User talk:Edward321/Archive 3

About a certain user

Hi I don't know if your a Administrator or not but I figured you were since you have been warning a certain User 69.180.145.190 about his edits. He continues to add disruptive edits without proper sources and continues to put them up even after being blocked for a week. He just doesn't learn so maybe he could be banned for a month or 2, and if your not an admin im sorry for bothering you. Deus257 (talk) 04:43, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone can warn other users, you can go see WP:WARN and after final(level 4) warnings, you can report it to WP:AIV MythSearcher^talk 09:40, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rockabilly

Thanks for helping out with the new GypsyBilly section(s). Someone had made recent comments in the Western Swing article stating (pretty much) that Django Reinhart wasn't acknowledged because of racism. The next day, or the same day, "GypsyBilly" added all that info to the Rockabilly article, which is an article I've put lots of time into, and I always hope someone will support the effort to "keep it real". Although I'm invested in many articles now, I try to not get too invested. Thanks again. Steve Pastor (talk) 20:35, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hoaxer

Checkuser turned up a whole 'nother crop of socks. —Hello, Control ^{Hello, Tony} 00:23, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Edward321. You have new messages at Hello Control's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ryan Christopher VanWilliams

Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryan Christopher VanWilliams --JimWae (talk) 04:39, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tylerwade

You can report him to AN/I if he refuses to stop, and 3RR blocks might discourage him. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 05:56, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's easy enough to prove their connected. Just point it out when you report him. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 22:29, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Look here I'm tired of you people doing this, First I'm just trying to improve articles and I know that to you guys it seems like vandalism but it isn't, second you're block me for being suspected of have two accounts but that isn't true just because someone has similiar intrests as me doesn't mean it's me. Finally there is something want say what's the point in alphabetizing the categories of character webpages. User:Tylerwade123 —Preceding undated comment was added at 04:32, 8 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Dwellers of the Forbidden City

Hi! :) I have nominated the article Dwellers of the Forbidden City for Good Article status, as I feel it has undergone significant improvement from the point at which it was almost deleted. Since you were involved with improving the article, and/or sparing it from deletion, I'm inviting you to help out in any way you can to improve the article so that it may join its fellow modules, Ravenloft and Dragons of Despair as a Wikipedia Good Article. :) You may want to place the review page (which may not begin immediately) on your watchlist to keep track of the review process. BOZ (talk) 21:00, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article is now up for good article review, so if there is anything at all you can contribute to get the article the rest of the way there, let us know. :) BOZ (talk) 04:33, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your CheckUser request

You recently compiled and listed a case at Sockpuppet investigations. A checkuser or clerk has requested you supply one or more diffs to justify the use of the checkuser procedure in the case, in accordance with the procedures listed in the table at the Checkuser criteria and letters page. For an outcome to be achieved, we require that you provide these diffs as soon as possible. This has been implemented to reduce difficulties for checkusers, and is essential for your case to be processed. A link to your recently-created case which has this information missing is here. Thanks for your co-operation. -- lucasbfr ^talk 10:07, 5 February 2009 (UTC), SPI clerk.[reply]

Jhelum (City)

I will bet that the uncited elements that you removed will be back very shortly. That article appears to be a place of local pride, whcih appears as somewhat spammy unsourced information. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 07:21, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for keeping an eye on this article, too. It seems that there is a different ethos in that part of the world regarding what is felt there to be notable. It is likely to be a cultural thing. But, with care, we can drag the article into being well referenced and with cited entities within it. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 16:44, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Even though i have added referances for what i have added on this page, then why some one delete it again and again? and also i m basically from jhelum city, i live there, and i know what is in city better then any one outsider. Brainlara73 (talk) 12:48am, 15 February 2009. —Preceding undated comment was added at 19:48, 14 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

can you tell me why did you undo again and again my contribution to the page Jhelum (city), even though i have posted referances for what i have added? Brainlara73 (talk) 14:52, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit confused

Perhaps you can unconfuse me. Your edit summaries speak about redlinks. Wikipedia welcomes redlinks. Please have a look at Wikipedia:Red link for the guideline. Wikipedia hates unreferenced stuff, though. When I look at the edits, unless I am missing something big, I see no redlinks that you have reverted, but I do see that you are striving for referenced material. So, in a different way is Brainlara73.

