Jump to content

User talk:Epicgenius/Archive/2013/May

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Replaceable fair use File:Alg-51st-queens-jpeg.jpeg

Thanks for uploading File:Alg-51st-queens-jpeg.jpeg. I noticed the description page specifies that this media item is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media item could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media item is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the file description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the file discussion page, write the reason why this media item is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 07:28, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Takashimadaira Station, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nishidai Station (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:41, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Station Successions for Infoboxes for the BMT Jamaica Line and Myrtle Avenue Line

Can you please change back the edits to the "Station Succession" sections on the infoboxes for station articles on those lines? Last year, there was a major argument that broke out over the "north" and south" in terms of railroad and service directions. [1] [2] [3]. The problem here is that the J and M trains operate in opposite service directions (i.e. a J train traveling from Marcy Avenue to Myrtle Avenue is considered going "northbound" while an M train running on the same track in the same direction is considered going "southbound) while the railroad directions of the BMT Jamaica and Myrtle Avenue Lines are opposite of the service directions there, meaning Jamaica Center - Parsons Archer in terms of railroad direction is actually the southern terminal of the Jamaica Line and Essex Street is the northern terminal. Middle Village - Metropolitan Avenue is really the Myrtle Avenue Line's southern terminal by railroad direction since the line originally terminated at Park Row in Manhattan, which is geographically more to the north than Middle Village, Queens. The M changed service directions when it was rerouted in June 2010. Prior to that, a shuttle train to Middle Village is considered going "northbound", but is now considered going "southbound." That is why the now retired User:Acps110 created the new boxes for those articles, which basically everyone from WP:NYCPT was okay with. If you want to go back to the style the other station infoboxes have, I would appreciate it if you start a new discussion in the group first. The Legendary Ranger (talk) 02:12, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

  • Which is very confusing because the M operates on the Jamaica Line between Essex Street and Myrtle Avenue in the opposite railroad direction for the J/Z. The station succession infoboxes are meant for service directions, which led to the conflicts of interest last year. That is why you should have started a discussion first before making major changes like this one. I mean, geographically, Jamaica Center is more to the south than Bowery, Manhattan. for now I reverted all your edits to those info boxes. If you want to change it back, discuss on WP:NYCPT first and if the other members don't mind the old box formats, feel free to revert my edits and next time, don't make drastic changes to something just because you don't like it The Legendary Ranger (talk) 02:39, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Flatbush and Fulton countdown.png

Thanks for uploading File:Flatbush and Fulton countdown.png. I noticed the description page specifies that this media item is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media item could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media item is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the file description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the file discussion page, write the reason why this media item is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --DAJF (talk) 04:40, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains#Template:Rail text color and comment there, if you wish. - dcljr (talk) 22:57, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Dead issue

FFS, of course deceased means dead, but why change it? HiLo48 (talk) 01:35, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Minor edit

Are we invisible to you? [7] [8] [9]. Just stop ticking minor edit. There's no penalty for making an edit that's minor that isn't ticked "minor edit". Wikipedia:Minor edit << read this page. ChessFiends (talk) 02:07, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Have you read WP:MINOR? Addition of visible tags or templates ([12]) is NOT a minor edit. Pburka (talk) 00:44, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Besides, I didn't notice the wrongful replacement of words until about a minute ago. Epicgenius(talk to me • see my contributions) 00:59, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
  • That's always your excuse: "I didn't mean to". I don't buy it anymore. You need to slow down and THINK before you hit save. Use the preview button. Read what you wrote. You say you're a Harvard graduate. You should know how to proofread and how to act deliberately. Pburka (talk) 01:05, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

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

Would you please THINK before you edit?

I'm getting very tired of cleaning up after you. I'm sure you're at an age where you think you know everything ("Graduated from Harvard University" my left foot), but please consider that people with more experience, both in life and on Wikipedia, may have a bit of an edge on you. Instead of assuming that you're right and they're wrong, how about assuming that you may have something to learn? Certainly your editing history shows quite clearly that you're not quite the "genius" you apparently believe yourself to be. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:28, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Just a tip. If you do have "clear reasons", it's always good to summarise them in an Edit summary. Had you done that, I would probably not have made my "Dead issue" post above. HiLo48 (talk) 01:49, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
    • You made your user name, and it is your way of presenting yourself to the Wikiworld. And about Harvard - bullshit. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:37, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

