User talk:Donner60/Archive 8

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive 8 starting with threads from April 1, 2015

General William Morrises

I'm glad you pointed the discrepancy with H. out, the Google Books preview doesn't include page 713 and that saves me the trouble of checking out the book. With W. I didn't know about the 'backdating' of awards. I made both changes as you suggested & if you want to add the details from Generals in Blue go ahead (again, saves me the trouble of tracking it down) - Thanks! Kirk (talk) 14:54, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Your welcome. Glad to help. Donner60 (talk) 20:19, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for that update - I was just trying to fill in the hole with a corps commander not having a page so if you have better information please add it to the articles. Kirk (talk) 20:48, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

A new reference tool

Hello Books & Bytes subscribers. There is a new Visual Editor reference feature in development called Citoid. It is designed to "auto-fill" references using a URL or DOI. We would really appreciate you testing whether TWL partners' references work in Citoid. Sharing your results will help the developers fix bugs and improve the system. If you have a few minutes, please visit the testing page for simple instructions on how to try this new tool. Regards, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:47, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi Donner60, I am completely new to Wiki editing. Thanks for editing the VCBF page to make it more appropriate and aligned to Wiki guidelines. I have an article that I have been trying to publish, and so far, I have not had much success. I'm wondering if you could lend a helping hand to a fellow Wiki user. Thanks in advance. -Charlie CharlieSkye (talk) 17:26, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

I have replied in detail on your talk page. I hope it helps. If you have any further questions, please leave another message and I will try to answer or point you in the right direction if I can the next time I am online. Donner60 (talk) 21:20, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Pontiac GTO: Here comes the Judge

Hi, in 1969 "Here comes the Judge" was a routine made popular by comedian Flip Wilson, not Sammy Davis Jr as indicated in the description of the 1969 GTO. Flip was a regular on Rowan & Martins Laugh In. My source for this info is I grew up watching the show ;>) Thanks, Rod 97.76.31.9 (talk) 22:52, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

You may be right, especially since Wilson was a comedian and Davis primarily a singer and actor, but your memory can not be the source for a change. Isn't there a source on the internet or otherwise publicly available that can be cited for this? Added that I deleted the original message on your user talk page. Donner60 (talk) 22:56, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klann_linkage

Hi Donner can you put back my edit of the eprints repository please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tom rooney Bristol (talk • contribs) 22:30, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

I now see that there is nothing wrong with the edit except that it is in the wrong place. It should be in the footnotes or external links sections, not at the bottom under the categories. This is usually a sign that the addition is advertising or promotional, irrelevant or outright disruptive. Here, this simply seems to be replacing an otherwise bad link. Sorry I did not look at this more closely. I will move it to the proper place on the page so it won't raise a question. Donner60 (talk) 22:40, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Kerbal Space Program

Re: this edit: Oh wow. Whoops. I have a word filter extension for Chrome that does exactly what it says on the tin (for no reason other than bad jokes) and somehow it completely slipped my mind that the filter would apply to the existing article text when editing. Normally I'll go incognito or disable the extension when editing... But, again, it slipped my mind. I've taken the liberty of performing the edit I actually meant to perform, this time without changing every instance of flight to fight and so on. Pretty sure you'll agree that this time it's perfectly constructive. Sorry to make busy work for you. 198.244.107.209 (talk) 21:02, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

I left the following message (plus a welcome template not repeated here) on you talk page: I am deleting the above message in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through) because you have explained that the edit was a mistake caused by a filter extension for Chrome. I have run across this in a few other instances but (as far as I know) it is not readily apparent when reviewing changes to articles that this was the cause of the problem. Thanks for letting me know and correcting the problem. Following is a welcome message which contains some links which might be helpful in future editing, although I don't recall that this particular glitch is covered. Donner60 (talk) 23:12, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with Don Lane (Santa Cruz)

Thank you for your help in keeping Don Lane (Santa Cruz)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Lane_%28Santa_Cruz%29 honest and as negotiated on October 15 2014. They have added this sentence: "The following paragraph was written by a political opponent of Lane who has decided to take up 25 percent of Lane's biography with his obsession with a minor event from more than 25 years ago that is not accurately described. The references cited do not actually verify all of the contents of this paragraph:" which is patently untrue. I am not the political opponent they are referring to though I do oppose many of Lane's policies and decisions. I have added this after the above inserted sentence: "The previous sentence is not true as evidenced by the following links and direct quotes."

It's funny how Don Lane and his team are so upset about this episode that they lie about it. It's also funny that Don Lane refers to it in a jokingly condescending manner in a recent fluff piece about him in a local paper: http://www.gtweekly.com/index.php/santa-cruz-news/santa-cruz-local-news/6203-on-his-terms.html

Again, thanks for your help and diligence on this page. Let's keep it up! The Man of Heart (talk) 13:19, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

  • Comment This isn't how content disputes are dealt with on BLPs. 3RR notices issued, temp semi protection requested. Take it to Talk:Don Lane (Santa Cruz). Keri (talk) 14:07, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
It seems the comment was directed to The Man of Heart rather than to me. For clarity, I will state that I have had no involvement with the article or any comments or pages related to the article or any contact with any of the editors of the article about the article prior to this message. While reviewing recent changes using Huggle, I saw a removal of content from the article with the letter "A" remaining where the content was. The latter was actually a key indicator of a problem for me. A previous editor had reverted the same change. Deleting content which cites a source, with no explanation, which has been reverted previously and leaves stray letters or other incomplete vestiges of the removed comment almost always adds up to vandalism. Even in the rare instance where it might not be, I think that an edit with such facts being obvious does not appear to justify the time spent on any further extended examination. In the rare case of an error, it can be brought up and changed within a short, reasonable time. I approached this not as some sort of content dispute, or something in which I had any interest in the content, or as anything other than a type of disruptive editing I have seen many times. If this was a mistake, which I am not sure is the point of the comment and I do not think was one under the circumstances, it was an honest and a rare one. Since the page has been placed under administrator protection, it seems to be a moot matter now. Donner60 (talk) 01:39, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Donner, the comment was indeed for the benefit and attention of TMoH, who seems to have been on a forum shopping expedition. Keri (talk) 11:42, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I was on a forum shopping expedition as I was looking for any help that I could get. Is this wrong or against the rules?The Man of Heart (talk) 15:24, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

It is "unhelpful to finding and achieving consensus"; see WP:FORUMSHOP. Keri (talk) 15:47, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

A Little Help?

