User talk:Ofcdeadbeat

July 2010

Thursday, July 8

Re: The Real Ghostbusters

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article The Real Ghostbusters, please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This is particularly important when adding or changing any facts or figures and helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. -- Doniago (talk) 19:39, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

		The Modest Barnstar
		Thanks for your recent contributions! 129.49.72.78 (talk) 17:11, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

November 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please be aware of Wikipedia's policy that biographical information about living persons must not include unsupported or inaccurate statements. Whenever you add possibly controversial statements about a living person to an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did to Tara Charendoff-Strong, you must include proper sources. If you don't know how to cite a source, you may want to read Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners for guidelines. Thank you. If I had made a mistake, please report it and make the edit again. Cutecutecuteface2000 (talk) 02:17, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide sources

Please provide sources when you add content to articles. It is particularly important that when adding content about a living person the information is from the highest quality sources, those with a known reputation for fact checking and accuracy. I have reverted your edits to Dave Benson Phillips. -- The Red Pen of Doom 18:09, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ofcdeadbeat, saw your message to TRPoD about birthdays. What websites do you have, which list the DOB that you tried to include? If they are blogs (not counting the official blog of Dave Benson Phillips of course -- if there is such a thing), then they are not enough for wikipedia's kewl rulz. But, if they are newspapers, teevee, or non-vanity-press books, then they can be used as Reliable Sources for wikipedia. There might be *other* equally Reliable Sources which give a different DOB, and those will usually still be included (verifiable sourcing trumps truth oddly enough), see here for some examples User_talk:Betty_Logan#Julie_Christie. You can leave a note on my talkpage, if you reply and I don't respond promptly. Thanks for improving wikipedia. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 01:47, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Goldust and Kane

Hello. Concluding that someone is Jewish because of their name (first or last) is the very definition of original research. It so happens that both my first and last names are Jewish but we have not been able to find any confirmed Jews in my family line dating back at least 500 years.

"As for Goldust's year of birth, I've found websites that say he was born in 1966." There are websites and then there are websites. Some are reliable sources and some are not. If you can provide a reliable source then that information can be added to the article. SQGibbon (talk) 21:23, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Benson Phillips

Particularly in respects to this person, other websites have been notoriously and horrifically WRONG in what they are saying. That is why we do NOT allow just any website. We only allow sources with a strong reputation for fact checking, accuracy and editorial oversight, particularly on content about a living person.

You can leave the URL for any sight that you think meets those qualifications on the articles talk page with a request to add it to the article if others review it and agree with your assessment. We would want something like a reputable mainstream newspaper or Benson Phillips' own website.

You can read more about providing sources at WP:CITE.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:28, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

re: Domino masks

Hello. I did not remove the "Notable fictional users" section from the Domino mask article. All I did was tag it as being trivia. Wikipedia is not a collection of trivia. The tag I left was meant to tell other editors several things. First there were no reliable sources being used to back up the claims in that section which made the entire thing an example of original research. Second, as per WP:TRIVIA we are not to have lists like this. Because we are an encyclopedia what is appropriate is to have, in prose form, a section based on what reliable sources have written, that discusses how domino masks have been used in fiction. Since none of that happened after I tagged the section another editor came along and deleted as per Wikipedia's standard practice. While I do not know exactly why the editor deleted it I imagine it was mainly because the entire thing was unsourced and entirely made up of original research.

The "review button" comment was a bit of self-effacing humor. I had tagged the section and had done so incorrectly. Had I used the review button instead of just saving it I would have seen my mistake and could have fixed it before saving. But because I did not use the review button first I had to make a new edit fixing that mistake and thus the edit summary. SQGibbon (talk) 16:49, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Without sources backing up your claims about those characters wearing Domino Masks we cannot include that information in Wikipedia. And everything else I said above still applies. SQGibbon (talk) 03:03, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

re: Bye Bye Love (The Everly Brothers song)

You said "These songs, to me, are in memory of deceased persons, as they're both about loved ones who've died." You do understand, don't you, that Wikipedia is not at all interested what you think about these subjects, right? The only thing that matters is what reliable sources claim and that's what goes into these articles.

As for Bye Bye Love the article does not state that the song is about a person who has deceased. If you read WP:CAT you will see that we are not to apply a category to an article unless that article makes that claim and that claim is backed up by reliable and verifiable sources. This criterion was not met therefore your category was not appropriate. Not to mention the fact that the song is not even about someone dying but a lover leaving the narrator.

Honey is not a song about an actual deceased person but a purely fictionalized account of someone dying. The category is for songs written for actual people who have died. SQGibbon (talk) 17:38, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Everything I Own" should not have that category either as the claim that it's about the passing of his father is not supported by a reliable source. I've tagged the claim as needing a citation and if no one comes up with one then that claim and the category need to be removed. And yes, "Honey" does not belong because the song is not a about a real person. SQGibbon (talk) 03:08, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sources. Again.

I came here to ask you to please include reliable sources when adding biographical data to biography articles, yet I see you've already been made aware of this policy on multiple occasions. Is there a reason why you didn't include the required source when adding a date of birth to Jane Cox? --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:53, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 14:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Ofcdeadbeat. 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)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Ofcdeadbeat. 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)[reply]

October 2018

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Robert Kazinsky. Thank you. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:24, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Ofcdeadbeat. 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)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]