      • "And about Harvard - bullshit"


        No comment on the above quote. Except, I do have a tendency to "straighten" things out sometimes.
Anyway, you only added the references to Church Street after I reverted your hasty edits twice. Epicgenius(talk to me • see my contributions) 01:43, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
You reverted my edits without even looking at the changes I had made to the article in the meantime. You're much too hasty, and quite too enamored with yourself and your perceived abilities. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:01, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
I agree about THINKING before you edit. Either you're just incredibly obtuse or you don't want to listen to people. READ WP:MINOR PLEASE. [15]. Reverting edits is NEVER minor, unless it's vandalism, which mine clearly wasn't. Also a link to WP:Humor isn't needed on the humour article. Links to WP: articles aren't important to our readers, especially unimportant ones like that. ChessFiends (talk) 02:04, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Talk:September 11 attacks/GA4

Hi; I have deleted your review. I've included the full extent of your text below, in case you want to submit it on the article talk page instead. The GA reviewer is not allowed to be the same person who has nominated the article, and is not allowed to be someone already involved with the article. Conversely, people are generally discouraged from nominating articles for GA status when they are not major contributors to the article without talking to those who are. How much have you personally been involved in the development of the article? J Milburn (talk) 13:21, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Text of the review

I think this article could become a good article for a fourth time. It seems to be well-cited, well-organized and well-explained. However, I think that the following things can be cleaned up:

  • The amount of whitespace in some sections (particularly this section)
  • The length of some sections which have their own pages
  • The grammar in some places

Overall, it's a great nominee for good article. Epicgenius(talk to me • see my contributions) 00:17, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

William Shakespeare's life

I have reverted your undiscussed article name change. There is an ongoing discussion about the article name. See the talk page. Paul B (talk) 15:01, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the Warm Welcome!

Hi Epicgenius (love the username).

I'll definitely work on balancing out the new page I created, thanks for the helpful tip!

Hi!

Hi Epicgenius,

Thanks for the welcome and helping me out on the Makena page. It's still requires a bit of editing on my part so I welcome the assistance! Mchantry16 (talk) 20:15, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome

Thanks :) NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 21:21, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Please identify your previous usernames

In this edit, you wrote that you had been editing "for years" under other usernames. It is a breach of our sockpuppetry policy for an editor with an account to edit under another name to avoid scrutiny of their edits. It is also a breach of policy to edit under another name if your previous usernames are blocked or banned. Because these are very serious breaches of policy, and because your talk page history is full of objections from veteran editors about your editing, I believe you need to clear up this situtaion: please make your other usernames known so they can be examined to see if they are blocked or banned, and to see if your current behavior is an extension of theirs, and explain why you are no longer editing with them.

If you would prefer not to do this in public, which I would understand, please find an admin that you trust and reveal your previous usernames to the admin, who can then report here that your history is clear of encumbrances to your continuing to edit.

Please do not ignore this, this is a very serious matter, and could lead to your being blocked from editing if you do not respond. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:53, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

  • You did not write "IPs" you wrote "other usernames". And a "clean start" means that you avoid topic areas you edited before, so we still need to know what all your other usernames were to see if you've fulfilled your side of the obligations of a WP:CLEANSTART (which you should read). Please find an admin you trust and divulge your usernames so he or she can determine if you are, indeed, a legiitmate clean start. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:09, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
I think ArbCom is the usual place to declare things like previous accounts that one wishes to avoid stating on-wiki. That's what WP:CLEANSTART recommends. DMacks (talk) 03:01, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes, Epicgenius can certainly divulge his background to ArbCom if he wishes, but I don't think there's any requirement of his doing so. Any admin he trusts can get the information from him, examine it, and report back here. That may be more informal, but as long as editors are satisfied with the admin's report, there would be no need to take it any further up the food chain. In either case, however, ArbCom or rank-and-file admin, there is clearly a situation here which needs to be cleared up. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:11, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Epicgenius, in this version of one your sub-pages, which you just reverted [16], you claim to have made 50,000 edits under multiple usernames. I realize that you are prone to, shall we say exaggeration (I note that you have removed from your talk page the absurd claim that you graduated from Harvard University), but I hope you realize that statements such as this, and the edit summary I cited above, raise serious questions which have to be answered. It will not be sufficient to point us to an account with no edits (User:Ryanng98) or to an IP with under 100 edits (User:50.14.142.33), as you just did on your user page, it has to be determined what the previous usernames were that you edited with "for years". You won't be able to whitewash this away, please find an admin and divulge your past activity.

