User talk:NottNott/Archives/2015/September

Archives

Toontown discussion

Hey Nott! Regarding this edit summary, the discussion being referred to is here in the archive - unfortunately that wasn't very clear. Your new note always works just as well however :) ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 01:10, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

After doing a ctrl-F for 'infinite', I came up with just 1 result, declared that "there was no consensus" and left it alone. It wasn't specifically toward Infinite I guess? Worked out fine anyway :> ~NottNott ( ✉ -☺) 17:45, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ohh, would you look at that! The comment did say Infinite. It used to saw Rewritten; looks like someone must have changed it at some point. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 20:46, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT RIGHTS

Hie NottNott how are you doing We can have a healthy chat on WhatsApp. I want to talk to you its about a change. Drop me a message (Redacted) KattuKakku (talk) 20:08, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I have no idea why you want to talk to me. I'm not here to defend LGBT rights (although I do avidly support them), I'm just here to improve the site. Talk to me by posting your messages below, if it's about the article. Thanks. ~NottNott let's talk! contrib 20:09, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For privacy reasons, please do not post contact information belonging to yourself or others. Thank you. Mike V • Talk 20:39, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Are you from brazil? dont you know funk carioca is pornographic?

Por acaso voce nao sabe que funk carioca é pornografico? Interenções não justificadas só dimminuem a credibilidade da wikipedia.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brunocaput (talk • contribs) 00:33, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies - I was going on the definition of pornography based more on images. Reading the wider article makes me understand. ~ NottNott let's talk! contrib 00:36, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

One comment

Hi, hello Nottnott, how are you?. I agree with your comment in my talk page. I just thank you message and I will explain that in the case of pereiro, is not the same as pereira (pereyra, pereyras, das pereyras, da pereira, paraira), the former is a european wild pear tree and the second is a pear orchard. In addition, Pereiro is a religious military order or an order of Knights Templar. By the way, by the by, the question is how to create a page with your help that explain of the origin and meaning of surnames,i.e. etimology (onomastics and semantics) of the the surnames / family names in general. There are good references in the web.

--LigronTigonTiglonTigronTiglon 12:16, 6 September 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by LigreLiger (talk • contribs)

Hey there, thanks for questioning my revert. The reason I reverted your edit actually has nothing to do with what you posted - it just didn't seem like the definitions you posted in the lead section helped the disambiguation page much, as it isn't the place to define what the name means and it's obvious it's a surname by looking at what's on the page. Check out WP:DDD. I might even be wrong in my revert. Anticlimactic, I know. :)

Having that many sources to write an article with are awesome, but the main problem you'll face is that you're in the wrong wiki - all of those sources are in languages other than English. You might find you're better suited to it:Pagina_principale or es:Wikipedia:Portada to contribute in those languages (I don't know if you're Spanish or Italian) - be sure not to contribute those here as you'll find them quickly removed.

If you can find some English sources about the etymology of those names, you should definitely check out Family name, which is a branched-off article tackling surnames in all sorts of cultures. Particularly for you in the case of pereiro, try editing Spanish naming customs - that includes a subheading for Galician names. Should be a quick edit - I wish you good luck with this.

One last thing completely unrelated to all of the above, you should try learning how to sign off with a signature on a talk page. I'd recommend you learn how to do so here! I wish you the very best in your editing journey! :D ~ NottNott let's talk! contrib 13:38, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Avalon

Hello...the page(Avalon) was restored without considering the various interventions. It seems very questionable. [1]. --82.59.44.145 (talk) 11:38, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Landau Forte Academy Amington Side Entrance Gate.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Landau Forte Academy Amington Side Entrance Gate.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:42, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Blake Bortles

Why did you erase my inclusion of the time he was busted by UCFPD watching Cash Cab naked...? Pretty important info there boss. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.82.152.41 (talk) 19:40, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.google.com/search?q=WIKIPEdia+trouble+keeping+editors&rlz=1CAACAG_enUS589US589&oq=WIKIPEdia+trouble+keeping+editors&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i64l2.8934j0j7&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=0&ie=UTF-8 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.210.242.135 (talk) 04:38, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On CST6CDT

Hi NottNott,

You reverted one of my changes to the CST6CDT page. You mentioned that my edit appeared to be a "joke" but I assure you I was not joking in the slightest when I left an edit on that page saying "fix me." The page needs fixing and I do not have the skills to fix it myself and could not determine any other way to flag it for repair (note the table on the page is full of broken links, which are still broken despite my attempts to call attention to it). If there is some other way to flag a page for review, please let me know.

