Hello, Tbhotch! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! fetchcomms04:09, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Tbhotch. 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.
PETA is now considered a "domestic special interest terrorist" group by the USDA[1]. I appreciate you taking that down and accusing me of vandalism without even doing the proper research.
Electropop
I was not aware that generalities were preferred for genres. I understand the rationality behind it. Although I personally believe specificity is more useful, I have no intention of disturbing that rule or arguing against consensus that predates my career as a Wikipedian. What I want to know is what constitutes inclusions of genres on musician BLPs. You informed me that having publications that could be classified under a genre is not grounds for labeling the artist as employing that genre regularly, but that seems to me, to be the only certain way to distinguish that a musician performs any genre whatsoever. I am uncertain specifically which article you were referring to when you left me the message on my talk page, since SnapSnap reverted between eight and ten of my electropop/synthpop category edits. I assume it's Wanessa. Speaking for all the articles I believe I am justified to add Category:Synthpop musicians to, I would not be against the idea of adding simply [[Electronic music|electronic]] or simply [[Electronic dance music|dance]] to the infobox, but I thoroughly believe that every single musician article that I added this category to deserves to have that category and be classified as commonly performing or creating works of that genre. As you are aware, I based the addition of this category on several criteria, starting with whether the artist was included on List of synthpop artists and reliably sourced. From there, I sorted through most of the articles on musicians that I assumed were associated with the genre, searching for veracity to my suspicions. I did not add the category unless the musician had at least prominent album in the genre or several singles. As I outlined on the talk page of Nicki Minaj's article, some artists ONLY HAVE one or two albums. In the case of Minaj, she has two studio albums, both of which have between 80% and 90% of their tracklistings being on the electropop genre. I also listed third party sources (some more reliable than others) that labeled her as an "electropop artist". So not only are there examples of electropop works in this artist's discography, music journalists are also calling her an "electropop artist" or a "synthpop artist" (Since electropop and synthpop point to the same article, I've used them interchangeably on Wikipedia. I will procure sources for every artist that I added the category "Synthpop musicians", if it is necessary, but I assumed (perhaps falsely) that the abundance of sources for artists like Madonna (entertainer), Enrique Iglesias, Christina Aguilera, Nicki Minaj, Rihanna, Wanessa, Paris Hilton etc. etc. etc. did not warrant this much added effort. Even despite this, I still added sources to some articles, after which my inclusion of Category:Synthpop musicians was REVERTED ANYWAY. So this is what I want to know: what articles can have the category and what do I have to do to ensure that my edits are not reverted? Evidently, providing reliable sources is not sufficient, and I (perhaps mistakenly) believed that adding reliably-sourced information to Wikipedia was part of its mission to be reliable and verifiable by adding third party sources. At this point, I feel not that biography of living persons are being protected, I feel that a vendetta has been embarked against me for reasons I don't quite understand. I'm not a fool; I know the rules of BLP. I've been editing Wikipedia for a year and have contributed significantly to Good articles about living persons, some of which I authored almost entirely by myself. I'm sorry for the wall of text, but I am deeply offended by all of this mess. I am almost to the point where I feel like you and SnapSnap want me to leave Wikipedia, as if my contributions are unwanted. That is probably a gross hyperbole, but it's true. I want nothing more than to enhance the quality of music-related articles on Wikipedia, and I hope you take me seriously and reply to this post, so I know what I am doing wrong...so I can correct my mistakes...and so these articles can be as accurate as possible. --Thevampireashlee (talk) 03:32, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
I apologize that you misconstrued my linking to WP:BLUE in the edit summary as rationalization for my edits. I merely used it as a quick-link to how I felt about the additions--that labeling the careers of these artists as electropop was obvious and not in need of verifiability. Obviously that wasn't so obvious...to anyone other than myself. I want to respond more constructively to your post, but I confess I'm having trouble interpreting this statement: "Even if they released one song or album with synthpop influences, their whole music career should be labelled like that, like in Aguilera's or Ciccone's biographies?"
