User talk:Rushbugled13/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Rushbugled13. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Surprising edit summary
Good faith?? 79.123.74.157 (talk) 08:44, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
- Someone makes an edit which (a) messes up the formatting of a section heading by removing an =, (b) gratuitously adds the word "water" by itself, not even in a sentence. And that edit must have been made in good faith, because it does not fit into any of the categories in a list that someone has made of the commonest types of vandalism? That really seems to me to be an odd interpretation of the expression "good faith". I would have thought that "good faith" referred to the intention behind the edit. How it could be an "accidental edit" I am not sure. It might be mistaken for a "test edit" if one only looks at the edit itself, but a test which produces nonsense ceases to be a mere test and becomes vandalism when the editor decides to walk away and leave it in place rather than revert it. Since in this case the edit had been left for well over five hours before you reverted it, I think we can safely conclude that the editor had no intention of reverting. I had thought, in fact, that your edit was an example of automatic and unthinking use of Stiki. Many people using such tools as Stiki and Huggle make the mistake of thinking that doing so removes the need to think about edits, and just automatically click on one of the default options that such tools give them, frequently producing inappropriate results. The message above was intended to be a gentle pointer to the fact that you might have done that, in the hope you would think about it. However, from what you say it was not a case of such automatic use of Stiki, but a definite decision that the edit should be treated as good faith. However, I still find the idea that something is not vandalism if it is not on a list headed "Vandalism on Wikipedia usually falls into one or more of these categories" an odd one. I am also by no means convinced that it doesn't fall within the types enumerated in that list, under the heading "Silly vandalism". 79.123.74.157 (talk) 20:18, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
- Another one and more and more. Are you sure that you have really made a considered decision in each of these cases? I counted 63 Stiki edits in one hour. I never use Stiki, but I do use Huggle, and I never achieve a rate of anywhere near an edit a minute over a prolonged period, and I very much doubt whether anyone can really be giving sufficient thought to each edit at that rate. If the only result of haste is inappropriately edit summarising as "good faith" when there is vandalism, perhaps it is not a significant problem. However, hasty use of automatic vandalism tools is very likely to lead to more serious errors, such as reverting perfectly good edits as vandalism. I do suggest that you think about this. 79.123.74.157 (talk) 20:36, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
Mobile Monitoring
Hi Chris, you have declined the publishing of the article Mobile Monitoring. Can you help with fixing it or be more precise what is missing, so it can be made live? Why is Mobile Monitoring ok for the Germen Wicki and not for the English one?
Jschweizer - SWITZERLAND — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jschweizer (talk • contribs) 08:52, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kate Dimbleby, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages English and Ian Thomas (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) 11:51, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Rejection of Sean Burch contribution
Hi, Thanks for reviewing the Sean Burch contribution page. Can you please be more detailed with specifics on what I need to do to get this accepted? I've looked at other submissions and contributions, and my writing seems to fit in with everything applicable as well as sourcing the info. Please help. Thanks. Alexia Stuart (talk) 20:35, 14 December 2012 (UTC) Alexia Stuart
Anton Kuivanen vandalism
Hi, I noticed that you reverted vandalism on article about Anton Kuivanen. The article has been maliciously edited multiple times in a short period of time. Previous activity: [1]. There seems two users whose nicks are "Pertti11111" and "Jorma74" who are vandalizing the article. I'm not certain if I can give them a warning or if it would help at all but can you warn or sanction them (ban) for intentionally vandalizing the article? 130.234.207.176 (talk) 10:29, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
Rejection: UFC 155: Dos Santos vs. Velasquez II
Hi,
I saw recently that you rejected the creation of the article for UFC 155. I added some data to the article (including an image) and I'd like for you to take another look at it and re-consider your decision.
Although I did not create the article, I believe it is reasonable and apparent enough to see that the article is NOT a test as you suggested. Aside from the facts that the topic and content of the article are specific to a real-life upcoming major sports event and that it is filled with real sources for the content discussed, there is nothing in the article that suggests it was created as a test article or that a reader would consider it to be a test article upon first view.