Apparently I've been flagged as to be in an Edit War at Don Lane (Santa Cruz). If you have the time and interest, would you comment on the Article's Talk Page? Thanks, The Man of Heart (talk) 17:50, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Don_Lane_%28Santa_Cruz%29

Since I last signed on, the Don Lane (Santa Cruz) page was placed under editing restrictions and only administrators can edit it. I do not see this has been taken any further either on the talk page or a noticeboard or by an administrator's comments. Your explanation seems to suffice at this point. Since the matter seems moot, at least for now, I think that further comments that might unnecessarily reopen or escalate the matter at this point would be unproductive even if I had anything useful to write about it. Since it seems your edits could be considered part of a content dispute rather than reverting improper edits and were within a 3RR time period, I cannot say that the edit war template placed on your talk page and advice to take the matter to the talk page, where it could be explained to those more generally interested, was wrong. It is not necessarily easy to craft a specific message in this type of situation so use of a template is understandable. There seems to be no bias in it because it also was left on the talk page of the IP user who appears to be the other party principally involved.
The dispute seems not to have escalated further and the edit flag matter seems to have been left as a warning and not taken further. I note that the subject of the article rather obviously (from the user name) was the creator. He has edited the article from time to time. This seems to raise a question about whether the article which now stands close to the form it was written was created under a conflict of interest. In any event, unlike the editors who have been interested in the substance of the article and have edited for content, I have no knowledge or information about the underlying content dispute that I could add to the talk page. Donner60 (talk) 02:15, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Help please

User talk:90.213.152.202 is continuing to vandalise political pages, now focusing on Liberal Democrats. He has been warned many times (assuming he set up ToryBoy1988 username as well) and continues to remove citations EVERY DAY! Please ban him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.24.107.157 (talk) 21:36, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

I left this message on your user talk page: I am not an administrator so I cannot block the disruptive user. You could report this person to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism and/or Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. I must say that there are several possible reporting noticeboards which makes it a little difficult to decide which one to use for a problem that involves more than one issue, but I think the above two are the most likely for this one. You can see other suggestions on the general or main Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard page. Donner60 (talk) 23:29, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Re: Apple

I don't really understand how I got a warning when I edited "Apple"? My information was true and not inappropriate or disruptive. Could you explain what was wrong with my editing? - Applezap — Preceding unsigned comment added by Applezap4 (talk • contribs) 01:20, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Applezap4: You kept on breaking the format. That's what was disruptive. - Amaury (talk) 01:23, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 01:30, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
I have deleted the warning I left with respect to the edit to Apple since your question shows me you were in good faith. I also think this is an instance where a final warning seems inappropriate. In addition to Amaury's comment, I also think your edit appeared to be a matter of opinion unless it could be supported by a citation. I should have explained that rather than just leaving an automated message. Donner60 (talk) 01:30, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Not sure why the caption relates to The Scream; perhaps Amaury's comment relates to an edit to that article and you have had some trouble editing that article as well. In any event, my messages have related to the edit to Apple. I will place a welcome template with some links on your talk page. The linked pages will give you some guidance about editing. Donner60 (talk) 01:34, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
@Donner60: There was originally no heading, and I thought that's what they were inquiring about. I reverted them on The Scream once for breaking the format. So my comment above may possibly be disregarded if they were only asking about the Apple article. (I've changed the heading now.) - Amaury (talk) 01:37, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. I hope we have a person here who is just unfamiliar with editing and not otherwise disruptive. I also appreciate any help from an experienced editor with these types of matters. Donner60 (talk) 01:41, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I won't use or edit on this site anymore. -Applezap — Preceding unsigned comment added by Applezap4 (talk • contribs) 02:12, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Re: Irwindale

Hi, I am confused as to why you deleted my edit to Irwindale, CA. I simply listed a relevant and recent case study to Environmental Concerns and provided both party's opinions, including petition letters from the community members and an interview with the representative of the CleanTech company in response. I tried to be as neutral as possible. If you'd like, I can end the section with the CleanTech owner's interview so as to end off neutral after hearing the first part of community complaints. I'd just really like the case study i worked hard on here to be back up! Thanks. Cmartinez2k15 (talk) 23:04, 29 April 2015 (UTC) Cmartinez2k15

You put one sentence about the company's response. You are trying to put several paragraphs about one side of an issue which, if it belongs at all, should be in another article, such as one about the company. This article is about the community and should include standard general information. This is not a news article or an article about passing concerns that would not be found in an encyclopedia article. See Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, especially that Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Given these guidelines, I am reluctant even to say that a couple of balanced sentences would be appropriate. Donner60 (talk) 23:15, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Seeing as it is a environmental concern and relevant issue to the city of Irwindale that has already occurred and is now impacting and a part of the Santa Fe Dam, a huge part of the city of Irwindale, I believe at least the basic facts of the CleanTech controversy should be here, like the Huy Fong Sriracha section has. I agree I wrote too much on one side, perhaps a more condensed, barebones version would be suffice? Cmartinez2k15 (talk) 23:26, 29 April 2015 (UTC)Cmartinez2k15
I would not object to that and perhaps others would see it the same way. Of course, I can not speak for other editors. Donner60 (talk) 23:28, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Okay then! I'll do better this time. Also, would you happen to be able to put back the text and references? I will take out whatever's too much and edit it out myself. Thanks. Cmartinez2k15 (talk) 23:34, 29 April 2015 (UTC)Cmartinez2k15
I was offline for awhile. I have put the three edits which were reverted by my edit on your talk page. That will give you all the text and references along with the coding. This should give you a chance to work on it without feeling you need to rush it. Donner60 (talk) 00:23, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
I changed this to only show your edit prior to the reversion, which should contain everything you need from the previous page. You may want to work on this on this page or offline in a document. Although it may be obvious, you will need to open the page for editing to have all the coding. You can delete the entire section that I added when you are through with it to get the clutter off your page. It will still be in the history. If I have left anything out, let me know. Donner60 (talk) 00:44, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Error about Yusuf and Zulaikha

Hi Donner60, I edited the page to remove fallacious arguments and misinterpretations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abuammaarkhan (talk • contribs) 03:12, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Your edit is a personal comment, and it is unnecessary. The paragraph merely states a fact that the story originated in the Bible (true, it's earlier) and has been told and retold many times by Muslims. It does not say they do not use the Quranic version. Donner60 (talk) 03:17, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Revision to Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene

I am a professor of chemistry, and as a class assignment, I had students revise the pages of chemicals with toxic properties. I see that when one of my students revised the DDE (dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene) page, the changes were marked as "not adhering to a neutral point of view" and removed. The talk page mentions (twice) that the original article was biased, and I notice some of the original material was not cited. My student revised the lead, added headers and a couple of references. Is it the last page of the lead, which is a summary and not cited? Is it that the references are not primary, or not viewed as high-quality? Is it how the statements are phrased (this might also apply to the original article?) I am not aware of any debate about the toxicity of the molecule, and it's DDT, not DDE that is used as a pesticide. I am new to wikipedia, and am trying to learn how to guide my students. How should I advise this one, so he can complete his assignment and improve the quality of this page? Thank you Ajfrontier (talk) 15:41, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