I think you might have accidentally left out a word. I'm not trying to poke fun at your grammar or whatever; I just want to understand, so we can write better articles. However, I do think I understand the gist of what you're saying. That having works influenced by or performed in a particular genre does not constitute labeling an entire artists career epitomizing the genre. But I still don't think that's a valid reason, to be honest. Simply put: if an artist uses paint, they're a painter. If a musician writes and performs synthpop music, they're a synthpop artist. Minaj, Madonna, Enrique all have an abundance of work influenced by electro- and syth-pop and they have many works in their discography that are, themselves, electropop. In other words, their not jut influenced by it, and frankly, I don't see the difference. Are you saying that a person influenced by rock and roll would write rap music? Surely it's possible, but it seems ludicrous. Anyway, I don't want to get labeled making original research. I guess the only thing I can do is provide reliable sources for these artists being "electropop artists" and "synthpop artists" and pray that my reliably sourced edits aren't reverted at the end of the day. I am making attempts to discuss this issue with others, so I don't even see how that's an issue. That is what I am doing now, after all. --Thevampireashlee (talk) 04:12, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Shouldn't you be leaving these tasks to the bots?
Your contributions recently showed a TON of seemingly automated (PyWikipedia?) edits "removing protection templates from non-protected pages." Were these edits in fact automated? If so, you're violating Wikipedia policy — they need a bot account! Regardless, I suggest a read of WP:BOTPOL. —Theopolisme04:59, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi Alex. How are you? How has life been lately? I am finally back here and I missed you all so much, especially close friends like you. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 02:33, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
Finally, you replied. I am so glad to hear from you. Oops, sorry about the name Axel. Lol. I am fine, thanks. We will talk very soon. :D Jivesh1205 (Talk) 04:04, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your comment on my recent edits of the subject article. Please explain your comment " Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Józef Piłsudski. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia".
Please note that the edits in question are just a couple of lines of text that have close to a dozen of citations of reliable sources, including both reliable scholarly secondary sources (scholarly monographs), articles in reputable news sources (Time Magazine, Life Magazine and Canberra Times) and other encyclopedias. Please also refer to the Talk page of this article where other editors support the statement that Pilsudski was a dictator.
Please do not revert this page, as you are reverting the properly cited reliable reference sources, without stating a proper reason.
Thank you.
You wrote, answering my earlier message to you: "I see no consensus to include, in fact, I have noted that multiple users have reverted you. If you gain no consensus to include the material must be removed, even if it is sourced by 20 reliable references." Please note, that my edits restore the page structure and content that existed earlier, and also provide references from reliable sources justifying this earlier content. Please provide a reference to Wikipedia rules, justifying your reverts, particularly your statement that properly sourced material "must be removed" if one editor sees no consensus. Unless you are able to provide a proper reference to Wikipedia rules quickly, we will have to proceed with a complaint against your repeated reverts of sourced information.
Thank you for your clarification of your actions via the message on my talk page. Please note that the current edits to Pilsudski as well as the discussion in Talk:Józef_Piłsudski namely serve to arrive to the consensus. E.g. the latest edits by me and other editors merge the suggestions made by other editors into the main section of the article. Please do not revert these compromise edits, as they lead to consensus.
Regarding your objection on using a term "dictator". Please note that this term is broadly used in Wikipeadia to describe, well, dictators. See the examples in Dictator for instance. "Dictator" is in no way a banned term on Wikipedia. Wikipedia's requirement is neutral point of view editing, not utilization of only the terms that everybody finds neutral.
Please feel free to use Talk:Józef_Piłsudski to contribute to further discussion and reaching a consensus on Pilsudski dictatorship.