Furthermore, I believe that the article meets the notability guidelines for sports events listed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28events%29. Specifically, there is both a great depth of discussion regarding the background and importance of the event, and there is a diversity of listed sources. The outcome of the event will impact the championship of a weight class within the largest mixed martial arts organization in the world, which meets the "lasting effects" guideline. All of the event participants even have their own Wikipedia articles, with the main event of the fight card featuring the current and former champions facing each other in a rematch.
The event is upcoming on December 29th, and I (and I'm sure other MMA fans) would appreciate it if you reconsidered your decision before then.
Thanks,
Accountingkid (talk) 08:40, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
| The WikiProject Articles for creation newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Grupo Rush
I created this page by mistake, when I was trying to get an example. Can you delete it? Thank you so much, and apollogizes, Im going to create a new one.
--Misty2011 (talk) 21:26, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Edit to the page of Reina Hein
I corrected the line on the page of Reina Hein that stated "Raina plays the role of Catwoman for the Gotham Sirens and appeared in their Lady Gaga's video, "Bad Romance." Fellow ANTM contestant, Jessica Serfaty, appears alongside Hein in the video as the role of Poison Ivy (comics).[12]"
After looking up the video, I found that the correct name for the video was BaT Romance. [1] [2] [3] To be clearer, maybe it could be stated "...and appeared on their rendition of Lady Gaga's "Bad Romance" entitled 'Bat Romance.'"
I received notice that this correction was changed.
Bethanybgd (talk) 01:12, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Dear Sir
The article has been revised as suggested.
It is accepted that the three previous declines were - to some extent - relevant especially since they all had a common denominator. However, it is difficult for this author to see, how someone can write about anything without knowing anything on the topic or subject, and thus by definition be biased!! Furthermore, it seems rather rude and inappropriate that the former editor (bjelleklang) find it prudent to joke about the hard work performed by others, when commenting on the references.
Finally, I have a question: How do I submit the article for the fourth go? I can't seem to find the link, I have used previously!? Hopefully, it's not the 'three strikes and you're out' rule applied?!
Thank you and kind regards Jesper
Jesperbp (talk) 12:58, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
From AFC Submissions
What should I do about this article? I think this article is good and has important tips. But This is taken from an essay and needs some more development.The references also are not good.So what should I do?--pratyya (talk) 07:03, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
Done Do not need any answer.--Pratyya (have a chat?) 10:46, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
overrated!
this guy , who makes wrong changes and then doesnt even rectify them is receiving so many awards?this is overrating!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aayish (talk • contribs) 10:06, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Why are all the reviewers contradicting themselves? One time you say that the article needs more references and at other times you say that is not the problem!
Why are all the reviewers contradicting themselves? One time you say that the article needs more references and at other times you say that is not the problem! This article is a hundred times better than thousands of articles on Wikipedia and they are all still up. what is the problem?!
Symbol opinion vote.svg Comment: The reason this Afc was declined was not because of lack of sources, but because of the tone of the article. There are many peacock terms in the article, which show off the subject of the article. Encyclopedic articles need to be written from a neutral point of view.Rushbugled13 (talk) 21:04, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Mohamad_Jebara#cite_note-mccncr-1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickelbranderwier (talk • contribs) 19:11, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Why are you declining this article?
Why are all the reviewers contradicting themselves? One time you say that the article needs more references and at other times you say that is not the problem! This article is a hundred times better than thousands of articles on Wikipedia and they are all still up. what is the problem?!
Symbol opinion vote.svg Comment: The reason this Afc was declined was not because of lack of sources, but because of the tone of the article. There are many peacock terms in the article, which show off the subject of the article. Encyclopedic articles need to be written from a neutral point of view.Rushbugled13 (talk) 21:04, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Mohamad_Jebara — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickelbranderwier (talk • contribs) 19:17, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Rejection of Rails Camp Article 9th November
Hi There,
with regards to the event and source citation there is currently only one site with backing information www.railscamps.com outside of information distributed through google groups.
Can you please assist me to get the right sort of citations required to pass this wikipedia article in?