I left this message on your talk page: Please tell your students that I have reviewed this and concluded I made a mistake, which unfortunately occasionally happens when editing new pages quickly. The important thing is to straighten out the problem quickly. The program that I and some others usually use shows only changes, not the entire page. This is not really an excuse and is not supposed to be, but occasionally it does lead someone looking at changes to draw the wrong conclusion. Of course, one could pull up the whole page but in my experience at least 99% of the time it would not make a difference. Here it would. Please have them restore the edit, or I can do it. If there is much intervening material, however, I would ask that they be especially sure to check on my restoration to be sure it was correct. Thanks for your explanation and patience. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Donner60 (talk) 20:24, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Lady Elle Finn

Hi Donner60 I hope that this is correct I am very sorry if it is incorrect, In advance thanks for your help. Ginny Monroe Hi Wikipedia Team I am to use Creating Talk: Lady Elle Finn https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lady_Elle_Finn&action=submit As I have bad eyesight, and I have good corrective Eye-glasses, however, I am not able to Wikipedia's CAPTCHA at max magnification. I have had to get my son to do this for me. As I get this message from Wikipedia "Error Incorrect or missing CAPTCHA." This was the message I wanted to leave for Creating Talk: Lady Elle Finn I am trying to write a "Lady Elle Finn" Wikipedia page, like this example:- Lady Gaga From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. So based on Wikipedia message, I have either used the incorrect Wikipedia template Or it is my writing style, so I am very really sorry. I will re-address this "Lady Elle Finn" content across the weekend of May 02 & 03 2015. Please could you email me the hyperlink for the correct Wikipedia template? ginny.monroe@hotmail.co.uk This is me: https://uk.linkedin.com/pub/ginny-monroe/59/145/a14 Thanks Wikipedia Team All the best! Ginny Ginny Monroe CEO Regal Magazine & Regal Media & Advertising Company Limited Business, Celebrity & Digital Marketing Expert MA, BA Hons, BTEC, RSA — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ginny Monroe (talk • contribs) 22:06, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Moved from middle of page. I responded on talk page with previous draft. I and at least one other editor answered there. Donner60 (talk) 01:48, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Kikiyu

Hi Donner, the referenced edit/contribution prominent kikuyu people njenga karume was intended as a genuine contribution to the article and not a test.thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.45.1.48 (talk) 01:42, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Moved from middle of page. No response appears necessary.

Indian Half-bred

Hi Donner, We saw you recently reverted some edits on the page. We appreciate the concern for the page, but it is currently being worked on as a class project, as indicated in the talk page. We're currently together and in the process of changing it, and so would appreciate if you would refrain from changing anything until after this week. We do not intend to leave anything incomplete for long, as it is due tomorrow, but would like it to remain our work. Helen Purdy (talk) 23:36, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Under the circumstances you describe, I will not review any edits on this page for at least a few days. Editors usually work independently without knowing who else may be reviewing recent edits, so I can only speak for myself. Good luck with the project. Donner60 (talk) 00:39, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your understanding Helen Purdy (talk) 00:58, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Psychedelic drug

Hi Donner. I changed the word "Drug" in the psychedelic experience section because it is far too broad as to be descriptive on such a narrow topic. The word psychedelic would be more appropriate. Drugs refer to all types of compounds, prescription, over the counter or illegal. These edits would improve the flow as well as the accuracy of the section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.70.83.182 (talk) 16:39, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Deleted message on talk page due to explanation. Donner60 (talk) 17:59, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Amy Hill

Hello, I'm Donner60. An edit you recently made to Amy Hill seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, the sandbox is the best place to do so. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks

No, it wasn't for practice or a test. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edmunddantes (talk • contribs) 17:48, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Deleted message on talk page. Noted that caption did not seem to quite line up with picture. Donner60 (talk) 17:56, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Judge Judy

Hello, I'm Donner60. An edit you recently made to Judge Judy seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, the sandbox is the best place to do so. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Donner60

No, it wasn't for practice or a test. It was fixing a broken url. I have edited it again to fix the link after you restored the broken one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.214.36.67 (talk) 11:22, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Deleted message on your talk page and noted sorry for the mistake and thanks for letting me know and fixing it. Donner60 (talk) 18:44, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Fernet

Hi Donner, No I wasn't practicing, I was making an adjustment based on a drink my friends and I created using fernet that we wanted to share with the world. What is the requirements for making this sort of change? Does it need to be linked to an outside source, like a blog post? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.183.2.11 (talk) 17:01, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Left this message on your talk page: :I am deleting the above message in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through) because you have explained your edit. However, you do need a reliable source (other than your own statement) for that type of additions. Please see Wikipedia:Notability, Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook, textbook, or scientific journal. A blog post that originates from the same person or group who added the edit would not be a sufficient reference. In general, you could start with Wikipedia:Simplified ruleset. Donner60 (talk) 18:44, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Carlton football club

hello this is haydo88 I was only telling the truth on carlton football club — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haydo88 (talk • contribs) 23:49, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Unsourced, contains a personal comment ("it is not good"), three sentences run together without capitalization and punctuation. Donner60 (talk) 00:28, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Sunnyvale Housos

Housos is television show on sbs it is rated ma but I think more people should watch it because that is Australian culture the characters are Frankie shazza dazza beryl abdull habib and more its all about some rural parts of Australia if you see this page go and watch it on sbs 10:00 Tuesdays its great television show it will give you some laughs and you will talk about all the — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haydo88 (talk • contribs) 23:56, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Not available where I am. Donner60 (talk)

Easter egg (media)

-Dear Sir: It seems you have deleted one of my editings. I realized it was placed in the wrong place, and was just about to fix it, and then it was gone..

Hello, I'm Donner60. An edit you recently made to Easter egg (media) seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, the sandbox is the best place to do so. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 21:28, 23 May 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by FrodeMadshus (talk • contribs)

Your edit contained spelling and grammatical errors which is why I assumed it was a test. It was nonconstructive in that form. Your message to me was straightforward so I am not sure what to make of the poorly written entry. If you wish to restore your edit to a proper place in the article, please construct your entry a little more carefully. Thank you. Donner60 (talk) 21:56, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Dale Brown

Hi. You asked for documentation of the change I made on the Dale Brown site. What would constitute such documentation? When it comes to the Philippine air force not using the F-4, for instance, well, there is ample documentation on this wiki-page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_former_aircraft_of_the_Philippine_Air_Force As for the 'make the B-52 stealthy'...that's really more of a common sense thing. The massive size and the amount of heat the engines put out, as well as the general shape of the aircraft means that, to make that thing stealthy would require so much work that there would be very little to nothing that was part of the original, beyond some bolts and nuts, maybe. And as for the 'orbital weapons platform'...that's the way stationary 'parked' orbit works. Compare the page on geosync orbit.85.229.59.77 (talk) 21:54, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