Further to explain to you the consensus on Pilsudski, please note that Pilsudski article always called him a dictator, beginning as early as 2005. The current structure of the article (with a section titled "Dictatorship") has been finalized sometime in 2008. This current structure existed until February 10, 2012, when it has been edited to remove all mentions of dictatorship with a justification stating "calling Pilsudski a "dictator" is controversial and not supported by a majority of historians" (see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J%C3%B3zef_Pi%C5%82sudski&oldid=476093221 ). The editor neglected to provide a single source reference from "a majority of historians". Despite admitting a controversial nature of the subject matter, the same editor deemed it unnecessary to initiate any discussions of these extensive edits on the Talk page of the article. The purpose of the current edits and the on-going discussion in Talk:Józef_Piłsudski is to provide references from verifiable and reliable sources supporting the previously established consensus on Pilsudski dictatorship. Thank you for your interest to this matter.
Hey. I'm done with finals. I'll let you know when I get back home at what hours I'm available so we can work on the translation together. Cheers. ComputerJA (talk) 08:04, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Habítame Siempre
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if a record company claims that an album has certified gold/platinum, it should come from a secondary source, not the official right? The reason I ask is because IPs have been using the main site as a source even though I point that it falls under WP:PRIMARY. Erick (talk) 17:30, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
I reverted one of your edits of Peter O'Toole because it looks like you accidentally deleted half the page.
You might want to go back to the article to make the edit you intended to, since I reverted the entire edit without trying to figure out what you intended to change.
Yes, undoing the last edit was in error for Jenni Rivera. Apparently the media have had issues reporting her name correctly, we have the smoking gun now, a copy of her (smoking) driver's license that confirms her birth/legal name to be Dolores Janney Rivera. Some places may list her name as Dolores Janney Rivera Saavedra, including her maternal surname....which might be her legal name in Mexico if she's a dual Mexican-US citizen, but her US birth name would have to be Dolores Janney Rivera as registered on her driver's license.
New York Times is in error to suggest she was born with or ever changed her given name to Jenny Dolores
The main problem I see right now is that we have two names "Dolores Janney" or "Jenny Dolores", and both names started to circulate the same day of the accident, and multiple information may vary the next months. We have, in both cases, reliable sources, from both countries, discussing those name. We can't say that one name is correct and the second one is not, both may be valid, but how can we trust ABC when they don't know where Monterrey is. I know you are refering to her driver license, but the name in her license is her legal name, not her birth name, which is different. You said, "[The] New York Times is in error to suggest she was born with or ever changed her given name", well, we can't known if they are right or not, but we cannot discard that information as simple as an "I believe is wrong" comment, we go by what the reliable sources say, if there is a mistake, you can contact the NYT by e-mail, and ask them about why they did suggested that. Also, if the US database is like Mexican database (CURP), her birth name should be in the records. IMO, the NYT reference seems more valid about the name, but if you want to complain about it, you can search for consensus at Rivera's article talkpage or contact the NY Times. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it!See terms and conditions.06:42, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
>>>>The US's database for such info would the the social security system to Mexico's CURP. Legal and birth name may differ, but most of the time they are one and the same. Any suggestion that her birth name was Jenny Dolores and later changed to Dolores Janney seems very unlikely for an US citizen given the spelling. A US driver's license is a direct reflection of a legal/birth name, it is the most common form of official identification for Americans, since each state requires a citizen to present their social security card for verification of their identity, which lists the legal/birth name, please review: http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/brochures/fast_facts/ffdl08.htm
I'm afraid the NYT, when compared to other news articles (LOL at the ABC news graphic for Monterrey) reporting Jenni Rivera's real name is in a minority, has the least amount of credibility especially in light of the picture surfacing of her driver's license.
mistake
So you/it (im really not sure if it was you or an automated process) made a mistake. It was a legit edit. The sources it is using are self serving and make lofty claims that would need to not be published by the articles subject. PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 08:47, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Madannabe
Hola, Tbhotch ¿como te encuentras?. Verás, Magiciandude/Eric me recomendó que viniera contigo, pues yo le pedí el favor que me tradujera de español a inglés este texto:
The bright side of this phenomenon is that these Wanna Be's (as in "We wanna be like Madonna!") could be out somewhere stealing hubcaps. Instead, all of them, hundreds of thousands of young blossoms whose actual ages run from a low of about eight to a high of perhaps 25, are saving up their baby- sitting money to buy cross-shaped earrings and fluorescent rubber bracelets like Madonna's, white lace tights that they will cut off at the ankles and black tube skirts that, out of view of their parents, they will roll down several turns at the waist to expose their middles and the waistbands of the pantyhose.