Might it be better if you two worked together to make the article fully referenced fast? Fiddle Faddle (talk) 16:34, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tale of the shipwrecked sailor

Thanks for that, the article was becoming a chore. The editor whose stuff you removed (and who also added the references) has been given an indefinite block for original research -- he's got a history of 3 1/2 years of bans and blocks for OR and related issues. Now that's happened I shall hopefully continue improving it. dougweller (talk) 17:39, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Age of Scorpio

Just wanted to let you know that it has a sister article, Septennial cycle, which has no reliable references or apparent notability. Zazaban (talk) 17:08, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank your for your input

Based on the links you provided, I have declined his unblock request. It is clear he is evading his current block by editing while logged out. If you need any further help with this editor, please let me know. Thank you. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 06:34, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User back at it

Hey Im letting you know User:69.180.145.190 is back making those ridiculous original research edits again. Now you and I have had our bouts with this character and I was hoping you could report him the Admins, I would but I still haven't gotten the hang of reporting vandals. Deus257 (talk) 04:18, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Additional information needed on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Oncebyten

Hello. Thank you for filing Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Oncebyten. This is an automated notice to inform you that the case is currently missing a code letter, which indicates to checkusers why a check is valid. Please revisit the page and add this. Sincerely, SPCUClerkbot (talk) 15:03, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know if this helps, but the IP in question may have been canvassing at User talk:Rickyrab while the now-closed AfD in question was still in progress... Ranma9617 (talk) 04:57, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bengaluru

Are you aware that Bangalore was officically renamed to Bengaluru almost 2 and a half yrs ago? Please STOP reverting Bengaluru to Bangalore everywhere. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 10:32, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

APART from that, the rate in autos in India, varies by kilometre and not by MILE. Please do NOT do such things and say they better, they may be in some case, and most definately are NOT in other cases. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 10:36, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possible sock

Hmmm, that is suspicious--looks like meatpuppetry at the very least. You should probably file a sock investigation case and request checkuser evidence. In case you have trouble, let me know and I can file it myself. Blueboy 96 06:05, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rebelprince

I think the duck test works here. This is quite clearly the same person. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 06:06, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to comment

I have also seen the uncanny resemblance. This is more than likely the same person. Good spot. DaisukeVulgar (talk) 22:39, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

about the source

Yes, I was actually surprised that he actually did not just looked at the Japanese wiki on that info. The Japanese wiki actually listed 15 million instead of 3 with no source, thus not reliable. MythSearcher^talk 16:03, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

No is wasn't too wordy, I'm having internet problems. Well it's almost impossible to source a character as a protagonist since the meaning is so wide. I just happened to base the meanings on the Naruto character article and it's past discussion. Also I'm not sure on the Wiki standards for character lists, but dividing characters into classes won't do. I think you should try asking a wikipedia expert to see how they'll view it. DragonZero (talk) 00:33, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. On the Gundam Seed Character list, they are not supposed to be alphabetized. Also the protagonist and antagonist are suppose to be set in the order they appear in. DragonZero (talk) 05:22, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I disagree with your organization on the other characters as they should not be associated with the Earth Alliance or ZAFT. Also Kira's friends are not technically part of the Earth Alliance, and they just wish to tag along the Archangel to help find peace. I will undo the edit. My apologies. DragonZero (talk) 05:49, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blue Lacy

Thanks for keeping an eye on this article. The edit-warring going on there is too ridiculous to be believed. Say--you use some kind of bot to revert to an older version? (I'm ignorant when it comes to that fancy stuff!) Drmies (talk) 17:59, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retraction

Dear Edward, please accept my unreserved apology for suggesting that your revisions of the AIMS article were tantamount to vandalism. I realise in retrospect that my actions were out of a pique and I am mortified and deeply sorry about the entire incident. Ditto for the Paul Boateng article. Ambrose.chongo (talk) 17:15, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for the revert to my userpage! --Faradayplank (talk) 21:14, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there

Just wanted to say Hi, after having passed my recent Request for adminship. How's everything going?