I am deleting the message on your talk page because your edit was obviously in good faith.
Thanks for your comment. I think that putting a link in the Dale Brown article to the article you cite on list of former aircraft of the Philippine air force would be sufficient. As to geosynchronous orbits, the article you link to does cover the concept. Technically, Wikipedia can not cite to itself as reference but if the articles linked to have valid references, that should be good enough.
I am sure you are correct that making a B-52 stealthy would require a substantial rebuild. It would be better to have a citation for the fact. I have not tried to see whether such a citation can be easily found. I think potential questions can arise from an entry such as the one you made. Since you are entering criticisms of theories rather than of the person, I do not see this as inappropriate biographical content and I would assume that issue would not arise. The question with respect to the B-52 is whether the statement is your personal opinion or original research or whether a reliable, verifiable source exists to back up the claim. If no one questions it, I would probably concede that it is common sense. However, many other people might not and want at least some back up. I would be surprised if an article in a reliable publication does not exist somewhere that mentions the difficulty or overwhelming expense of making existing aircraft stealthy.
I have not put any links to Wikipedia policy or guideline pages in my comment but could do so if you wish. You have a welcome template on your talk page with some links to helpful pages. Here is a slightly longer list of links to pages that can provide useful information.

Donner60 (talk) 22:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Midnight Rider

Read midnight to dawn. By Jacqueline L Tobin. Then the lyrics to Allman Bros song Midnight rider — Preceding unsigned comment added by Corybartlett958 (talk • contribs) 22:00, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Left on your talk page: I am deleting the above message in the method prescribed by the guidelines (strike through) because your edit was in good faith. However, the material you inserted should be in the text of the article, not in a hatnote. Hatnotes are only for links to articles with the same words in the title. Please put the material in an appropriate place lower in the text (not in the lead paragraph). Thank you for your patience and contribution. Donner60 (talk) 22:07, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Ritterhude

Hello, I'm Donner60. An edit you recently made to Ritterhude seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, the sandbox is the best place to do so. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 20:09, 26 May 2015 (UTC) It was not a test, we are german students from ritterhude and wrote this article in school. We will also get a mark for this, so please let this article online. You can see this also by the many references. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dxjzljz (talk • contribs) 20:31, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I will take your word for it and leave it, at least for some time, before giving it another look. I cannot speak for any other editor since we mostly work independently. Donner60 (talk) 20:38, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Beef tenderloin

hey the fillet mingon is the tail end of the tenderloin as per the page on fillet mingon looking to get the souces all i have is work related info (butcher in canada) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.226.54.44 (talk) 20:28, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Left this message on your talk page: I am deleting the above message because your comment indicates to me that you are in good faith. Please do get a source for it because it is a change which does not appear to be right (though I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you can show that it is). Thank you. Donner60 (talk) 20:36, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Question

            • A question******

Hello there. I'm a long-time Wiki reader. Recently I noticed I had a message from you claiming that I'd edited an article erroneously. Now, I've never done this but I did recently tell my children, who are home from school for the summer, that it was possible to edit a Wiki and that was sort of what made it different from an Encyclopedia; it's "Self correcting" nature.

I didn't even know that this site had a messaging function! I'm curious to know if there is any way I can see, if it was one of my children, WHAT they changed in the article so I might discuss with them the importance of keeping information accurate. As I've said I'm sort of "casual user" of Wikipedia so have no idea of the use of the backend. If you could perhaps steer me in the direction of the full truth so I might understand and prevent future occurrences. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.32.214.66 (talk) 05:49, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

From the computer with this IP address: On May 25 at 5:46 p.m. ET Kenny Brown (guitarist) changes: birth date moved up 40 years, "style" changed to "proof", "Brown" changed to "Menefenef". On May 25 at 5:50 ET "Rainbow" the word "rainbow(s)" was changed to "kitten(s)" several times, "red", "violet" and "water" were changed to "pink", "magenta" and "kittens" and "double rainbow, a second a"rc the words and letter in quotes was deleted. Donner60 (talk) 20:54, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

St Paul's College, Namibia

You wrote the article on St. Paul's right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.63.232.181 (talk) 10:06, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

I did not write the article St. Paul's College, Namibia. I reverted an edit that added "It is widely believed that the school's former headmaster, Mr. Robert Church, is the antichrist." Unfortunately, in doing so, I did not notice that I inadvertently restored some vandalism by a prior user or did not see that some vandalism was still present in the article. A later editor appears to have now cleaned that up. Sorry for the mistake. Donner60 (talk) 21:16, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Donner. I have visited the St Paul's Namibia page. Please can you remove the whole page and all the contents? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.243.247.144 (talk) 10:57, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

A later editor appears to have cleaned up the article and I am not sure it would get through the deletion process now that it is cleaned up. I cannot delete an article. It must go through the articles for deletion process. You cannot complete the process if you still wish to put the article up for deletion because a user must be registered to complete an articles for deletion request. You can start the process, however, and get further information on the process and alternatives at Wikipedia:Articles for Deletion. Donner60 (talk) 21:17, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

7 Cups of Tea

Please be careful about getting into an edit war -- I see both you and 188.72.119.14 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) have already broken WP:3RR. —Tim Pierce (talk) 19:53, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Left this message on your talk page: I have been reverting clearly improper personal comments and have explained this to the new user on their talk page without escalating the warnings. Vandalism patrolling, which I have done for quite awhile, is an exception to 3RR. I don't claim to be always right and certainly make a mistake from time to time but I don't think someone can leave personal comments about "what an organization is really like" and not have them reverted. If you evaluate the content differently from me, please let me know. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 20:12, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

List of GTA V Characters

Sorry Donner60. The only reason I was adding the unseen characters was because I saw that the list was of Grand Theft Auto V characters but this was not a section. I have sources for every one of the ones that I posted. So can I still keep them up there if I post the sources under the "References" heading? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DominicSeidel2 (talk • contribs) 02:41, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Left this reply on your talk page: I am deleting the above message because your edit tells me that you were in good faith and have support for your change. If you have a source, I suggest you leave it as an inline citation if you add the edit again in order to avoid controversy. Although adding a new reference to the reference section is good, it won't automatically relate to your edit. Someone would need to search the references to find it. Donner60 (talk) 02:52, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DominicSeidel2 (talk • contribs) 02:55, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Nicolas Nixo

Sorry Ive been tying to write a bio about this soccer player. If you see the Bios that are accepted for Nixo, Chad Ashton,Nick Stavrou,and making the other players is a lot less than you are editing mine. How is Nixo who also was selected to the US National national team in the United States national futsal team in Brazil at the 1998 Rio de Janeiro Futsal Tournament not aptepable for notability? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.223.37.89 (talk) 02:39, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Left this message on your talk page: If you are trying to write this article, why did you blank the page? I simply restored the text. I see that another editor put the article up for deletion. You can help prevent that by improving the page and providing more citations to reliable, verifiable sources. I can not guarantee the result of the process because I have not tried to determine if the player meets general notability guidelines, although I do see that he played for an MLS team so that shows me there is a basis for keeping the article. Your concerns about deletion or blanking are with someone else. I might add that blanking the whole page and starting over, if that was your intention, is not the way to go about editing an article (unless it is one that you just created, which you did not in this case). That is why I reverted your edit.