Hi, Thanks for notifying the error. But I have no Idea what it is.. So I have just removed everything. Can you please say me what should be there so that I can edit it. Thanks. ( -- plz add a talkback message in my user talk page when you reply to my message.. :) ;) -- ) --RAT-.-Poke it21:30, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Bot Proposal
Hello Tbhotch! I've seen you use Huggle and I wanted to get the opinion of another editor on something; what do you think about the idea of a bot to automatically update Template:Vandalism information? Updating it manually is tedious and the amount changes quickly. A bot would complement the situation perfectly IMO. I would just need to see where Huggle gets the revert count from, and if there is an API for it. What do you think of this idea? Vacationnine04:54, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for cleaning my talk page. I was actually going to give you this anyway after I noticed that you have taken actions against that multiple IPs using genre warrior. Good work! Widr (talk) 21:06, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
it was announced today that the show has been cancelled
it even says ON the wikipedia page that the show is over
yet you keep reverting the changes of Was back to Is
it ISN'T anymore, it says so on the page itself.
Saure
Please have a look in German wikipedia about Saurer,
About saurer Tanks it is all wirtten down in the Book from Hugo Freudiger but only in german Schweizer Panzer from the begining until today (2008)
about the Military troks you can finde them on the officila homepage of the swiss army, there are pdf.lists with all vheciles of the swiss army unfortunatliy only in german, french & italian not in english.
English is not my native language, i trye to translate the importannt facts who are missing in the english wikipedia and add them, so i kindle request yyou not to delet the informations i ad (because then they are missing) i would more wish if they would get improved in the english language.
Don't you realise something? (Singapore football team)
五代 (talk) is wishing you a MerryChristmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Greengreengreenred is wishing you a MerryChristmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Merry Christmas
May your Christmas sparkle with moments of love, laughter and goodwill,
May the year ahead be full of contentment and joy,
May the good times and treasures of the present become the golden memories of tomorrow,
Merry Chritmas to you Greengreengreenred, Mags and Jivesh, have a good season and enjoy it . Also, Merry Christmas to all the people who is watching this page. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it!See terms and conditions.09:56, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Hi Axel. I need your help. I have forgotten my Wikipedia password. I don't need it because I am automatically logged on but still, can you please help me with this? Jivesh1205 (Talk) 04:18, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
CURTAINTOAD!TALK! — is wishing you a Happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
May 2013 bring lots of happiness and perhaps a change for the better here on Wikipedia. Your work in keeping this site nice and tidy is impressive. I wish I was like you... —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]03:24, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
Greengreengreenred — is wishing you a Happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I really hope I'm doing this right and not writing somewhere I'm not supposed to again. All I wanted to do was make a few changes to a page that is about me. Some of the facts that were on there were incorrect, and I wanted to fill in some details and maybe add an image. I'm really sorry I didn't site where the information came from right away, but I'm still figuring out how to navigate wikipedia beyond just reading it. I'm also sorry that I didn't respond correctly on the other user's talk page, but they said to add a message at the bottom of the page and all I saw there was the box that I wrote in (incorrectly I now know). Again, I'm very sorry, I wasn't trying to disrupt anyone or anything, just trying to make changes to my own page. If I make future edits, can I just site myself as the source, or will that not be acceptable enough? Thank you for your help and happy holidays!