I don't know if you've been around in a while, but I'd like to point out to you the success we've had with the D&D GA-drive so far: Gary Gygax, Wizards of the Coast, Dragons of Despair, Drizzt Do'Urden, Forgotten Realms, Tomb of Horrors, Dwellers of the Forbidden City, White Plume Mountain, The Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth, Expedition to the Barrier Peaks, Planescape: Torment, Dragonlance, and Against the Giants, and we plan to hit Dave Arneson and Drow (Dungeons & Dragons) after some work. :)

If you're interested in coming around to check out what we've been up to, you are welcome as always. :) BOZ (talk) 17:50, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lady Lovibond

Hi. I have checked out this article and taken off the "hoax" tag you added, because the article itself is not a hoax: the books it cites are real and, as far as I can see in Google Books preview, support what it says, except for the date being a Friday - you're quite right that it wasn't and neither book says that, so I have taken that out and inserted the words "is said to... " to indicate that the article is about stories of wrecks and sightings, rather than about any actual events confirmed by a reliable source. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 16:53, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wolf's Head membership

See footnote 1.SLY111 (talk) 13:52, 21 April 2009 (UTC)SLY111[reply]

Joseph and Imhotep‎

You might want to see this new article (I think this is it's 4 title). Dougweller (talk) 15:10, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Response

Hm, their edits are un-wiki like, granted there is little I could do in this other than watch the page. Although I will vouch for you if you report him to a admin, since he is relying on a useless source and adding original research and promoting videos he or she obviously made. Deus257 (talk) 04:50, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No Problem, nothing annoys me more than noobs who don't read the rules and add fan wank. Deus257 (talk) 04:59, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your IP seems to have reverted himself, so maybe he finally got the message. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 06:08, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Northern soul linkspam

Please explain why you deleted the four links on this page Northern soul 92.18.174.241 (talk) 18:24, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Should have logged in Lebkuchenteile (talk) 18:26, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Galactus Edit War Mediation

Hi. I'm trying to mediate an edit war over the Galactus article here. Can you chime in with your two cents? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 00:10, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation

Hello, I noticed you've made edits to University of the Philippines (UP) and UP–related articles and thought you might want to support our recent proposal to create the WikiProject University of the Philippines. We've recently revamped the proposal and started a drive to push the approval of this project. We have a lot of articles that may be under this project and we would like assistance and support for its approval. Hope we'll have a very positive response. Go Fighting Maroons!

P.S. You can look at the preliminary drafts of the project in here. Thanks!--The Wandering Traveler ^{WIKIPROJECT UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES NEEDS YOUR SUPPORT!} 04:32, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

SPA at AfD

So glad you called attention to that. It looked suspicious to me, but I was not sure what to do about it. --Susan118 (talk) 01:48, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stan Gooch

Hi there, I've replied to your comment in this AfD. Tim Vickers (talk) 15:37, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greek Love

Hi Edward. There is a message for you here: Talk: Greek love#Committee for keeping Greek Love. Thanks. Esseinrebusinanetamenfatearenecessest (talk) 05:00, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed that trolling "message" which is from this user that !voted to delete the related article. If you need, you can view it in the edit history but it's nonconstructive and quite uncivil. - ALLST✰R▼^echo _{wuz here @} 05:33, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, unfortunately someone else he trolled actually restored it so feel free to go there and comment. - ALLST✰R▼^echo _{wuz here @} 14:37, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Linguistixuck

Hi, your recent edit to Amanda Palmer made me wonder if you have mistaken my intentions. I have no vendetta against you, and I hope you don't have one against me. I don't expect a reply. Linguistixuck (talk) 00:37, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User page indexing

Please note Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User page indexing has been repurposed from the standard RFC format it was using into a strraw poll format. Please re-visit the RFC to ensure that your previous endorsement(s) are represented in the various proposals and endorse accordingly.

Notice delivery by xenobot 14:01, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD Mia, Days of Our Lives

Thank you for your input regarding my nomination for deletion of Mia (Days of Our Lives). I do think I need to clarify that I think the article should be deleted outright, as there is already a section about this character at Minor characters of Days of Our Lives. No additional work would be required of anyone except for the deletion itself. I'm new at nominating, so I just wanted to be clear. Any suggestions on how I should proceed next? Thank you! Rm994 (talk) 16:42, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I edited it accordingly now. Thank you so much for your help. Rm994 (talk) 01:43, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

recall feedback

Thank you for your comments on my feedback criteria. I have copied them to User_talk:John_Vandenberg/recall#comment_by_Edward321. I hope you dont mind. If you do, feel free to remove it. Otherwise I will respond there, and will drop you a note when I have responded, hopefully in the next day or two. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 06:53, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barbaro nonsense

Just a heads-up on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mctrain this. Deor (talk) 18:17, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wish that you had left this alone. I was hoping to determine how the admins would react without any prompting. Deor (talk) 01:14, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Call out

WikiProject Alternate History is currently holding a roll call, which we hope to have annually. Your username is listed on the members list, but we are unsure as to which editors are still active within the project. If you still consider yourself an active editor, please add your name back to the Active members list. You can also list yourself as a Supporter if you feel you cannot dedicate the time necessary to be an active member.