We're here to build an encyclopedia, Epicgenius, not to play games or screw around. If you can help do that, you'll be an asset to the project, but if you're here to mess around with userboxes and act the fool, we might be better off without you. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:54, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

  • I deleted the 50,000 edits userbox because it was a test of mine, and was untrue. It's more like 5,000 edits/

Besides, I didn't exactly "graduate" from Harvard yet- I'm still going. Epicgenius(talk to me • see my contributions) 11:42, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

    • Sure you are. That's why you say you live in New York (not Cambridge or Boston), the IP you list on your user page geolocates to Middle Village, New York, which is in Queens, about 75% of your edits are about NYC, and your general behavior pattern and demeanor fits the profile of a 13 or 14 year old boy.

      Please find an admin you trust and divulge to them your past editing history so it can be determined if you are a scrutiny- or block-evading sockpuppet or a legitimate clean start. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:42, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

      • BMK, quite being an asshole to users. There is nothing useful by adding "Sure you are", there is no requirement for the user to prove themselves to you (your not an admin and not even a respected or well liked editor), the only things we have in common it seems), even if they are 13 or 14 stating as such in the way you did is rude and unnecessarily aggressive. If they haven't done anything with this user name to make us think they are a sockpuppet then there is no reason to pursue it. Maybe they are telling the truth or lying about it, it makes no difference. They have been editing positively with this username so there is no reason to assume at this point they are anything but a user attempting a clean start. Kumioko (talk) 19:10, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
        • Thanks, Kumioko. ;) Epicgenius(talk to me • see my contributions) 19:37, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
        • KumiokoCleanStart - what do you do, cruise around Wikipedia to find places to stick your nose in where no one asked you to? Have you stopped free-loading yet and started contributing to the improvement of the encyclopedia, or are you still bitching and moaning in every non-article corner of the place? Let's take a quick look at your contribs: let's see, your last article edit was on April 23, and you've made over 200 non-article edits since then, so that puts your article edits at 5.63% of your total contributions. Admittedly, you did better under your previous account (before you starting IP socking and were indef blocked for it), but stats and a history like that don't empower you to be some kind of free-ranging ombudsman, so why don't you just buzz off? Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:35, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
          • BMK, I have done about 8x the number of edits you have, I have created more than a 1000 articles and have more than 2 dozen articles that have gotten GA, A, FL or FA. So even if I'm not doing that much article editing at the moment, I am still about 10 years ahead of you as far as usefulness goes. With that said the reason I am acting like a "Free ranging ombudsman" is because the admins seem unwilling or incapable of doing it. So there you go. If you don't like it, good, stop being a dick. If you think you should be an admin and take on the role of harassing editors feel free to run. My guess is that you know what I have been saying. That you are too much of an ass to other editors to get the tools. Back to the topic at hand. If you have some "proof" that Epic has done something wrong then present it. Otherwise pick someone else to harass or better still, go edit some articles and stop trying to act like an admin. We have enough useless admins trying to ban everyone we don't need you doing it too. Kumioko (talk) 20:01, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
            • @KumiokoCleanStart: Yes, it's quite possible that you may have been a productive editor once - although I'm not going to take the time to verify your horn-blowing above - but you certainly aren't now. Now, you're nothing but dead weight. Worse, your "contributions" consistently stir the pot, creating drama where there was none, and muddying the waters. If you're not going to edit articles, you should just go away, really, and come back when you're interested in contributing again.

              (BTW, your ability to add and compare numbers seems to be just as deficient as your ability to analyze situations: by my count you've got around 148k edits - throwing in a few for your various sockpuppet IPs -- while I have 122k. How is that "8x the number of edits" - or did you have an account before Kumioko?) Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:41, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