Do you even know the songs/artists which I edited? They are all soft rock, it's clearly stated and sourced in their own articles. The band America are folk rock/soft rock, not 'pop' that's why I changed the genre of "Tin Man" to soft rock, the correct genre. I never add incorrect genres. Hiddenstranger (talk) 23:38, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
What about the genres already there before I edited/added to them? None of them are referenced. They may be incorrect. Same goes for the million other song articles with unreferenced genres.
Talkback
Hello, Tbhotch. You have new messages at WP:RFED. Message added 06:49, 9 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
There's these IPs (such as this one recently from Guatemala that's going around and linking dates. I have repeatedly warned and asked these IPs to stop with the date link, but the IPs kept on doing it anyway. I reported it to the AIV but to no avail. What am I supposed to do? Erick (talk) 09:50, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Axel, I came here to ask if you've considered standing for adminship, as your name keeps popping up on my watchlist doing useful things. But I see you were asked above and said no. If you ever change your mind, please let me know, because I'd certainly support you. Best, SlimVirginTALK|CONTRIBS04:07, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
Why are you removing edits to the Ekojet page that is marked as having serious errors in need of correction?
Do you really think information about holding corporations and their tangential projects and mergers really belongs in a page about a specific in-development airplane?
Why do Boeing and Airbus plane pages not include such info if this is a good idea?
Do you know the difference between a turboprop and a turbofan? Did you look at the image included in the page?
HINT: that isn't a turboprop engine, turboprop is short for turbo PROPELLER, this plane like most others is a jet with a turbofan engine.
the article itself mentions the PD-18 engine, which ELSEWHERE ON WIKIPEDIA you can find out is a Geared Turbo FAN, not turboprop.
Do you remotely realize the issues with claiming that widebody aircraft make 56% of FLIGHTS < 3000 km?
And how irrelevant that figure is for profitability which depends on # of PASSENGERS flown?
Do you really think the phrase 'carrier-mounted fins' actually means anything?
maybe this is bad machine-translated russian, but that still doesn't fit on an english wiki page.
This is my very first edit, my very first time trying to help Wikipedia, and you just revert it saying it's 'unproductive'. WTF?
'
Breaking Bad (Season 5)
If you'd look at that article for me real quick you'll see that the entire 2nd paragraph has not one single citation. You know as well as I do that not every single sentence on Wikipedia is cited. This is what I get for doing my small part to make an article better (and before you say "Don't take anything on Wikipedia personally", I'm not, but this is essentially what happens every time someone tries to edit something, no I don't even care to add a cite because as I mentioned the entire 2nd paragraph has no citations at all, so why not remove all of it?). The article doesn't even have that the season starts out a flashforward with Walter White celebrating his 52nd birthday.
Minaj
"Hello, I'm Tbhotch. I noticed that you made an edit to a biography of a living person, Talk:Nicki Minaj, but that you didn’t support your changes with a citation to a reliable source."
No edits were made to a biography, a comment was added to the talk page. The talk page is exactly for the discussion about the addition of content, which is what I was discussing. It is quite unusual for such discussions to be removed from talk pages, especially when they were neither disrespectful or disruptive. Would you care to explain yourself?137.111.13.200 (talk) 05:02, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Your question contained an assertion, and that assertion is unsourced. WP:BLP applies to biographical material placed anywhere in Wikipedia, not just the biography itself. Don't ask such a question without being able to point at a source that meets WP:RS to support its foundation.—Kww(talk) 05:07, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Reference
Yes, there is a reference I have given: The "Undutchables" by White and Bourke! Quick hands, please read first before using Huggle! It is ref no. 1. I will now complete the ref with isbn and all just for you. Please read, before acting!
70.137.130.79 (talk) 07:03, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
I am coherent, friend. You are just too quick to let me fill in the reference, before reverting with your twitchy fingers on Huggle.
Here is the ref, it is a book which is famous among travelers to the Netherlands and among Dutch-Americans, since the 90s, numerous editions. Read the text linked below, which is probably one of the most bizarre and seemingly pornographic misunderstandings in the book, they refer to it in the text! I believe it is in the chapter "Misunderstandings of the dutch language, by English speakers" - or the like.
