:09, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

If you look at the edit history of the page in question, you'll see that we both reverted consecutive edits from the same user in rapid succession. :) Uncle Dick (talk) 16:11, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, you're absolutely right. When I looked at the edit history only my own edit showed. It was probably right before your edit. My apologies! Lova Falk 16:22, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

From the top

Hi i recently edited Fillipo Inzaghi page, but I have been sent a message telling me that my contriubution has been reverted, may I please know a reason for this as my statement was a fact which has been on italian news, I think you should find out before reverting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.101.157.71 (talk) 22:45, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Just wondering

Why has your userpage been deleted so many times? Immunize (talk) 20:18, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

I have never personally created a userpage, however, many of the vandals I have reverted took it upon themselves to create one for me, with less than flattering results. The admins were kind enough to finally protect my userpage against recreation. Uncle Dick (talk) 20:24, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Recent revision change

How is that last revision vandalizing? It's true. The band was started with Pepper Keenan of Corrosion of Conformity. ViciousCorruption (talk) 22:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Any addition to Wikipedia must be support by reliable sources, especially when your previous edits show a pattern of persistent vandalism. You may add the information to the article again if you include external citations. Uncle Dick (talk) 22:13, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Really? Because for the section that I added information to there is no source there. Failure to cite sources is not vandalism. However reviewing your page I see that you often abuse powers. :) ViciousCorruption (talk) 22:15, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Give it up and read the message I left for you on your page. – B.hotep •talk• 22:17, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Uncle Phallic Realation, P.Garrison changed the face of post-punk and alt guitar for the worst. I sleep better knowing you have rooted out the paracticed and small peni[is?]. [diggin this pil live record 'shut up i'll walk off this stage poptonnnnes!!!!!!!] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ptrek71 (talk • contribs) 01:45, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Sundaes

It appears that you do not like them. Malpercio (talk) 02:09, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I got the impression that the "sundae" comment was a genuine attempt to lighten up the atmosphere on the talk page, akin to WP:TEA. Are you sure that these are bad-faith edits? ALI ^nom nom 02:21, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

That's honestly what I was going for. I thought that the talk page could use a WP:TEA, only instead of tea, I chose a sundae. My apologies if it appeared to be in bad-faith. Malpercio (talk) 02:26, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

That talk page is already such a ridiculous, bloated mess, and I was trying to keep the discussion just a little bit on topic. I'll give it a rest for now. You may continue with your merry-making unabated. Uncle Dick (talk) 02:31, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Malamanteau

Please do not remove the {{High traffic}} template from Talk:Malamanteau as it includes a tracking category for these pages. The wording of the template is generic and not always ideal but there is still nothing wrong with it. --Tothwolf (talk) 06:50, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

...Which I see you removed anyway. --Tothwolf (talk) 06:50, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I will concede that it is possible to interpret the Malamenteau article as being "mentioned" on the xkcd web site. Kind of. I've modified the template accordingly. Uncle Dick (talk) 06:57, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

That works for me. I found the template itself to still be somewhat rough around the edges while adding code to automatically link to stats.grok.se. It still needs further refinement to bring some of the parameter usage more in line with other talk page templates. The |page= parameter in particular is not going to be fun to redesign and migrate. --Tothwolf (talk) 07:04, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Congrats

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I always see you doing a great job, keep it up! Tommy2010 17:27, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

neutral writing

You changed a contribution of mine where I said Syria is bordered by Occupied Palestine "Israel" and said this was not Neutral. You removing my post was racist. I urge you to read a history book chap or look on map. A Large water rich part of Syria is occupied by "European Israel" and is called Golan Heights. A Water Rich part of Lebanon/Palestine which also Borders Syria is occupied by European Israel called Sheba Farms. Israel also occupies everywhere it is as its a European White Country created by England with 90% of its people being White Europeans.. It was unfair that you are biased towards them and call me un-neutral.. Either way, Asia will be given back to the Asians, just as Gaza kicked the European Occupiers (Israel) out in 2005 & Just as Lebanon kicke the European Occupiers (Israel)out in year 2000.. The truth will always prevail no matter if there are people called Dick like you who try to hide it.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ipad123 (talk • contribs) 23:14, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

The international community currently recognizes the 1949 Armistice line in its definition of the State of Israel. Wikipedia will continue to use established international conventions for naming of territories. If you wish to discuss the issue, please visit the talk page for the State of Israel. Uncle Dick (talk) 23:21, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

But why?