Re Wars fought on American territory

You have sent to me a message that I introduced factual errors without explicitly saying what the errors were.

Before 1776 there was no USA so no wars could have been fought on USA soil. Thus I introduced the term "now USA soil". Specifically, the French and Indian wars were not fought on then USA soil. You may quibble about the fighting of the Revolutionary war. That started before 1776. If we count the USA from the US constitution of 1787 all the fighting was done before the USA existed.

As to references, this was in the introductory paragraph for which no footnotes or references are given. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.55.108 (talk) 11:27, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Strikeout

Re this edit, I bow to your superior knowledge of the game. It could hardly fail to be superior since I know virtually nothing about the subject. What I do know, however, is that the present lead definition is inadequate, and has been so for a long time. As discussed on the talk page, the main problem is the word "strike". To someone unfamiliar with the game's terminology, "accumulates three strikes" sounds for all the world as if the player hits the ball three times, whereas I understand that (essentially) it means that he doesn't hit it in three opportunties. Despite an earlier discussion on the talk page, nothing was ever done about this, which is why I took matters into my own hands. I encourage you or other editors knowledgable about the game to try to clarify this definition. 109.152.148.40 (talk) 11:47, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

I am sure you are quite knowledgeable about the game and are perfectly aware of both the problems in the current lead and problems of clearly defining a strikeout for the less knowledgeable. Your intention and effort were both good. I do wonder whether it really accomplishes your purpose. You have hit on an issue I did not think about, whether someone not familiar with the game would interpret the word "strike" differently. Because changing the lead is not as simple as it might appear, I have restored your edit as better than the alternative of leaving it. I suggest we both think about whether any further change can help accomplish the objective. Since this was enough of a concern to you to make the effort, and your knowledge of the game is clearly greater than you modestly suggest, now that I have restored your edit, I will leave it to you to consider whether any further change would be beneficial. If I look at it at all, it will likely be some time from now. Thanks for your effort. I encourage you to keep editing. Donner60 (talk) 21:06, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

May 2015

Hello Donner60 I recently removed some of the contents that had a bad reference, or no reference and also bad citation. Some of the contents were irrelevant and outdated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Football Expert 10 (talk • contribs) 21:22, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

I left this message on your talk page: I am deleting the above message in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through) because you have explained the edit. Please use edit summaries to give a brief reason for your edits. It helps to avoid such misunderstandings. Thank you. Donner60 (talk) 21:39, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Question.

When I saw that it was now 31 May 2015 but currently is 30 May 2015 can you fix and change the birthdate? Help. --182.191.178.25 (talk) 22:24, 30 May 2015 (UTC) 182 anon user.

I really don't know what you mean. It can not have anything to do with the edit you made to Month which was adding the words in quotes in the following excerpt: January || 31 days "80 in old years". Donner60 (talk) 22:30, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Nayanthara

Hi Donner60. I'm Eileenio07. June 2015. Nayanthara. Yes I'm New to this, the only thing I wanted to change was her name. The actress herself who is not a model, just an South Indian actress, who spells her own name with a "h" in it; NAYANTHARA as opposed to NAYANTARA. Also, wanted to include her mother tongue which is Malayalam or ethnicity as Malayalee. I may have bumped up a few but these two points should contributed/amended. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eileenio07 (talk • contribs) 17:21, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

There is a problem with this because sources do not all spell the name the same way. Some are as you put it but others are as the title of the article. The Internet Movie Data base uses both! Wikipedia's guidelines are that the spelling in the article must conform to the title of the article. There are three ways to handle this. Change the title of the article and put up a redirect page to the new title from the old title. Or put up a redirect page for the new spelling and mention in the article (leaving the title as it is) that the new spelling is actually the preferred spelling. Or simply mention once in the text of the article that the other spelling is the one the actress prefers even though some sources use the spelling in the title of the article.
You cannot change the title of pictures because it will simply show a red link and not the picture. The picture is linked only to the exact spelling in the title. This does not show anyway so there is no need to change it. Changing the title of a picture (that is, the file which adds the picture itself, not necessarily the caption which is stated in a separate entry) is a sure way to get your entire edit reverted.
Mentioning the actress's mother tongue is no problem. An edit will be reverted on an all or nothing basis almost every time because the editor who reverts the edit will probably not know whether any part of it is valid when that editor sees a problem with part of it.
There are links to pages in the following welcome message which can help you become familiar with Wikipedia editing guidelines and policies - or links to other more specific pages: (omitted here but placed on user talk page).

Aneri Vajani

Hey Donner60! I don't have a Wiki account or anything but the thing is that there is no picture of Aneri. Idk how to insert it but I want to. Help me!94.76.4.73 (talk) 18:27, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

I suggest you read Wikipedia:Images and pages linked at that page for help. I looked at Wikimedia Commons and did not see any pictures for Aneri Vajani that can be used. So I cannot put a picture in. You can do so if you have one that is a free image, not protected by copyright, and you follow the guidelines for images and uploading images. Donner60 (talk) 18:33, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Orange

Re the article on Orange - source sited, Daily News Egypt:

It is our intention to terminate contract with Israel’: Orange Chief Executive

Emir Nader and Menna Zaki / June 3, 2015 / 0 Comments

BDS movement accused Orange Telecommunication Company in Egypt of cooperating with Israeli occupation on Palestinian territories ShareThis Facebook Tweet Print Email

“Believe me I would cancel the contract tomorrow if I could,” said Stephane Richard, Chief Executive Officer of mobile network Orange about his company’s links with Israel.

In response to a questions asked by Daily News Egypt at a press conference Wednesday, the CEO sought to distance himself and his company from the actions of Israel and the network’s affiliate there.

Richard suggested that the contract with the Israeli affiliate was ‘inherited’ and thus out of the company’s hands. However, when asked about reports that the contract was renewed in 2015, Richard said: “We didn’t renew the contract, we wanted to change the terms of the contract and include a termination date, as there previously wasn’t a termination date, and gave us no possibility of leaving the deal.”

“We want to terminate this and to fix this, we don’t want it. In the existing contract, it gives us the option to terminate this without exposing this to a huge financial risk. If you were the CEO of this company you would act the same,” Richard said. “The only other possibility would be to enter a dispute with the partner, and I’m sorry to say but entering a dispute when you have zero legal grounds in Israeli courts is not something I would recommend for my company. I am not willing to pay hundreds of millions of euros just because I have to take a risk in terms of penalties.”

Orange Israel has been targeted by an Egyptian ‘BDS’ campaign to boycott, divest and place sanctions on companies that cooperate with Israel, for the occupation and alleged war crimes of the Israeli state. Orange Israel is understood to have sponsored combat units in the 2014 Gaza offensive, running a campaign to ‘Adopt a soldier’.

