User talk:HenryLarsen
Welcome to Wikipedia!!!
[edit]
|
Hello!
You added a single sentence: "There is no trial by jury in Finland", to the article Judicial system of Finland. I suppose you are trying to address some problem you have perceived. However, it would be nice if you could expound on the problem on the article talk page. As it was, your mention looked out of place. I moved it under heading District courts and expounded a bit. Please discuss your idea here or on the talk page of the article. --MPorciusCato 12:12, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
December 2007
[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, adding content of marginal relevance (unnecessary trivia) to articles, as you did to University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, is not considered productive. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. RichardΩ612 20:39, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Hell's Kitchen
[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.
We already have a reference to show-related material describing the "executive chef" prize. There's no need to add further un-cited trivia bits detailing every time the "executive chef" prize is mentioned on the show per WP:NOT; Wikipedia is not the place for indiscriminate information. --Madchester (talk) 19:51, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Do you watch the programme? I think direct quotations of the words from Ramsay's mouth are hardly 'indiscriminate information'. Since the nature of the prize on offer -- executive chef vs. sous-chef -- is clearly relevant; and since the supposedly authoritative source is a wire-service leak, I will continue to prefer Ramsay. HenryLarsen (talk) 03:11, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
We don't need to report on each instance the show, it's advertising, or any related publicity mentions the prize to be an executive chef position, per WP:NOT. After the show's filming, Ramsay's publicist has already stated to the media that the winner is receiving a "senior sous chef", along with the associated prize money. If you wish to add those unsourced and trivial episode quotes against Wiki-policy, please discuss it on the article talk page so that wiki-editors can decide whether it has any sufficient weight in the introduction, despite the wealth of information provided by both the show's publicity and Ramsay's publicist. --Madchester (talk) 03:34, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I simply disagree. Much of the frisson of the competition comes from the fabulous grand prize on offer, i.e., the position, as promised by G. Ramsay, of executive chef in one of his own restaurants. This is far from trivial. 'Unsourced episode quotes against Wiki-policy'??? As I said, do you even watch the programme? These are Ramsay's own words; he is the source. What do you want, a screen capture? As long as he keeps telling the participants that the prize is the position of executive chef, this is what the article needs to reflect. If there are conflicting reports, then that fact should also be mentioned. But Ramsay is paramount and his continuing promises cannot simply be swept away. HenryLarsen (talk) 06:44, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Please discuss your proposed changes on the article talk page and see if it gains consensus with the article's editors. Right now:
- The quotations lack proper citations (Violates WP:RS)
- The prize awarded is already mentioned in the show's press releases; there's no need to make superfluous references to each time it is mentioned by Ramsay, the narrator, or the contestants on the programme. That violates WP:NOT, by adding trivial details.
- Historically, the show's stated prize and the the actual prize awarded has not always been the same. Neither Michael or Heather got the exact title or restaurant they were suppose to win, despite what Ramsay told them throughout their seasons.
Right now, you're adding the unsourced, superfluous quotations as a way of downplaying the press release from Ramsay's publicist, even though it has been carried by reliable sources. I would suggest discussing your questionable edits in the article's talk page, since they're taking a personal POV and trying to skew the reader's opinion. We have to give equal weight to the two descriptions of the prize. --Madchester (talk) 10:54, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
- Your only 'citation' is a gossip columnist claiming info from an unnamed Ramsay publicist. This is supposed to outweigh public pronouncements from the man himself? I don't think so.
- The prize is not mentioned elsewhere in the article, except insofar as it is dened by said gossip columnist. I agree that it would not be necessary to make reference to it each time it is mentioned by Ramsay IF it were mentioned at least once in the article, clearly, as the true information we must suppose it to be unless or until it is altered by the maximum authority, G. Ramsay himself.
- Changes to the winner's compensation have occurred, yes. But from the perspective of the _viewer_, at this stage in the competition there is no reason to insist or even expect that it will happen again. Your 'press release' from the anonymous 'publicist' is not authoritative and the gossip column is not a 'reliable source'.
Right now, you keep deleting what must be considered at this stage the 'official' view, as espoused by Ramsay himself, in favour of a specious press release. 'We have to give equal weight to the two descriptions of the prize,' you say. All right, then: let's do that. Stop deleting the reference to executive chef. HenryLarsen (talk) 11:56, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Tri Nations bonus points
[edit]Hi! Good question! My first thought was the so-called "Greatest Ever Rugby Match", the 2000 Tri Nations Series opener when Australia hosted the All Blacks and drew a crowd of 109,000. And sure enough, yep, that was a three bonus point match - both sides scored 5 tries, and the final result of 39-34 earned Australia a bonus point for losing by 7 or less.
There may well be others, but you'd need to browse through all the results and look for games with 4+ tries each side and a close scoreline. Template:Tri Nations has links to articles on each year's competition, they all have the results and scoring details.
Cheers! --Stormie (talk) 21:30, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Just to be sure, I went back and checked my DVD of The Bank Dick. It's spelled "Sousé", and they keep saying "accent grave", which is obviously incorrect. It's part of the joke, probably just Fields seeing if anyone was paying attention. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 13:14, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Page blanking
[edit]Since you're a long term editor I assume this was done by someone else logged into your account. You might want to change your password now and remember to log out once you're done editing if that is indeed the case. --Zvn (talk) 16:00, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
This is the final warning you will receive for your disruptive edits, such as those you made to Doc Martin. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. Woogee (talk) 07:31, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:HenryLarsen_blanking_articles. Woogee (talk) 07:55, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Why are you removing sources here? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:09, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Vandalism
[edit]Please note that deliberately introducing false information into articles constitutes vandalism. Your repeatedly changing the Tampere Airport article to List Frankfurt instead of Hahn as a Ryanair destination is vandalism, and someone has had to go and undo your addition each time. Please stop vandalising. I see you have been warned before. It's best to avoid a block. jasepl (talk) 13:33, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
Hanh
[edit]As already explained in the past, Frankfurt-Hahn may be the name of the airport, but we list destinations in the table, not airports. HHN is not a Frankfurt airport (it never was) and the Frankfurt prefix was added recently as a marketing tool. Please bring your input to WP:Airlines should you disagree with this longstanding status. jasepl (talk) 12:10, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
I noticed that you removed a reference to Palin as an alum of Univ of Hawaii because, as you say, "She did not graduate, so she is not an alumna". That is statement is not true. She attended the college. That is all that is required to be an alumni. Please review the definition provided here in Wikipedia: Alumnus. Clearly that article points out that graduation is not required.--NK (talk) 11:09, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:29, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]
Hello, HenryLarsen. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
[edit]Hello, HenryLarsen. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
[edit]Hello, HenryLarsen. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
[edit] | Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
[edit] | Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
[edit] | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |