Jump to content

User talk:Ducknish/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

The Signpost: 29 January 2014

The Signpost: 29 January 2014

The Signpost: 12 February 2014

The Signpost: 19 February 2014

The Signpost: 26 February 2014

(test) The Signpost: 05 March 2014

Editor Review

Hello, this is just to let you know that your editor review has been completed, one or several editors have provided their feedback on your editor review page. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Happy editing and regards, Mewhho18 (talk) 19:07, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia: Editor review/Ducknish

The Signpost: 12 March 2014

EditorReviewArchiver: Automatic processing of your editor review

This is an automated message. Your editor review is scheduled to be closed on 21 March 2014 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7 days. You can keep it open longer by posting a comment to the review page requesting more input. Adding <!--noautoarchive--> to the review page will prevent further automated actions. AnomieBOT⚡ 19:40, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 March 2014

The Signpost: 26 March 2014

The Signpost: 02 April 2014

Wolfie Smith

Your warnings seem very harsh and inaccurate - Wolfie Smith's additions are hardly "vandalism" - their most recent edit even provided a list of sources for their edit (which I'd asked them to provide only a few minutes beforehand). Wouldn't it be better to simply advise them that the sources were unreliable, rather than threaten to block them? Sionk (talk) 00:22, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

The edits are pretty clearly slanted towards attacking the subject in the article, and if you look at the previous edits made by the user, you can see comments that make this pretty clear. For example, "Don't worry about deleting it, it is now on several other forums as well. I am off for some shut-eye now. Make sure someone is monitoring this though, tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow". Does that sound like the words of someone interested in making useful contributions to the page to you? Ducknish (talk) 00:24, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
They are clearly angry about Findmypast, but when I told them their contributions needed to be sourced they went away and came back with sources. That's not vandalism, whichever way you look at it. Sionk (talk) 00:32, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
But when the sources are clearly unreliable and used to support the same copy-and-pasted edit throwing NPOV to the wind, it still harms the article. If I were to edit a politicians page with rumors about them and append sketchy sources with a clear intent to disparage the subject of the article, that wouldn't make my edits not vandalism of a sort simply because I took the time to find someone on the internet who agreed with me. Ducknish (talk) 00:37, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Try re-reading the first few lines of WP:VANDAL. Adding unsourced/poorly sourced content is not 'vandalism'. New editors will rarely understand the concept of 'reliable sources' either. As you can see, Wolfie Smith has apologised. I somehow doubt a person using a genealogy research website is an itinerant teenager out to damage Wikipedia.
P.S. Your page is on my watchlist, no need for any more Talkback notices, thanks. Sionk (talk) 00:49, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
I think that the user's comments make it pretty clear that the intent behind the edits is disparaging the subject of the article and not contributing to the integrity of the encyclopedia. Whether vandalism or an NPOV issue, whatever one wants to label it as, it's still a blatantly repeated and deliberate action that harms the page. This apology comes after my warning, not before. We can see what they do from here. I stand by my warning. Ducknish (talk) 00:54, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Specifically, read the first two points in WP:DISRUPTSIGNS. Ducknish (talk) 00:57, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi

Its about Jhinwar page.information on the page was incorrect and ambiguous.I have always tried to maintain a good knowledge sourse as this wikipedia page but there has been tampering and thus all the information in Jhinwar page will be sent tO kashyap Rajput page.Its all done in goodwill. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greatvirgo (talk • contribs) 22:15, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 April 2014

Ahtehsham100

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic User talk:Ahtehsham100. Thank you. A.Minkowiski _Lets t@lk 11:24, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

hello sir, just here to tell you that i'm trying to make things here politically incorrect as possible. if you can keep it that way, i'll appreciate it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jarhead4Life (talk • contribs) 00:06, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Xmarc999 regarding The Gurdjieff Journal entry

I presume this is the appropriate place to have a "meta-discussion" about the article, such as "meat-puppetry"?

In brief, I do believe the article is worth keeping. I have made what I considered a serious proposal to improve the article, and was hoping for comments from experienced editors. Not sure of the proper forum to have that conversation, since this talk page is directed to "Ducknish" which I presume would not normally be visible to the other two commentators.