“The amount of money we receive from these contracts is very, very low, we are not involved out of financial interest,” Richard said. “If you take the amount of money we receive and the amount of time we take explaining this in France and elsewhere, believe me it’s not a good deal.”

Palestinian Chief Negotiator Saeb Erekat expressed his concern to French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius over the French company’s involvement in the Israeli military occupation and the mass violations on Palestinian territories.

The company sponsored unit combats during the war on Gaza in 2014 and is helping the Israeli forces expand their settlement activities in the West Bank, according to Palestinian news agency Ma’an — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.178.217.26 (talk) 22:08, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

I did not see any citation in your edit. Also, your edit was not phrased in neutral language. I suggest that you rephrase your edit and cite the Daily Egypt article. The facebook article is not a good reference because it is self-serving and cannot be considered neutral. Donner60 (talk) 22:18, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi, the source is the Daily Egypt article, not a Facebook citation: I can rephrase to make neutral (Orange has declared its desire to move out of its Israeli operation in response to the BDS movement but feels precluded from doing so as a result of contractual obligations) - I assume that's neutral? But what do I site if not The Daily Egypt? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.178.217.26 (talk) 22:32, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

You can cite the Daily Egypt but use neutral language. Cite it directly and not by reference to the Facebook article. In doing these things, I think you can come within the Wikipedia guidelines. Also, the lead section is supposed to be a summary so only brief mention should be made there. If you have additional details, you should put them lower in the text of the article. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 22:36, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

BMO Field

Hey Donner, I messed up when adding Toronto FCs Reserve team in the USL to the tennants at BMO Field. i have fixed it though. There shouldnt be any issues with it now.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by TFCFan (talk • contribs) 22:07, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. Donner60 (talk) 22:15, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Revert: SMF

Hello Donner60, first of all thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed you reverted a change for failing to cite a source that SMF is used in dedicated setups for very large forums as it is capable of handling large traffic.

However, if you scroll down on the SMF wiki page: you can see multiple links to such forums; hence I was merely clarifying that SMF is not limited to (small) shared hosting solutions like the article currently suggests. I'm not sure how to provide an extra source that SMF is used on dedicated machines, as there aren't really articles explaining that such huge forums don't actually run from a $2USD/month shared hosting solution but from a dedicated setup: probably because it is pretty much common sense that forums with millions of hits and thousands of users online can't actually run from a small hosting plan. It is correct that it is *generally* used on shared hosting packages, like any piece of website software is (wordpress, for example.), and I had not modified that part at all. I was only adding clarification that it can also run in large non-shared environments with no problem, and about 20 links are provided in the "Prominent forums" list within the wiki page that support that claim.

I could probably find multiple links on the SMF community of people who are discussing their dedicated server setup (there is a board dedicated to it); but I don't think sources should be cited from the vendor itself; even if it is user generated content on the site of the vendor. Unless I'm mistaken? As users, however, generally turn to the SMF community for help with server configurations: that is the place where such proof can mostly be obtained. I also just Google'd and noticed that most of the hits for explanations on dedicated servers stem from SMF's own wiki/Online Manual, which is probably also not deemed a worthy source. It's all too much common sense that small sites run on shared hosting, and large sites run from dedicated servers. That's just how the technology works. I operate two SMF forums that have millions of hits, and thus require dedicated servers. Hence why I was adding this explanation to the wiki page.

So I would ask you to consider reverting the reverting (wait what?), or alternatively point me to a guide on in which way you're allowed to clarify something that is a bit common sense and of which proof (with links) are already quite prominently shown further down on the same wikipedia page. Common sense is slightly hard to cite. Again, I was only clarifying a slightly wrongly worded entry in the wikipedia page: as it now suggests it can only run from shared hosting; which is false. Removing that clarification, in my opinion, undermines the correctness of the current wording in the wiki article.

Thank you so much for your consideration! 178.85.187.149 (talk) 21:31, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Left on your user page: I am deleting the above message because your note to me shows that you were editing in good faith and knew what you were talking about. I will rollback my edit and consider further whether a source should be added. While I think that my initial impression probably was correct based on the change alone, I will consider whether the remainder of the article shows no source was needed, as you suggest. (The program I was using does not show the entire article and it is almost never worthwhile to take the time to open an article to see whether a change can be justified in context, although I have seen some infrequent exceptions. Usually the writer will draw attention to them promptly and they can be amended.) Donner60 (talk) 21:36, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Take a penny, leave a penny

(Kldiamond3 (talk))Hello you cited I need a source on my give a Pennie take a penny edit? When I stated it was invented by Ken Diamond, While I cannot provide a source I am the inventor of give a penny take a penny, and I would like at least an honorable mention in Wikipedia for it. If you could get back to me I would appreciate it thank you.

I have actually spent some time googling this and can find no reference to you at all. Please see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not especially Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought and Wikipedia:Verifiability and pages linked from that page. I assume this is a prank. Even if it is not, as the linked pages show, Wikipedia can not just take your word for it. It is suspect and needs a reliable, verifiable, neutral source to be included. Donner60 (talk) 02:17, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

re: 173.48.60.207 vandal

As you threatened in January, please put some long-term moderate/block on this jerk's IP! It looks like he has the same fixed IP since 2011, and the same vandal inclinations, so hoping for change is forlorn...-71.174.181.39 (talk) 21:57, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

I am not an administrator; all I can do is report someone who is vandalizing Wikipedia. I see only one instance of vandalism since January and that was in April. I don't think this is worth reporting. I doubt any administrator would not block someone based on such stale history. Donner60 (talk) 22:33, 10 June 2015 (UTC) (deleted: "not"; that was an error, hope that was obvious in context)

Whomever posted the top paragraph please communicate with me directly - my name is Mike Morris, contact me at mikemorris91740@gmail.com. I'm in the pacific time zone. What's your name? Call me. Talk to me. I'm not hiding behind an anonymous IP address.

If anyone has an issue with my writing - on style or content, let's talk. Let's resolve why you feel I'm a vandal. I've been an engineer for years. I do have some knowledge on a number of topics including vintage computers, amateur radio, public safety radio, industrial electronics and control systems, pyrotechnics, and a lot more.

As to the sneakernet page... I AM THE ONE WHO WROTE THE INDENTED PART that starts with "The 1970s "old joke" referred to above". Let me put it in simple words: I WAS THERE. It's been almost 40 years, but I can give you the names of the people who were at that table. Vandalizing that page? I don't think so. I thought I was clarifying my own text and building on others.

As to any other wikipedia pages that anyone has issues with, as i said above, let's talk. I'm open to cogent, non-voice-raising discourse on any topic except politics, religion and sex. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.165.113.100 (talk) 03:43, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

I have just left a message on your talk page. As I note in a little more detail, I don't think the above message was meant for you. The IP addresses are different. I explain my message to you about editing tests (rather than vandalism). There were some technical problems with your edit which I point out to you. I left some links to pages that can be helpful in learning about Wikipedia policies and guidelines to help a person with writing or editing for Wikipedia. Donner60 (talk) 04:57, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

(I have no idea why Mike Morris has gotten involved in this matter.)
All 15 of the edits ever made from

are obvious silly vandalism.-71.174.181.39 (talk) 21:09, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

I came to the same conclusion about Mike Morris's message which is why I replied that I thought your message was not for him. I explained my message to him and left some helpful links on his page. I did not characterize his edit as vandalism, only edit tests, because the problems were more in the nature of technicalities. Perhaps he put his message in the section at the end but then again, it does not reference his edit. It's a puzzle. I agree that the edits from 173.48.60.207 were silly vandalism. However, I do not think an administrator would block a user who had not vandalized a page in recent weeks. Donner60 (talk) 02:24, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you!

The Wikipedia Library

Call for Volunteers

The Wikipedia Library is expanding, and we need your help! With only a couple of hours per week, you can make a big difference in helping editors get access to reliable sources and other resources. Sign up for one of the following roles:

  • Account coordinators help distribute research accounts to editors.
  • Partner coordinators seek donations from new partners.
  • Outreach coordinators reach out to the community through blog posts, social media, and newsletters or notifications.
  • Technical coordinators advise on building tools to support the library's work.
Sign up to help here :)

Delivered on behalf of The Wikipedia Library by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:16, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Desk Ball

I am furious that this was deleted without any sort of contact. This is a real item that is to be submitted for a patent and trademark, and the deletion without any contact, notice or warning is absurd.]

Additionally, at some point after submission, the page was edited and I have no idea what the edit was to agree or disagree with; I invented this and therefore, know what the topic is.

At the very least, I need to see the text for it to be able to defend or not what it may have said. In short, I need the text back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theopela (talk • contribs) 10:10, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

You did get notification, otherwise, you would not have put this message on my page.
I am not an administrator. I can only recommend pages for deletion. Evidently you did not keep a copy of what you wrote or cannot recreate it but I can not restore the page. Only an administrator can delete the page or restore the text (probably to a user sub-page of yours for further work). You say you don't know what was changed but I am not sure what that means since the page was deleted, not changed.
Your article had no references to outside sources. Therefore, it appeared totally made up, possibly bogus. This also does not comply with the need for Wikipedia:Verifiability.
Your note shows this is proposed, so it is nothing in existence and thus is not likely to be notable. See Wikipedia:Notability. Also, apparently not much progress has been made since the article "Desk Ball" was deleted in 2009.
Finally, see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, especially Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. Donner60 (talk) 02:02, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Cincinnati

Donner: I can't figure out how to add the topic about Jews in Cincinnati that you have responded to. I gave you on-line references as well as book references, and much of my knowledge comes from genealogy work in Cincinnati. My family arrived there in 1850 and has lived there ever since. My great-great grandparents are founders of the Jewish section of the city, still called Germany-on-the-Rhine. I am writing in a hurry (during lunch) so my thoughts may seem incoherent or rushed, but it seems that an article about Cincinnati lacking any information about the Jewish peoples there is clearly misguided. 199.30.71.30 (talk) 18:21, 17 June 2015 (UTC)Lori S. Hansen

In looking at the edit history, I see that I did not respond to or revert any of your edits. I only reverted one recent edit which changed "city" to "RAWR", whatever that is supposed to mean. I see that User:Barek has provided some guidance on his talk page. I think your problem simply occurred because of the formatting technicalities of the wiki, with which you are not yet familiar. I will place some helpful links to pages about Wikipedia editing on your talk page and add a little comment on correct formatting of links and references, which User:Barek has already touched upon. Donner60 (talk) 00:58, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Warned?

Why did you warn me just by telling you something? --2602:306:CFC5:6240:69C7:1CEE:CC30:CB04 (talk) 03:53, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Why are you continuing to make disruptive edits? If you genuinely do not intend to make such edits, please use edit summaries and try to learn a little more about Wikipedia. I will leave some links on your talk page. Donner60 (talk) 03:58, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
Later blocked 36 hours for several additional vandalisms. Donner60 (talk) 04:49, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Revert: Frank Ocean

I made that edit with full knowledge that it would be reverted. After all, "the marijuanas" isn't exactly the best way of referring to cannabis eitiher. I appreciate you letting me know though! 173.79.213.108 (talk) 23:46, 18 June 2015 (UTC)


Long Eaton

dont know what I am doing wrong? stop removing my content! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.144.19.146 (talk) 22:10, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I put some explanation, advice and links to helpful pages about Wikipedia and editing on your talk page. Donner60 (talk) 22:18, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
(78.144.19.146 (talk) 22:24, 24 June 2015 (UTC)) That time I did everything like you had said? I am so confused to why you feel the need to remove this? why do you need to remove something that does not have an opinion and has a link to where the information has been scoured? do you just not like marching bands? Do you actually know that there is an iconic one in Long Eaton?
Your confusion is in large part because I have not edited the Long Eaton article or left any messages on your talk page since I left the advice and links on your page. I have been offline so I did not remove your further edits to the article. Apparently the additional edits that you made did not appear to the administrator who reverted those later edits and imposed a temporary block on your editing to be within the editing guidelines. You should communicate with her, and if you think your edit is in compliance with the guidelines, appeal the block (which will be handled by another administrator in the ordinary course). I might add that personally have no problem with mention of the band in a neutral, factual manner. Perhaps some helpful guidance a little earlier might have helped although the administrator's note questions your later consideration of my note. However, since the later actions concerning the edits and the temporary block were not by me but by a longtime administrator, you need to take this up with the administrator involved or another administrator through an appeal. Even if you wait until the block expires, I would still advise you to be careful with the wording of the edit, and to ask the administrator about the edit or whether she has any further advice. I assume that if you point out the significance of the band - and provide some references from reliable, verifiable, neutral sources and not the bands web site or some other promotional link - you will be able to make your point. Donner60 (talk) 01:30, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you

. --141.196.215.105 (talk) 21:16, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Linda M. Springer