      • I am a New Yorker by nature. My computer is from home, which is in Queens, New York. (See my user page: practically the first sentence says that I am from NYC.) I wasn't raised in Boston or Cambridge.
        Besides, I act 75% of my age most of the time. Epicgenius(talk to me • see my contributions) 19:32, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
The truth is, I didn't really edit Wikipedia often in the past. Epicgenius(talk to me • see my contributions) 19:32, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
The problem is that it is hard to know which one of your various statements to believe. Are you telling the truth now, when you say that you didn't edit in the past, or before, when you said you had been editing for years under various usernames? And why did you invoke WP:CLEANSTART? Beyond My Ken (talk) 19:37, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Didn't I say "I made about 5,000 edits" above? Or did you not read the above? 5,000 edits is not much. I have only performed 5000 edits over the years. Epicgenius(talk to me • see my contributions) 19:40, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Epic your better off just ignoring him. BMK is going to keep trolling as long as you let him. I recommend just ignoring it or revert it. Kumioko (talk) 20:05, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Epicgenius, KumiokoCleanStart is not giving you good advice. Please clear up the question of your past activities. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:42, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Honestly, I really haven't made many edits in the past. Epicgenius(talk to me • see my contributions) 20:44, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
OK. One of the core values here is to assume good faith, so I'm willing to take that as the final word. It would be helpful if, in the future, you try to avoid exaggerating and stick to the facts. It might also be a good idea to do some editing of your user pages and bring them into line with reality. Finally, various editors, myself included, have brought to your attention here some problems with your editing, you should really pay attention to what more experienced editors tell you, and try your best to follow their advice. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:58, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Minor edits

You still don't get it, do you? This is not a minor edit: [17]. You added content. Nor was this: [18]. You added content. I've asked before if you've read WP:MINOR and you've never responded. Please confirm that you've read and understood that page. Pburka (talk) 03:17, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your welcome message. I've been busy with film and writing projects, so it's taken me this long to start on my page here. The information you impart is appreciated and most helpful. Now, I have to get my tech mind, was nearly bankrupt, to working.

Keep up your good work!

Best Regards,

Donald L. Vasicek Olympus Films+, LLC The Zen of Writing http://www.donvasicek.com dvasicek@earthlink.net

Glad I could help! Epicgenius(talk to me • see my contributions) 13:54, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Time sink

Kid, you are a terrible time sink, and in a very short period of time you have managed to attract the attention, and cause annoyance to, a number of veteran editors because of your misuse of the minor edit tag, your badly-thought out non-consensual merging and renaming of articles, and your addition of misinformation and poor formatting to article. So here's the deal:

  • I will continue to monitor your edits about subjects that I know something about, and will revert any edit which is incorrect or which does not improve the article, but since you have shown tremendous WP:IDHT capabilities, I will no longer bother to try and educate you on your talk page. You would be advised to listen to what other editors are telling you, but you've shown little inclination to do so, so I consider it a waste of my time to interact with you.
  • Unfortunately, I cannot do the same for subjects I am not familiar with, such as Japanese train stations, but given your overall track record, I'm fairly sure you are probably doing the same kinds of things to those articles; other editors will have to deal with them.
  • That means I will not be posting on your talk page again. Do not take this as acquiescence to your editing behavior, just as a lack of interest on my part in spending so much of my Wikipedia editing time on you, since you don't seem to want to learn.
  • You are explicitly asked not to post on my talk page, unless you are specifically required to do so by Wikipedia policy. (And, FYI, if an editor removes your comment from their talk page, restoring it is a violation of Wikipedia policy which can easily get you blocked from editing.

Fortunately for you, your behavior never quite crosses the line into being disruptive, it can best be described as consistently annoying. That means you probably won't be blocked any time soon, but it's a natural progression for annoyance to turn into actual disruption, and when that happens, there will be veteran editors who will speak to the nature of your editing - and that's something you've brought on yourself.

This is my final word of advice to you: you're just a kid now, and you think you know everything, but you need to grow up and find out that there are vast numbers of things that you know absolutely nothing about, one of which is how to survive and prosper in this environment. There are numerous ways of doing so, but yours ain't one of them.

