User talk:SilverOrion/Archive 5

About Maltese_(dog)

G'day Binary TSO. Please do not revert my rather blunt and brutal effort to make the Maltese article into the factual non-POV article it once was.

I explained on the talk page, now archived, that unless those two trolls disappeared, I would do it, and had no argument from reputale editors. I did it, and the result was a better article, wuith better citations and no point-scoring.

Please revert your revert. 122.200.166.113 (talk) 04:48, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever the issue may be with the two conflicting editors, it does not give you the right to go and make those changes to the article. There was nothing explicitly wrong with the previous version. Your edits were reverted due to the fact that you removed extensive sections of referenced material. -Binary TSO ^???

Jon Gaunt

Yes, the editor was deleting some sourced material, but they were also trying to update the article. You reverted their edits wholesale without any explanation, three times, and only afterwards gave them an extreme-bad-faith level4-im warning (still without any explanation of what they were doing wrong). You can hardly blame them for getting the impression that "revert with no explanation if you think you're right" is how Wikipedia works.

I've taken ten seconds to include the relevant information about Sun Talk that the editor was trying to add. --McGeddon (talk) 11:51, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

...for reverting vandalism to my talk page. Much appreciated, JNW (talk) 03:17, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Monopoly of Initiative

I wish to draw your attention to this. Regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 16:45, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alpine Chough

I had decided to try to work this article up to Featured Article standard, to join Red-billed Chough. The "unexplained removal" did not occur - I simply moved the text and reference to a new "status" section, reworded it slightly. I have removed the duplication, but I have no intention of getting into an edit war on this so, if you are not happy, just let me know and I'll pick another species to do instead. jimfbleak (talk) 15:21, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

For watching out for vandals on the USMA page. — BQZip01 — ^talk 05:57, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sikh extremism

I would like to call your attention to this revert you had made to Sikh extremism. While the editor who killed the recent addition did not include a useful edit summary, the section is flagged Off-topic, and I have asked a wide variety of editors to review the content of the article with an eye toward avoiding wp:coatrack problems. I am not challenging your edit at all, but simply wanted to call your attention back to it for your review. Thank you for editing. The article needs more eyes on it, and editors in it. :) - sinneed (talk) 17:27, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Binary, thank you for your input on the subject, its very much appreciated, I wanted to point out to certain people that Sikh Extremism is NOT exclusively about violent political demands but about all violence pertaining to Sikh fundamentalism. Whether its death threats to journalists, civilians, playwrights, politicians and other clerics.

Three people including yourself and myself believe it must be included, but the above user, Sineed had deleted it on several occasions without any thought or consideration of the meaning of the broader aspects of Extremism, again thanks for the revert. Morbid Fairy (talk) 22:55, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I humbly apologize for leading this editor to your talk page.- sinneed (talk) 00:06, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to point out your recent edits have been deleted again, even though I agree with your point it served as a usual adjunct to the article. user:roadahead seems to 'know' what happened, then disagrees with every journalist on the events and then contradicts himself by saying that 'time will tell what happened' ?? - you can make of this what you will Morbid Fairy (talk) 20:20, 28 May 2009 (UTC) - I hope the following is useful information, unfortunately there are coordinated attempts to rubbish and delete such information.[reply]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/25/world/europe/25vienna.html?_r=1&scp=4&sq=sikhs&st=cse

http://www.nytimes.com/1986/12/28/world/10-killed-in-punjab-attacks-radical-sikhs-are-suspected.html?sec=&spon=&scp=4&sq=sikh%20terrorism&st=cse

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/03/25/world/in-punjab-sikh-turns-against-sikh.html?scp=1&sq=sikh%20terrorism&st=cse

Thank you for you response Binary, much appreciated

The Austrian Times have provided a Sikh Extremist link to the incidents in Vienna http://austriantimes.at/index.php?id=13609 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Morbid Fairy (talk • contribs) 23:19, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This autrian times article is old news. Khalistan Zindabad Force have officially denied all involvement in this attack ^[1]. Note also I am going to run a check on this used Morbid Fairy and Satanoid. --Sikh-history (talk) 21:17, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yao Junior Sènaya

Do not revert the Vandalism content back. Matthew_hk t c 13:36, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism?

What are you talking about? All I did was correct a spelling mistake on the George Clooney page. "Spur-of-the-moment" is spelled with a 'u' not an 'i'... --60.240.126.92 (talk) 13:42, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notice how I removed it soon after. I thought you were the one who added the nonsense about the GAT tests on the George Clooney article. My bad. -Binary TSO ^???

New York Rangers

I was just removing very unneccesary details. look the 2009 playoffs were in so much detail that it takes up as much room as expensive acquisition which is 10 years. The article doesn't need to have ALL playoff games covered in the much detail. If it was like that imagine how long the article would be... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.15.55.180 (talk) 13:22, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah some of the information is questionable as well, due to issues with NPOV. Don't worry about it--Binary TSO ^???

Signature

Hello. I've noticed that your signature does not include a time stamp. The purpose of the signature is not only to identify the editor, but also to record the time of the edit. This is most helpful when you leave warnings on user talk pages because it can help the reviewing admin to quickly see that a warning was left before subsequent edits by the warned user. It is also helpful in determining a timeline in discussions that are not linear. I do understand that one can review the page history to get the timeline, but this can be cumbersome when there are a large number of back and forth edits. Thanks for considering this. If you choose to reply, please do so here. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 13:39, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I forgot to add the last ~ but thanks for the heads up. -Binary TSO ^??? 03:02, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Scars (Basement Jaxx)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Scars (Basement Jaxx), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Hellno2 (talk) 06:27, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

I have better things to do than quarrel with you. If you searched in Khmer you;d see she is one of the top female singers in Cambodia. I woudn't have started it otherwise. Just done a google search and found plenty of hits, finding solid sources in ENglish on any Cmabodian is very difficult. But on one mainstream english website she is listed as follows:

Mariah Carey * Cold Play * The Beatles * The Cure * Alicia Keys * Leona Lewis * Nop Bayarith * Preah Sovath * Kim Leakhana

OK she is not well known in the english speaking world but wikipedia isn't here to just cover the english speaking world. Perhaps you'd like to delete every articles we have on a Cambodian and Burmese because the web lacks sources in English? Why not put Preap Sovath and all the other articles we have on people from this region up for deletion too because "they lack third party sources". Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 12:01, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: The Unknown Zone

Hello Binary TSO, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of The Unknown Zone - a page you tagged - because: The reason given is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. So Why 11:52, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Grandmaster Flowers

As a major contributor to the article on Grandmaster Flash could you have a look at above article it could do with some input from an editor who is familiar with the scene/music I came across this one on new page patrol enough notability to stop a speedy tag thanks. BigDunc 16:33, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

^ http://www.tribuneindia.com/2009/20090529/punjab.htm#6

[1] ttp://www.tribuneindia.com/2009/20090529/punjab.htm#6

[1]