Why couldn't User:Nsk92 warn me instead? I wanted them to warn me, not you.--Doug with no spades (talk) 17:58, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I made a mistake. Need to get used to using WP:TWINKLE. Uncle Dick (talk) 18:06, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Ivan L. Moody

You changed an edit of mine to the page of Ivan L. Moody concerning his brother and sister, saying I needed to cite references, yet the section I changed is not referenced, either.

Also, I know by biological fact that the current entry is inaccurate, as I *am* the brother that the page supposedly says was also put into foster care. if you would like to have photo proof, I can provide that swiftly if needed.

But sufficed to say, a LOT of the page is inaccurate, that was just the first thing I noticed... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jgreening072 (talk • contribs) 21:18, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Recent edit!?

In what way is an edit made in early October last year a "recent edit"? I suspect someone's been a bit quick with the software reporting buttons... and what makes you think I made the post anyway. Honestly. 82.25.66.205 (talk) 01:46, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Gary Coleman

You must be joking. SelectSplat (talk) 23:05, 27 May 2010 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Uncle_Dick&action=edit&section=35

Just to let you know

Just to let you know, User:Felisberto seems to be accusing you of libel, although he may have made a mistake. He may have been trying to comment on your talk page, but he's written on Wikipedia talk:Libel, asking why you have reverted his edit. I've taken the issue up with him and explained that reverting an edit does not mean you are slandering him. I just thought I'd let you know since he seems to be wanting to talk to you. WackyWace ^talk to me, people 15:45, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

		The Original Barnstar
		Nice work on the Helen Thomas page, dealing with angry new pov'd editors in helpful, polite, neutral and encyclopaedic manner. Thanks! -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 07:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Not a joke

Hi Uncle Dick, you put on my page that I had made a joke in adding the image [1] I did [2], and I was just giving a heads up that I was 100% serious. The "half-your-age-plus-seven" rule of social acceptability isn't just something I made up. (a good description is here at wikidump [3]) Half_Your_Age_Plus_Seven_Graph.JPG was uploaded long before I edited the page for the purpose of illustrating that. I had previously seen the image on the article, and noticed it was gone, so I re-added it. If you have any objection to my adding it, I'd love to hear it, but I'd like if we could consider it a serious edit up for discussion. klosterdev (talk) 03:57, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

The discussion on the article talk page suggests that this "rule" is a joke that has achieved some notoriety as an Internet meme. The image and references to the "rule" in the body of the article were removed because they are unencyclopaedic and are not supported by any reliable sources. If this is indeed a serious edit, it needs to be supported by the addition of reliable sources. Uncle Dick (talk) 04:07, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

not trying to vandalize

i don't understand about this copyright thing. what's the problem. i think it's fair use. help!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crushtheturtle (talk • contribs) 19:04, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I would recommend that you start at Wikipedia:Non-free content, and if you need further assistance, post your question at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Someone there should be able to either help you tag the image properly or explain why it does not meet the criteria for fair use. Uncle Dick (talk) 19:09, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

this is a lot of effort. aren't there mods or something who can work with contributors to help them in developing articles? i don't understand all this copyright stuff. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crushtheturtle (talk • contribs) 19:16, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

NE1fm Edit

So you would rather a reference link to a 404 not found? Instead of to the actual video of a documentary which has since been relisted on YouTube by the creators of the video, a video which was featured on National TV in the UK?

There are no other versions online apart from the YouTube video. It is not promotional, it is a documentary about a blind persons ambition to become a radio presenter.

For reference, the video was created by volunteers who were part of NE1fm, the video is mostly set at NE1fm, and includes audio from NE1fm which permission was given & relevent licences are held. I do not see how this breaks the rules. Kev (talk) 20:04, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like you were just trying to improve the article. I've reverted my edits. Uncle Dick (talk) 20:08, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank-you. Kev (talk) 20:40, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Charles Yriarte

Vandalism has been reported and seconded, we're just waiting for admin action. Cheers, Piano non troppo (talk) 20:28, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Looks like I won this one. Anyway, I wasn't trying to vandalize Yriarte, just a typo that I had already gone back to fix but you started acting like a dick and I guess today I had more time on my hands. Do you call yourself Uncle Dick because everyone thinks you are you. You have a healthy collection of complaints on your talk page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.198.12.4 (talk) 20:51, 8 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.198.12.3 (talk)

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Uncle Dick. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

1. "Students sent home on "cinco de mayo"" http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/05/06/california-students-sent-home-wearing-flags-cinco-mayo/