Good luck in the future, I hope you continue to edit here, but learn how to do so in a better way - and, please, no responses are necessary, I'm un-watching your talk page. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:02, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

"...cause annoyance to a number of veteran editors"
Like whom? The only veterans that I see beside you that are harassing me about the tag are User:Pburka, User:DAJF and User:ChessFiends. Oh, and just so you know, by your definition, I'm a veteran too. Epicgenius(talk to me • see my contributions) 21:02, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
  • You identified four veteran editors who have been engaged in extended (and oftentimes frustrating) discussions with you regarding your misuse of minor edit tags and your borderline disruptive editing. Is that not enough? I really do believe that you're trying to do good, but you need to take a more thoughtful and collaborative approach. Pburka (talk) 21:46, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
Folks lets just calm down a little. The minor edit tag isn't that big of a deal, really. Besides that, about half the edits you all are mentioning could be considered minor edits (changing casing, adding brackets, etc.). Kumioko (talk) 23:45, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi

Thanks for the welcome epicgenius. I admire your username as well as your acceptance. See you around! Sethi.Ramitson (talk) 23:32, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Krista van Velzen

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Krista van Velzen, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a foreign language article that was copied and pasted from another Wikimedia project, or was transwikied out to another project. Please see Wikipedia:Translation to learn about requests for, and coordination of, translations from foreign-language Wikipedias into English.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Deadbeef 01:48, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Translations

Epicgenius: Please don't put rough translations in mainspace for others to clean up. Have a look at the backlog at WP:Pages needing translation into English#Translated pages that could still use some cleanup. While one of the few people who work there and can handle the task gets to it - which may be years - the article will sit, frustrating readers. Even more so, please don't translate an article by first uploading it into mainspace in a foreign language, as you did at Krista van Velzen. Create a sandbox space and then move it to mainspace when it's ready! Not only does a newly created foreign-language article run the risk of speedy deletion - this one should have been speedy deleted as a duplicate of an existing article on another version of Wikipedia, which would have been a waste of your time as well as the tagger's and the deleting admin's - but foreign-language material doesn't belong on en.wikipedia, so please plan a bit better and keep the steps in the process that aren't ready for prime time away from mainspace. It's far better to let a redlink remain as a cue to someone who can make a readable article in English; or alternatively if you can't read the relevant language, instead of machine translating a foreign-language Wikipedia article, instead use the translation program on a couple of sources and write a stub yourself in English. Yngvadottir (talk) 02:48, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I came here to say the same thing - If you're not able to translate something properly yourself then you should follow the instructions given at WP:TRANSLATION rather than creating a poor article which will remain poor--Jac16888 Talk 17:03, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
So, what you're saying is, I should create stubs only in the languages I know fluently? Epicgenius(talk to me • see my contributions) 18:13, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes. Either stubs or fleshed out articles. Google Translate and the like are of great use in understanding sources, and articles on foreign-language Wikipedias provide a great starting point in terms of indicating that a topic is notable and providing some sources, but nothing should appear in mainspace that isn't ready to be read by a reader. Again, take a look at the size of that backlog to which you added your articles - it goes back years, and if you click on some of those articles you'll see they do a pretty poor job of informing the reader simply because they aren't really in English. I do recommend userspace drafts, because it can be a lengthy process forming an article on something where you can't read the sources. And by the way, when you do translate something from a foreign-language Wikipedia, always say so in the first edit summary (or by adding the translated page template to the talkpage), to attribute the work on that Wikipedia that you drew on. I did that for your three articles. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:24, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Okay, I'll keep that in mind. Epicgenius(talk to me • see my contributions) 18:25, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

A good idea would if you spent some time and effort and had a go at cleaning up the articles yourself, or even just turning them into usable stubs - since they will otherwise most likely remain as they are (i.e. poor articles) for some time--Jac16888 Talk 19:45, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

New Yorker

Yeah, bad articles are already plentiful. Better to find and repair or kill them than to make new ones and hope someone else repairs or kills them. But anyway, will you be in Greenwich Village for the Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC on June 1? Jim.henderson (talk) 10:56, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Edit war

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Controversies about the word "niggardly". 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. Do not keep inserting your preferred version. Use the Talk page and if you cannot gain consensus, you can use dispute resolution. But do not keep inserting unsourced content. Dave Dial (talk) 00:35, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

OK, I'll try to avoid that in the future. Epicgenius(talk to me • see my contributions) 00:37, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Unfair block by someone using a similar IP

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.
Epicgenius/Archive/2013 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
67.220.154.178 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Block message:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Acalimari". The reason given for Acalimari's block is: "impersonation account".