Please also see the Project talk page for more information concerning this Call Out. Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 13:54, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question Answered

Please could you provide actual guidance on what is remains outstanding with the Black Boy Inn page?

IMHO I've used all referenced material, and stated prior to making any changes that I'm the owner.

I've really enjoyed learning how to use wikipedia and worked hard to make the article as impartial as possible, and would appreciate guidance.

Studdymx (talk) 23:21, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice and resources Edward321, very useful!

I totally agree with your point around neutrality; capturing the historic importance of the Inn - as opposed to shameless self-promotion.

Should suspect any bias moving forward, please don't hesitate to let me know, your advice is most welcome.

Studdymx (talk) 11:29, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashida Kim (7th nomination)

Since you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashida Kim (6th nomination), which was closed as no consensus and later relisted after a DRV discussion, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashida Kim (7th nomination). Cunard (talk) 08:19, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fernando Alfón de Ovando

Hi, I've removed the hoax tag you placed on Fernando Alfón de Ovando in July 2009. After doing a Google Books search, I believe that this article is about a legitimate topic. If I am in error, feel free to take this article to WP:AFD. Best, Cunard (talk) 07:47, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have also removed the hoax tag from Dom Fernando de Almada because it appears to be a legitimate topic; see here. Cunard (talk) 07:50, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have also removed the hoax tags from Blazco Múñoz de Cáceres, Fernán Blázquez de Cáceres, Juan Blázquez de Cáceres, and Diego de Cáceres y Ovando because they do not appear to be hoaxes. There are plenty of sources on Google Books about these individuals. Cunard (talk) 07:58, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you tagged Hazub as a hoax on August 14, 2009. I have been unable to verify this prince's existence, so I have nominated this article for deletion. If you would like to participate in the debate, please comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hazub. Best, Cunard (talk) 06:13, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Same with Sutra I; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sutra I. Cunard (talk) 06:53, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the two AfDs that have been closed as keep, I believe that the article creator wrote those articles in good faith. The creator even included sources, such as this one, that verified the information in Hazub. The case you mentioned above may be just an accidental error on the creator's part, not a malicious one. I don't think the other articles should be deleted because they appear to be factually correct. Best, Cunard (talk) 04:52, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wahhabism

I noticed that you reverted my edit on the Wahhabism article. Please see my comments on the talk page regarding that source.
Also, you may want to archive your talk page as it is getting a little long. Just some unrelated advice. It's pretty easy to do. MezzoMezzo (talk) 15:05, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heads up

See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mctrain. Deor (talk) 12:55, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An article whose AFD you participated in before is up at AFD again

The article Kemonomimi has been nominated for AFD a second time. I'm contacting every editor who participated in the first one, since if they were interested in it that time, they'd probably want to know the same exact article is being targeted once again. Dream Focus 03:15, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jimmy Rollins

Hi. When you reverted edits on Jimmy Rollins, you actually reverted some non-POV facts. Just a courtesy call from WP:PHILLIES. Thanks. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 23:47, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. It was just one (his batting average from '02). Taken care of. Cheers and happy editing! KV5 (Talk • Phils) 15:15, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RGM-89 Jegan (2nd nomination)

An AFD you participated, is again up for deletion for the second time. Ikip (talk) 03:27, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of List of female stock characters

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of female stock characters. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of female stock characters (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:07, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barbaro hoax redux

Do we have an entry in WP:LONG regarding this issue? If not, who do you think has the most experience dealing with the issue? (I.e., who could help create a comprehensive description). Cheers, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk`

Addendum...just found this, which is as good as any place to start. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:33, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing...if you haven't seen this yet, check it out...the comment section is hilarious. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:44, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Intelligent car

We all want the quiet life. I know I do. Is there a reason you didn't warn the editor about this clear vandalism? I think your lack of warning encouraged subsequent vandalism. I can understand not bothering to warn IPs, if enough time has gone past I do that myself. But account holders don't get any grace; if vandalism is found six months later, they get a warning. Oddly, my final warning stopped the vandalism, so an initial warning from you would have been helpful. If I sound bitey, I apologize, it's late here and I'm about to go to bed. Bloody vandals. Josh Parris 13:51, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the sock work. I think I should have gone to bed about five hours earlier than I did; my judgement really went downhill. Josh Parris 06:44, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]