I am not sure if it was you who redirected the 'Symphony Of Life DVD' to the 'Symphony Of Life (album). Please do not redirect or combine the two as these two are different media releases. This might create confusion with the two releases considering they are of the same titles. Kindly leave the page as is. Thank you.
It's tricky and I'm afraid removal would need a separate thread with consensus on the article talk. I've only checked refs 64, 65: [4] Daily Mail has been criticized on wikipedia, after Jimbo's comments on it, but it gives some details. [5] Guardian apparently relies on her vague Golden Globe speach, yet they went ahead with stating she is lesbian. I haven't heard complaints about the reliability of Guardian (though they are a news medium). Still thinking .. Materialscientist (talk) 04:12, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
It's an open secret that she's a lesbian that being the basis of her speech that she has not said it publicly until then. If you're waiting for someone to use the words gay or bisexual not everyone chooses to use those words.
[6]— Preceding unsigned comment added by Tx1987 (talk • contribs)
Just wanted to say that I admire you for having invited others to help you with your English. I've watched your editing over some time now, and it is very impressive to see how much your written English has improved. Some of your recent discussion comments are written almost like a native speaker, very easy to understand, with descriptive language, and complex sentence structure. I have never put in the effort to learn another language so I definitely admire people like you who put in the time and effort. It's great to see it paying off for you. Hats off! causa sui (talk) 00:35, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Gabourey Sidibe edit
Thanks. I left a note on an edit asking to revert. I accidentally clicked save while editing the page. 68.188.103.65 (talk)
I was attempting to undo the edit before on the MIA page
I was attempting to undo that edit before you rudely undid it and gave me another warning. I was mistaken in thinking he's 'possibly dead' since he was pronounced dead. Technically my edit was correct, he is over 90 years of age and there is no absolute confirmation. I made that edit in good faith as I have with all of my edits. 173.70.140.12 (talk) 07:25, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Tbhoch - I saw that you cleaned up this article a bit today. Last few days I've been dealing with a royalist editor who is persistently adding pointless boldfaced unreferenced dribble to this article. Rather than being the only voice for this special person, I'm hoping that you will revert the latest, which is a full assault on the lede. I left them a comment at User_talk:TheEconomissst, and it replied at User_talk:Nixie9 explaining its unrequited love for royalty, and distaste for comparatively unimportant American First Ladies. I won't be offended if you decline to stoop. Thanks!--Nixie9 (talk) 22:23, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks - I did some additional clean up after you, conforming to the references. Hopefully if Econ sees two interested, experienced editors, they will be a little more constructive.--Nixie9 (talk) 02:14, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Sorry to have put you in a bad position, I thought you would have seen the recent edit as unsalvageable, and reverted. So I took out the unreferenced aspects and fixed what I could. I'm fine with what you have reinserted, and thank you again. Nowadays, the first two lines of leads are picked up by Google as a summary of the subject, if they are short enough, otherwise just the first line is used. Now that summary will be
"Carolina Herrera (born María Carolina Josefina Pacanins Niño, January 8, 1939) is a Venezuelan-born, American fashion designer and entrepreneur."
instead of
"Carolina Herrera is a Venezuelan-born, American fashion designer and entrepreneur. Known for dressing First Ladies from Jacqueline Onassis to Michelle Obama.
I believe that an IP address user whose disruptive edits have been reverted in the past couple weeks by you, I, and others is now using a new IP address to continue adding incorrect information to numerous pages (associated with Billy Joel as well as other pages). I don't know if this behavior would be defined as sockpuppetry (since the user has never created an account) but I thought I would ask you since you're a more experienced editor. The user's old IP address was User talk:120.145.16.63. The new IP address is User talk:124.182.2.177. Do you think that this is a case worth submitting to adminstrators as a potential sock puppet? Thank you for your help!Jpcohen (talk) 17:00, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi there! I cordially invite you to participate in the request for comment on Talk:La Luz del Mundo. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! Ajaxfiore (talk) 23:48, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
N P Rajendran content removal
The content removed from N. P. Rajendran is speedy deletion nomination tag. Reason has been explained in talk page. The reason for removal has also been place in the talk page of the person who nominated the deletion talk of Fenix.
In future will take care to add summary. Thank you for the notification.
--atnair (talk) 16:57, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
hello
i will give u full proof please undo my edits .give me some time
If you don't mind me asking, why was the capitilization changed back to it's original, nonstandard form? (In the article OneRepublic, if you don't remember) I understand that I could be wrong, I just googled it and it seemed like all the music videos were fully capitilazed.
Well, I'll bow to your experience, but imo it's enabling a banned user to evade a perma-ban on wikipedia if we allow images they pushed on the project to be reinserted. I'd love to take it up at the Commons once I have time to - but that's not happening for a while. I'll see if I can find an alternative image somewhere perhaps but I am getting a bit bored chasing socks around. That's all - no need to comment on this, just needed to be exasperated somewhere :-) Blue Square Thing (talk) 06:34, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello Tbhotch. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Simon Allard, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Creator was not the only editor of this page. Thank you. — Malik ShabazzTalk/Stalk03:55, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Hello. "Toxic" does not contain a sample of "Tere Mere Beech Mein" or any other song. The album and single liner notes of "Toxic" do not credit any sample and any time an interpolation of another song is used it must be credited, for example the Eurhythmic's "Sweet Dreams" was credited as a sample in Spears' "Everybody". You can also check Discogs.com to verify this. This was an inaccurate rumor spread due to the violins sounding somewhat similar but "Toxic" is a completely original composition and the reference to it sampling "Tere Mere Beech Mein" should be removed due to it being completely inaccurate. —User549211:00, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
That doesn't mean anything. The sample can go uncredited. It's happened in the past. There are third-party sources stating that the song samples that song. — Statυs (talk, contribs) 04:18, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
It does mean something, a sample cannot go uncredited if it's used as part of another song. The third party sources are only based on speculation due to the violins sounding somewhat similar and the source listed, PopDust, is only an entertainment website and not a valid source. It would have to be credited in the liner notes and the album or actual sources that credit samples such as Discogs.com do not list the sample anywhere. It should be removed for providing misleading information. —User549211:20, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Chen (surname)
Please do not undo my edits, they are true, I knew the guy who first created the trollface and I think that the creator of an internet wide meme deserves a page.
Hi, I hadn't noticed all the edit warring and talk page drama between you and Katydidit when I reverted your last reversion, or I may have taken an intermediate step. She was not editing in the best spirit, but you were factually wrong that the NYT isn't liberal. We don't usually (although occasionally we do) cite in infoboxes. Since there's a whole amply cited paragraph on the Times' left-leaning tendency, I think we can just leave it as is. Best wishes, Yopienso (talk) 08:21, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Regarding Message Left on Talk Page
I left you a message on my talk page. Please check it out when you get the chance and share your thoughts. Thanks in advance.173.64.62.153 (talk) 13:45, 11 February 2013 (UTC) In fact I quoted my source and discussed it on the talk page. Next time read before barking Syxxpackid420 (talk) 12:55, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
AN/TPS vandal
Just a heads up. This nut has been vandalizing the article AN/TPS-43 consistently and repeatedly since 2006. Always the same MO. Always IPs from Colombia. Started at 24 hours and grew to 1 year. He ran out of IPs at home, school and work (always in Colombia) and now he is trying mobile IPs. Please watchlist (you semi-protected it but he will be back - now he started on its talk page). Block on sight for 1 year as many admins now do. We generally do not semi-prot this article as it is only one nut from Colombia. I will not renew the protection when it expires for that reason, but will block this guy on sight. Thanks. -- Alexf(talk)13:01, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
List of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender sportspeople
The policy of Wikidata sees the replacing of local interwiki links by data provided by the Wikidata project. A removal of interwiki links is not vandalism. So please stop calling me on a public platformlike this! OK? -- 109.48.74.139 (talk) 04:02, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
The interwiki links are from today on provided by Wikidata as reported in The Signpost and in WP:VP. The policy of Wikidata sees the replacing of local interwiki links by data provided by the Wikidata project. To make that work, it is necessary to remove Code >1KB, depending on the number of interwiki links. And again: thsi is not vandalism, but policy. Please stop disturbing the implementation of Wikidata. -- 109.48.74.139 (talk) 04:14, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
First: you were calling me "vandalism" ... maybe you should read what WP:Vandalism actually means?