Decline reason: Procedural decline as the autoblock has expired. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:44, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

It really does look very much like you are the one that created that account. --jpgordon::==( o ) 22:56, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
I have no association with that account. I just opened up my computer to find that I couldn't edit for some reason. Epicgenius(talk to me • see my contributions) 23:27, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
For some reason yesterday I could edit pages outside my house, however. I couldn't edit from within my house because of the IP restriction. Epicgenius(talk to me • see my contributions) 12:01, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Your edits to the R32 article regarding the summer swap on the A/C

The only differences is that when the R32s are on the A, they are full length but when they are on the C, they are two-cars shorter. Other than that, its still the same amount of R32s used at rush hour. Saying "However, fewer R32s are used during the summer months...." is completely misleading. For example, 140 out of the 222 remaining R32s run on the A at rush hour, being full length trains. When those scheduled rush hour R32 trains make service on the C, four more car segments are used, meaning its two cars shorter. But for the A, its full length. It's the amount of how many cars used at rush hour that matters, not the actual trainsets which we do not include on any of the NYCS car articles. JoesphBarbaro (talk) 12:41, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

  • It's not misleading: the R32s on the A are arranged in fourteen 10-carriage formations (140 out of 222 cars are used), while the R32s used on the C are arranged in eighteen 8-carriage formations (144/222 cars used). The cars are only arranged in 10-carriage formation for the A during the summer months, so while it is true that more R46s have to be used to supplement service on the C, fewer R32 cars are used overall (140 in the summer on the A as opposed to 144 in the winter on the C). The number of R32 trainsets is not relevant. See this winter roster and this summer roster for an idea of what I mean.

If there were 150 cars (or 15 ten-carriage formations) used during the summer months, I would not have included this tiny tidbit of information. Epicgenius(talk to me • see my contributions) 12:54, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Labyrinth problem (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Wiener
Lower East Side (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Hipster

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 23:20, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

9/11 review

I've begun the GA review for the 9/11 attacks and would like your thoughts on an initial point; drop by when you get a chance, and thanks for your work. -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:32, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

  • I've now closed the review, since it's been a week and some substantial issues from the previous GAR still need to be addressed; you appear to have made more than 500 edits during that period, so I think you've had fair opportunity to comment. In the future, please don't nominate articles for GA that you don't intend to work on--it wastes the time of reviewers, and the process is already seriously backlogged. Thanks, though, for your work on Wikipedia generally. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:14, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Ice Pigging

Hi Epicgenius,

Can you tell me more about my submission, declined, about Ice Pigging please ? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Ice_Pigging)

You didn't let any comments so I cannot understand why the submission was declined.

Thank you in advance, Aurélien

  • I apologize if I have declined it in haste. Although it sounded like an advertisement when I reviewed it, I'll go review it again. Epicgenius(talk to me • see my contributions) 13:38, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
    • Thank you very much. It may sound like an advertisement, but all the statements are proved by several sources : The University of Bristol, The University of Warwick, several independent researchers, several articles, and several companies. This is an innovation, and I wrote the advantages but the disadvantages as well ("Unfortunately Ice Pigging Requires more energy to carry out the cleaning process due to the fact the ice slurries must be chilled and constantly agitated up until the point they are inserted into the pipes."). An advertisement doesn't include the disadvantages. Thanks for your time. AurelienPrat — Preceding unsigned comment added by AurelienPrat (talk • contribs) 13:55, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Recent change at WP:EW

Hello Epicgenius. Recently you made this edit of the WP:Edit warring policy. Can you please undo this? The wording which is there now has been approved by Wikimedia Foundation legal staff.

The wording which is there now was added in this edit to the policy of 19 February, 2013 by NE Ent which is a follow up to this comment from Maggie Dennis (Moonriddengirl) who was forwarding the advice from WMF Legal:

Her input is in the WT:EW archive from February 2013: here:

Actually, since our servers are no longer just in Florida, this is probably as good a time as any to do something we've intended to do for months, and align the language here with the language in the Terms of Use. Since we refer to "US law" more generally there, why don't we make this section say:

Removal of other content that is clearly illegal under US law, such as child pornography and pirated software.

This way, our language will be the same in both places.

--Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 11:09, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

If you believe that our current EW language is not right and that further change is needed you should probably consult the WMF lawyers. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 14:40, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

  • The only people who can send in the police to shut down our servers are the local authorities. How we deal with the laws of other countries is a broader issue. For example, the UK libel laws. Food for thought. Many discussions elsewhere. Not suitable for a single sentence in WP:EW in my opinion. EdJohnston (talk) 14:53, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
  • This is only an exemption to 3RR we are talking about. It doesn't have to be 100% bullet proof. The question is whether you can be blocked for reverting something away that you think is illegal under the laws of Bulgaria, for example. I hope nobody would try that. EdJohnston (talk) 15:27, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

disambiguation pages

Please note that there should be only one navigable link per entry in a disambiguation page. Accordingly, I reverted your edit to Soho (disambiguation). Cheers! —EncMstr (talk) 21:04, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Empire Diner

Hi, Epic. You're a good editor and someone I respect, so I wanted to come by and let you know why, for now, I had to revert your addition to the lead of Empire Diner. The article doesn't say that it was between 22nd & 23rd, just that it was at the corner of 22nd. The Empire may well have been further up the block at one point, but we'd need a cite for that. I can help you look, if you want. With regards, --Tenebrae (talk) 23:45, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Armenian Genocide

I would appreciate if you may visit talk page of Armenian Genocide and share your views about consensus of editing/removing the references from the subject article,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Armenian_Genocide#Consensus_about_articleMalizengin (talk) 05:38, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Article notability notification

Hello. This message is to inform you that an article that you wrote recently, 10th Avenue (IRT Flushing Line), has been tagged with a notability notice. This means that it may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Please note that articles which do not meet these criteria may be merged, redirected, or deleted. Please consider adding reliable, secondary sources to the article in order to establish the topic's notability. You may find the following links useful when searching for sources: Find sources: "10th Avenue (IRT Flushing Line)" – news · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images. Thank you for editing Wikipedia! VoxelBot 15:20, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Article notability notification

Hello. This message is to inform you that an article that you wrote recently, 1100 (number), has been tagged with a notability notice. This means that it may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Please note that articles which do not meet these criteria may be merged, redirected, or deleted. Please consider adding reliable, secondary sources to the article in order to establish the topic's notability. You may find the following links useful when searching for sources: Find sources: "1100 (number)" – news · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images. Thank you for editing Wikipedia! VoxelBot 15:20, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello

I had to revert one of your edits on Template:Ethnic slurs, as Jews are indeed part of an Asian diaspora originating in the Middle East. This also includes Ashkenazi Jews (see the lead paragraph). Jews are listed in most places as a Middle Eastern people, not a European one, according to Wikipedia, and the Jewish nationality is treated as separate from that of our former host countries.

Thanks,

Evildoer187 (talk) 17:55, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Queens

Hi. I've just looked over Queens, which you nominated for GA. It does not meet GA criteria, and the issues, especially given the complexity and importance of the topic, are unlikely to be fixed in a short time. I am probably among the most positive and optimistic of GA reviewers, and am generally willing to help out on bringing an article to GA standard, but this one daunts me. Of particular note is the amount of the article that is unsourced, that the lead section does not meet WP:Lead, and that there are a lot of lists and data that do not meet WP:Embed. Essentially, the article is a collection of information that has not yet been appropriately formed into a readable, accessible, and reliable article. It would require significant work, and so should be quick failed. Rather than have a failed nomination recorded against you, it's probably best to withdraw - per Wikipedia:Good_article_nominations/Instructions, you may withdraw by removing the {{GA nominee}} template from the article talk page. SilkTork ✔Tea time 17:58, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nigga, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Homeboy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:45, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Recommendations are not requirements

Hi. I saw the 2 reversions at this article in my watchlist (27 and 28 May), and thought I would comment.

  1. It would've been better if both of you and Parrot of Doom had used slightly clearer edit summaries.
  2. You stated "WP:MOS" in one edit summary, but a subsection, or subpage link, would've been better (ie. WP:APPENDIX)
  3. The recommendations in WP:APPENDIX are just that, "recommendations". Individual articles/editors may use slight variations, based on common sense, ToC aesthetics, particular article nuances, and other factors.
  4. Edit warring is always bad! It is particularly bad on a Featured article...
  5. If you get reverted over a subjective issue, the article's talkpage is usually the next logical step. WP:BRD.

Hope that helps. (As someone said to me, years ago, "You're not a real Wikipedian until you've made, and learned from, at least 50 mistakes!") –Quiddity (talk) 21:57, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

New York City GAR

New York City, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 02:35, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Christopher Robin may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:58, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Museum of Jewish Heritage 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.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:00, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Apollo Theatre (New York City) 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.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:38, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Epicgenius/Archive/2013/May&oldid=1142989939"