Thanks,
Tom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ridget (talk • contribs) 03:16, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello,
I have made changes to the article Mohamad Jebara. You had mentioned last time that it had peacock terms. So I made changes to the article. Would you be able to kindly review it to ensure that the article is now suitable to be posted. If there are any remaining peacock terms, please let me know where they may be so may I remove it. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marwa609 (talk • contribs) 02:51, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Article for Re-Submission
Hello,
I have made changes to the article Mohamad Jebara. You had mentioned last time that it had peacock terms. So I made changes to the article. Would you be able to kindly review it to ensure that the article is now suitable to be posted. If there are any remaining peacock terms, please let me know where they may be so may I remove it. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marwa609 (talk • contribs) 02:51, 6 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marwa609 (talk • contribs)
Awaiting reply to previous post
Any feedback on the article I inquired about? This was my latest post, awaiting a reply:
Hello,I have made changes to the article Mohamad Jebara. You had mentioned last time that it had peacock terms. So I made changes to the article. Would you be able to kindly review it to ensure that the article is now suitable to be posted. If there are any remaining peacock terms, please let me know where they may be so may I remove it. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marwa609 (talk • contribs) 02:51, 6 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marwa609 (talk • contribs) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marwa609 (talk • contribs)
you suck
|
The Overrated Sucker Award |
| u suck dude!ure an overrated , idiotic guy who tells every1 to post their messages but never reacts!u F*CK!!!!!!!i hate u as*hole !! go to hell!!!!!! Aayish (talk) 14:00, 5 February 2013 (UTC) |
Wikiproject Articles for creation Needs You!
WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from March 1st, 2013 – March 31st, 2013.
Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 2000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!
Delivered by User:EdwardsBot on behalf of Wikiproject Articles for Creation at 13:38, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Rejection - Central Communications Command
Please explain why you recently removed the comments made about Integrated Borough Operations no longer existing and reverted it to a paragraph of information that is now completely factually incorrect?
Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.214.224.115 (talk) 21:45, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Request reconsideration of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kathleen A. Marchione (politician)
According to New York State Senate, Ms Marchione is the only member of the New York State Senate without a Wikipedia page. I appreciate that you have added 6 references, but am confused as to why you then denied the AFC.Naraht (talk) 15:50, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Article for creation : Last Curtain Call
I have revised and updated the references section on the Last Curtain Call-page (Live CD/DVD from the Norwegian band Theatre of Tragedy). ToT has been active since 1994, and has been a significant band in the gothic metal genre. They are already listed with the rest of their discography on Wikipedia, and I find it strange that the Last Curtain Call has been rejected two times. I hope you will have another look at the references, and let me know if something is still missing. Easorbo (talk) 18:24, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
WikiProject AFC needs your help... again
WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from July 1st, 2013 – July 31st, 2013.
Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!
A new version of our AfC helper script is released! It includes many bug fixes, new improvements and features, code cleanup, and more page cleanups. If you want to see a full list of changes, go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Helper script/Development page. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks.
Delivered at 12:42, 19 June 2013 (UTC) by EdwardsBot (talk), on behalf of WikiProject AFC
October 2013 AFC Backlog elimination drive
WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from October 1st, 2013 – October 31st, 2013.
Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!
This newsletter was delivered on behalf of WPAFC by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:03, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/BAYADA Home Health Care, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.
You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.
Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 02:02, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/BAYADA Home Health Care
Hello Rushbugled13. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "BAYADA Home Health Care".
The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/BAYADA Home Health Care}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 20:00, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Please note
That User:Filmmakerjohnb appears to be "John Borowski", and it was recently ascertained that the entirety of his article here at WP was self-published from his self-authored IMDB biography. The John Borowski article has been wikified (first pass), and has some real references now, and all the puffery removed (see here for what appeared before: [2] and [3]).
This is called to your attention, because he is also apparently the direct source behind the articles on the movies and books he has done, and your name appeared here, [4], as mediating the review of one of them here at WP. If he plagiarised and broke self-publication and NPOV rules (not to mention delivering entirely unsourced content in a new article), he may try to do this again. Cheers. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 04:17, 16 May 2015 (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) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (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) 14:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Please approve the journal's entry
A kindly request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Felunayak (talk • contribs) 21:42, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
Merger discussion for Dayereh
An article that you have been involved in editing—Dayereh—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Wildhorse3 (talk) 02:20, 5 June 2021 (UTC)