I have continued to look at other similar articles, such as that for Parabola, as well as your own entries, for guidance. I also found "Wikipedia:Welcoming committee/Welcome to Wikipedia", with a whole set of supporting links that I am just beginning to traverse. Being cautious, I normally would have waited to peruse all this before doing any editing, but I didn't have any sense of the timeline for a decision on deletion. "Speedy keep" didn't necessarily sound good. It's probably good that I didn't look at the Welcome page right away; I might have been confused by the comment "there will always be other Wikipedians happy to help" in conjunction with being called a meatpuppet.

I have updated my User Page with some background.

Appreciate any guidance on moving this discussion forward. I'm guessing there is some clever WP way of linking to that discussion but for now I will just have to stick in the hyperlink. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gurdjieff_Journal

Xmarc999 (talk) 20:26, 18 April 2014 (UTC)xmarc999

Your GA nomination of Mike Cierpiot

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mike Cierpiot you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Acalycine -- Acalycine (talk) 02:31, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mike Cierpiot

The article Mike Cierpiot you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mike Cierpiot for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Acalycine -- Acalycine (talk) 02:51, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 April 2014

The Signpost: 30 April 2014

The Signpost: 07 May 2014

The Signpost: 14 May 2014

The Signpost: 21 May 2014

The Signpost: 28 May 2014

The Signpost: 04 June 2014

The Signpost: 11 June 2014

The Signpost: 18 June 2014

The Signpost: 25 June 2014

The Signpost: 02 July 2014

The Signpost: 09 July 2014

The Signpost: 16 July 2014

The Signpost: 23 July 2014

The Signpost: 30 July 2014

The Signpost: 06 August 2014

The Signpost: 13 August 2014

The Signpost: 20 August 2014

The Signpost: 27 August 2014

The Signpost: 03 September 2014

The Signpost: 10 September 2014

The Signpost: 17 September 2014

September 2014

Hello, I'm Seaphoto. Your recent edit to the page Internal bleeding appears to have added incorrect information, so I removed it for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. SeaphotoTalk 19:20, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Am I incorrect in my assumption that working for three days in a row does not generally cause internal bleeding? Ducknish (talk) 19:22, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

MS DOS edit

Hiya, I did put an explanation in my edit summary, was it insufficient? "corrected History section, w. cite, that MS-DOS was not default OS offering w. IBM PC just one of 3)"

ReedSturtevant (talk) 01:32, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

It appeared that you stepped beyond what you described in removing basically the entire header of the article. The changes are fine but be careful not to destroy the formatting or fine parts of the article in the process. Ducknish (talk) 01:33, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Ouch! Sorry, my bad, I am an infrequent contributor I can re-edit just in the History section or happy to have your guidance in that editing — Preceding unsigned comment added by ReedSturtevant (talk • contribs) 01:55, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 September 2014

The Signpost: 01 October 2014

The Signpost: 08 October 2014

The Signpost: 15 October 2014

The Signpost: 22 October 2014

The Signpost: 29 October 2014

The Signpost: 05 November 2014

The Signpost: 12 November 2014

The Signpost: 26 November 2014

The Signpost: 03 December 2014

The Signpost: 10 December 2014

The Signpost: 17 December 2014

The Signpost: 24 December 2014

The Signpost: 31 December 2014

The Signpost: 07 January 2015

The Signpost: 14 January 2015

The Signpost: 21 January 2015

The Signpost: 28 January 2015

The Signpost: 04 February 2015

The Signpost: 11 February 2015

Thank you for your edits

Hi Ducknish, Thank you for reverting the changes made by anonymous user on our Wikipedia page. Can I ask how you were informed of the erroneous content and why you kindly reverted it for us? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by JkimNYC (talk • contribs) 15:09, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Nathan Fielder

Google "Nathan Fielder Wizard of Loneliness".

It's a description of his act. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A601:2B1:7D01:8127:502F:9AC5:59D (talk) 06:35, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 February 2015

The Signpost: 25 February 2015

The Signpost: 25 February 2015

The Signpost: 04 March 2015

The Signpost: 11 March 2015

The Signpost: 18 March 2015

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:34, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

.

The Signpost – Volume 11, Issue 12 – 25 March 2015

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:24, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost, 1 April 2015

The Signpost: 01 April 2015

The Signpost: 08 April 2015

The Signpost: 08 April 2015

The Signpost: 15 April 2015

The Signpost: 22 April 2015

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ducknish/Archive_3&oldid=1125490530"