Second: what bots might do is another problem. Here you were reverting the edits. I guess you are not a bot. So maybe we should solve first that behaviour.
Third: We've very successfully implemented the import of interwiki links by Wikidata in Hungarian, Hebrew and Italian Wikipedia. A behaviour like yours is so far without example. Sad! -- 109.48.74.139 (talk) 04:33, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
MPAA edits
Hi Tbhotch, I work for the Motion Picture Association of America and I'm acting as the organization's representative on Wikipedia, with the goal of improving the MPAA article. While I'm working on new text to offer, I've been keeping an eye on the article and I saw that an editor made some edits that seem biased against the organization, particularly:
Changing mentions of "anti-piracy" to "anti-file sharing" even where the it clearly relates to broader copyright infringement than file-sharing alone: for example, the heading of the section that includes information on opposition to VCRs
I hope you don't mind me asking but I saw that you'd previously undone negative changes on the MPAA article: could you look at these edits and see if you think they should be undone too? Thanks, MPAA Kyle (talk) 22:12, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Thalía's album Primera Fila didn't sold 120,000 in Brazil.
Hi, here in Brazil,since 2003 we have a code code that appear on cd,wich means the "number" of the press and how many copies were made of that edition. Thalia's Primera Fila sold only 5,000 here in Brazil,and it was not certified Gold or platinum.and wasn't any reliable source that say that the album got 3 times platinum here. You undid my version 2 times, first you say: "Certifications doesn't rely on sales, see My Life Would Suck Without You as an example. Also, as far as I know, RIAA website doesn't search for Platinum (latin)" and I undid your version,and now you undid my version too. Thalía as singer never did sucess here in Brazil,only En Extasis had a Gold disc. Also Primera Fila doesn't been certified 7 times platinum in USA,the article that say this,isn't a reliable source. So,I will undid you verion again.--88marcus (talk) 18:06, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm interested that the article about the largest Australian owned brewer is of low importance. Never having paid any attention to such things before, this has caused me to suddenly develop an interest. Where can I get more information? What are the criteria you have used to assess the article as of low importance? Thanks in advance, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:18, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Bleeding Love/2013 Russian Meteor Event
Although it probably doesn't belong in the lead, the fact remains that Bleeding Love was playing in the background of one of the most widely viewed videos on the planet. Cracked.com is as good a citation as any (it's an surprisingly good aggregation/reference website), but I suppose that the YouTube citation could be used directly. Neither the lack of freedom of the press in Russia, however, nor Syco's copyright, are germane. Obscure and trivial? Yes. But the song is nevertheless on the Russian dash cam video, and deserves documentation. kencf0618 (talk) 06:38, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
List of longest ruling non-royal national leaders "since 20th century"
1.) This list includes Porfirio Díaz, whose rule began before 1900. 2.) The title "since 20th century" was also suggested by another user from Uruguay. "Since 20th century" may be grammatically correct in Spanish, but this is the English Wikipedia. :-) "Since 1900" is grammatically correct in English. Thank you for your time. – Jwkozak91 (talk) 16:37, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Thank you my friend. It has not reached that stage yet but he constantly calls me a "rabid fan". He also called me an M word yesterday. It means "woman hater". Jivesh1205 (Talk) 07:34, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Tbhotch. 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.
.jpg)
.jpg)