Sorry if I butcher your talk page. As I mentioned before, I don't know how to edit wiki pages. --204.147.90.2 (talk) 22:09, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no, seriously it's fine - we get a lot of joke edits and since you've come to me explaining it as it makes sense now. It's refreshing to see a new wikipedia editor actually embrace the process of trying to fix an article - it's all in the process of learning! Looking at the article it's in a disastrous state of repair, so apologies for not picking up on that at first. I'll have a look at it and see what I can do, and if anything I can ask for assistance from guys who do know what they're doing. Cheers dude. ~NottNott ( ✉ -☻) 22:17, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. Thanks for looking at it. It looks like there was some sort of shift away from that notation (standardinitials-offsentnumber-daylightinitials). The MST7MDT page has the same issue, and EST5EDT, and I assume a bunch of others as well (not sure if its limited to north america time zones or what). It was an accepted abbreviation, and I believe it still is today (but I am not mega up to date on these things). Just a bit of extra info there on what may have happened. Sorry I can't be more help. --204.147.90.2 (talk) 22:29, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(colons in wikimarkup indent! I'll handle that for you :) ) I'm actually looking at the problem now, and learning a lot about ISO standards at the same time. It seems there's a file in the database that doesn't exist, and so the page won't display properly. I'll try my best, and get back to you if/when I solve the problem :) ~NottNott ( ✉ -☻) 22:32, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Neat-o. Thanks for the update. ISO is super fun haha (what can I say? I like standards). Really appreciate the effort. Hope you don't lose sleep over it!--204.147.90.2 (talk) 22:39, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I share in your lack on knowledge, and while I could vaguely interpret the new raw database files I have no clue how to correct the database entry at List_of_tz_database_time_zones and as such have stumped myself. I'll ask the help desk - but I'm seriously stumped myself. ~NottNott ( ✉ -☻) 23:14, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@204.147.90.2: Looks like the database might be getting a fix at long last. ~ NottNott let's talk! contrib 17:35, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Brooklyn-Queens Day

Hello, NottNott.

Your information is mostly wrong. It is strongly advised that you contact the Brooklyn Sunday School Union directly at 718.522.4317. You only think that your posting is correct. It is riddled with gross errors. The wise thing for you to do is to restore the information I provided. Mello rosenstein (talk) 22:49, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there - because that was your first edit, you might not have an understanding of Wikipedia's policies yet. I assume you're here to improve the site, so the fact that you're questioning my revert is good. I reverted your edit as it is a core policy that Wikipedia cites third party sources instead of being based on individual editor's experiences. This is called no original research. Your edit seemed to remove several citations and is based more on your own knowledge on the subject than third party sources - so I reverted your edit. ~ NottNott let's talk! contrib 16:01, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations from STiki!

The Bronze STiki Barnstar of Merit

Congratulations, NottNott! You're receiving this barnstar of merit because you recently crossed the 5,000 classification threshold using STiki.

We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool.

We hope you continue your ascent up the leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (developer) and ‑Ugog Nizdast (talk) 06:08, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Northfield School edit

Hi there I wonder if you can tell me why you have removed my edit when every statement therein can be verified by accessing the Ofsted link in the right hand info column whereas the edit you have replaced it with contains almost nothing that can be verified. All the statements made in my edit are verifiable whereas almost none in the current edit are. I fail to see how this is an improvement.

Best wishes

Pyrrhus62 (talk) 15:27, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My bad. I'd go even as far to say the previous revision, before your edits, are serious puffery in the article. I reverted your changes as a snap judgement based on the removal of content and your editing history. I'll restore your changes now, and sorry for the inconvenience. ~ NottNott let's talk! contrib 15:34, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Russian Cinema

Hi, I added the "so pretty much always" to point out that the sentence is poorly written and bears no purpose as it is dividing Russia's cinema based on Russia's political structure without alluding to a difference in those era's. It was good, then was good again, and then ended up being good after. Pointless. You can rather say something like: Russian cinema has been significant since the invention of motion pictures or whatever you were trying to say. Please take no offence, I get annoyed by the poor quality of wiki pages at is detrimental to the reputation and thus the purpose of Wikipedia, which is sacred. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.151.246.66 (talk) 15:31, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just fail to see how your change made the article better is all. Perhaps you could edit the whole paragraph to make the sentence better if you say the sentence is poorly written. That specific edit was better reverted however. I implore you to try and improve the paragraph if you can however. :) ~ NottNott let's talk! contrib 15:38, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Apology

Apologies if I seemed to accuse you of vandalism at Ashbourne, Derbyshire. I was trying to tidy up a series of unconstructive edits (which you had partially reverted) and got it wrong. Dave.Dunford (talk) 21:31, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I can relate to reverting genuine edits. ~ NottNott let's talk! contrib 17:24, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	I really like that you give courage to others to edit Wikipedia. Thanks to you, I have the strength to boost up! :) The Pancake of Heaven! 13:27, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

About the Murray Bookchin article

The PKK have been classified as a terrorist organisation by the UK and US governments, yet you removed my edit about this. Did I do something wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.232.15.225 (talk) 20:28, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@92.232.15.225:Hey there, thanks for asking. On the wiki it's really important critical statements like that are sourced, otherwise it damages the integrity of the wiki. Try reading WP:CITE on how to do this! You didn't do anything wrong at all - you're just learning as any new editor would. ~ NottNott talk|contrib 20:31, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

matt serra

everything i edited was correct, please switch it back — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slothdestroyer1 (talk • contribs) 17:51, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rick Santorum

Wiki page: Rick Santorum

The article I added to the page may have seem stilted to one opinion, however it merely stated what is. My opinion was not in it. It discussed his "Ideal Family" and how it has been viewed. If you still have a copy of the article section, edit it as needed to change the Tone to neutral, but it doesn't change the issue in and of itself. Leaving this information out of his page will direct a particular view of Mr. Rick Santorum that would be in error.

Did you check the sources? That is where part of the information came from. What he inferred is as important as what he said plainly.

Hey there, thanks for getting in touch. I reverted your edit for two reasons, the first being clear at the time before reverting the edit - it is unfortunately a WP:NPOV problem. Phrases such as 'a person can reasonably infer' and the rhetorical question 'should Compulsory Sterilization be enforced?' make for pretty reading in my honest opinion, but they don't appear neutral so it's understandable on that front why.

Secondly, most of the sources you have added don't directly link to Rick Santorum, which means the article begins to begin a discussion about compulsory sterilisation rather than a concise rundown of Rick Santorum himself. Please edit Castration (best guess at what you mean) as I'm sure you could contribute to that article very well with the sources you've accrued.

Finally, thanks for asking yet again. If you have any questions please let me know. Cheers. ~ NottNott talk|contrib 17:53, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rajiv Jain

Hello, I am just adding right stuff and i know about him. I am not doing any thing wrong overthere. Please have a look. Let me edit first and than u remove it, if you dont like it. Manikadsouza (talk) 17:49, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies. I've lost track of the revisions, but thanks for messaging me. I reverted your edit because the vast majority of people who remove content without providing a WP:EDITSUMMARY are pretty much here to delete content for no apparent reason and vandalise the wiki. Of course you're the exception here, as you've cited your additions to the article well. I hope you can understand where I'm coming from, and best wishes on editing the article. ~ NottNott talk|contrib 17:57, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate. Thanks Indeed Manikadsouza (talk) 18:02, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Leila Aria

September 30th, 2015 2:40 PM EST

Hi NottNott,

Thanks for the welcome, and for the tips. I will check them out.

A definitively friendly question: What do you mean when you say "I don't have to write out warnings"? I'm confused.

Leila Aria (talk) 18:39, 30 September 2015 (UTC)Leila Aria[reply]

@Leila Aria:For example, you could put painstaking effort into telling another user that he should have verified something using a source, writing the whole message by hand... or just use a Uw-unsourced1 template.

So, writing:

{{uw-unsourced1}} ~~~~ onto a page produces:

Hello, I'm NottNott. I noticed that you made a change to an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ~ NottNott talk|contrib 18:51, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See this page for a more detailed overview on how to do this.

Finally, writing ~~~~ will produce a signature that is personalised to you along with a datestamp, so you don't have to write the date and time at the beginning of each post you make. We aren't writing letters! Feel free to ask me any questions at any time, and most established editors would be happy to help you out anyway. Welcome to the wiki! ~ NottNott talk|contrib 18:51, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:TDH9213

I see you have reverted the edirs I made on this page, citing AGF. Since the user in question had created this page before, I do not see that in is reasonable to assume 'good faith': the man is clearly a vain timewaster.TheLongTone (talk) 13:16, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, posted the above before I read the post on my talk page, which is why I am not replying there. My opinion stands: I have no time whatsoever for nudniks who write Wikipedia articles about themselves.TheLongTone (talk) 13:20, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@TheLongTone: Slandering someone who might not know Wikipedia policy makes the community look bad. Don't pretend as if you were perfect when you started out editing, because nobody was. Instead, try to point newcomers to the policies so that they can learn, and potentially contribute on their own someday. See WP:DBTN. Thanks. ~ NottNott talk|contrib 15:54, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Although since the page was deleted, I can't see the edit history to see if he was continuing to write his autobiography after people had told him not to. If he was doing something that he knows is against policy, I have no qualms about him getting a block. ~ NottNott talk|contrib 15:57, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Slandering my eye. Look at the man's talk page. And af for being uncivil, if I wish to be rude I am capable of doing so. Telling this nudnik that nobody is interested in his mates is a statement of fact. Get real.TheLongTone (talk) 11:46, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@TheLongTone: I used the word slandering wrongly. It doesn't change the reality that being rude to him would solve the problem either, and if you wanted to state the fact that nobody is interested in his friends you could link him WP:NOTABILITY rather than making a personal attack. I don't think this discussion will go anywhere, but feel free to reply. ~ NottNott talk|contrib 14:41, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are right. I freely admit to being snippy sometimes, but sometimes the milk of human kindnesss runs thin. I certainly wouldn't speak like that to a first-time article recreated afd nominee,& I do sometimes make constructive talk page comments. Water under the bridge.

@TheLongTone: No problem at all, of course every editor needs to learn at some point. Glad to know that you're willing to, and I'm glad to have learnt what the definition of 'slandering' is :p ~ NottNott talk|contrib 20:41, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]