Linda Springer - how can I source my information when I am the source? I worked on the project I cited and was a team member and subject matter expert at OPM. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:589:4705:5A42:7C34:D055:259B:E79F (talk) 01:41, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Here are some excerpts from two Wikipedia pages that are pertinent to the type of edit you made to a biography of a living person, sources and the insufficiency of personal experience as a source. These should explain the matter to you but if they do not, I encourage you to also view some or all of the linked pages.
From Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons:
"Editors must take particular care when adding information about living persons to any Wikipedia page. Such material requires a high degree of sensitivity, and must adhere strictly to all applicable laws in the United States, to this policy, and to Wikipedia's three core content policies:
"We must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be explicitly attributed to a reliable, published source, which is usually done with an inline citation. Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced – whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable – should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion. (Jimmy Wales. "WikiEN-l Zero information is preferred to misleading or false information", May 16, 2006, and May 19, 2006; Jimmy Wales. Keynote speech, Wikimania, August 2006.) Users who persistently or egregiously violate this policy may be blocked from editing.
"Biographies of living persons ("BLPs") must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives; the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment. This policy applies to any living person mentioned in a BLP, whether or not that person is the subject of the article, and to material about living persons in other articles and on other pages, including talk pages. The burden of evidence rests with the editor who adds or restores material."
From Wikipedia:Citing sources:
"Wikipedia's Verifiability policy requires inline citations for any material challenged or likely to be challenged, and for all quotations, anywhere in article space."
The entire page Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons provides useful guidance. Here are a few more pertinent quotes from the page:
  • "When material is both verifiable and noteworthy, it will have appeared in more reliable sources."
  • "In the case of public figures, there will be a multitude of reliable published sources, and BLPs should simply document what these sources say. If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well documented, it belongs in the article – even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it. If you cannot find multiple reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident, leave it out."
  • "Wikipedia's content is determined by previously published information rather than by the personal beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it. The policy says that all material challenged or likely to be challenged, and all quotations, needs a reliable source; what counts as a reliable source is described here." Donner60 (talk) 02:14, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Forest View High School

hi you seem to undo my edit on the forest view high school. why?

You added the name of a person whose notability has not been shown by a link to a Wikipedia article about the person or to reliable, verifiable, neutral, third-party sources and deleted the name of a person who had such a link. See Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Notability Donner60 (talk) 02:48, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Tim Couch

Tim Couch is a bust that's a fact. So everybody needs to know that, he's a embarrassment to the NFL.Kidisrad (talk) 02:46, 26 June 2015 (UTC) Kidisrad

Wrong. See Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, which includes "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid" and ""Wikipedia's content is determined by previously published information rather than by the personal beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it. The policy says that all material challenged or likely to be challenged, and all quotations, needs a reliable source; what counts as a reliable source is described here." Donner60 (talk) 02:21, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks very much...

...for your kind words of support over at my RfA. I can only hope that I shall prove to be worthy of the honor. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 05:34, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome. I am sure you will do great. Good luck! Donner60 (talk) 01:20, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Arabian Peninsula

Vandal has been reported. Thank you for fighting vandalism on Wikipedia. Happy editing & Cheers! — JudeccaXIII (talk) 02:15, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

El Jaleo

Hello, Donner60. I am new to editing Wikipedia, but I was interesting in editing and adding information to the page "El Jaleo." You undo two of my recent edits as you thought I was testing. I was trying to make these edits for real, not just testing. If I did something incorrectly, please let me know as I am new to editing Wikipedia. I hope to continue adding information to the page with information from scholarly journals and authoritative resources.

I put this on your talk page: Thanks for your pointing out to me that your edits were in good faith. I mistakenly focused only on the word "deception." I think you may have meant to use a different word unless there is a technicality of which I am unaware. In any event, please review whether you really want to use that word. Unfortunately, the reversion carried with it the reversion of everything back to the last edit by someone else. (This is usually not a problem but proved to be one in this case.) The rest of your edits seem proper. So I am deleting the above message in the manner prescribed by the guidelines (strike through). I also have restored your edits (including the word "deception" so please look at that). Here are some links to pages that can be helpful guidelines for writing for Wikipedia: links and advice paragraph omitted here. Donner60 (talk) 02:58, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Intrepid203 (talk) 03:01, 3 July 2015 (UTC)Thank you for your guidance! Yes "deception" was a typo, I meant to type "depiction." I have fixed this typo to say "depiction." Thanks again!

Djwess2012

Djwess2012 (talk) 11:11AM, 3 July 2015 (UTC)Thank you for the message man. I was just concerned about Sisqo's article without his own image, just like other artists/singers; And I'm sorry for my unexpected removing of the content because I was just having rush edit on Sisqo's and I'll be having my class on the next 50 minutes. I just wanted to know how to attach an image like that of other Wikipedia articles of artists/singers (like Tyrese, R. Kelly, etc.). Thank you for the talk !

No problem with inserting an image. It must be a free or public domain image, not a copyrighted one. You also must get the image title precisely right or it won't show up. See Wikipedia:Images and pertinent pages linked from that page for advice. Donner60 (talk) 03:24, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Question

Question
please help me . i want to activate my account and i don't know what to do . 
Mohamed Eldakak (talk) 02:32, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
I have put some useful links and comments on your user talk page. Donner60 (talk) 02:39, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you!

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

  • Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
  • Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
  • Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
  • Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
  • Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
  • Research coordinators: run reference services



Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Vandal

Thank you for reverting and warning that vandal. He has been blocked.

You said "Also, I have seen less vandalism in the summer in past years." That must be because kids are away from school. I always see a spike in vandalism when school starts. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 15:09, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. Donner60 (talk) 21:24, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Yes, a lot of them are using a computer at school. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 01:48, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Khalil Mack

Read the edit I made on Khalil Mack. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.161.248.215 (talk) 01:09, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

You are right. Your change was a correction. Sorry for the mistake. I deleted the message on you talk page and added some links that you may find useful. Thanks for letting me know about this. Donner60 (talk) 01:15, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Ref

Cadillac Elmiraj is similar... --87.9.123.51 (talk) 01:35, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

I left this message on your talk page. Your edit seems to be in good faith and may well be correct. However, readers may view the edit with skepticism without a reference. Please read Wikipedia:Citing sources and provide a reference in the article. If you can find something on line, which I believe ought to be available if such comparisons are made, you can cite that. Thank you. Here are some other links to pages that may help you in editing or writing for Wikipedia (omitted here). Donner60 (talk) 01:44, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Jackson Wang

Why did you undo my edit? All those informations are real . Look at his profile — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.164.50.103 (talk) 02:35, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

I am deleting my two messages on your talk page because I think most of your edit is arguably correct and it was made in good faith. There are some misspellings which made them look doubtful. Also, I think it is proper to say he was born in British Hong Kong because China had not yet taken over when he was born. Since his parents were Chinese, I think your other edits can remain. I will make the changes since there has been an intervening edit and message. Donner60 (talk) 02:40, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi I wanted to come and let you know why I changed your edits so much. First off ancestry is supposed to be the persons ancestral home, they don't have to have ever lived there it's simply where their family comes from. So in this case that would be China not Chinese. Second the edit to the opening sentence was badly worded and not very grammatically correct. I looked on famous actresses and actors from hong kong's pages trying to find a better way to phrase it and what I found was ALL of them simply said "is a hong kong ----". So to avoid confusion you will need to add an additional sentence about the ancestry but that will be hard because of the reason I removed the third part of your edit. The third issue is the lines about Jackson parent's both being from the mainland. The only source on his parents that mentions where they are from is Jackson's mothers Wikipedia but as you know you can not use another Wikipedia page as a source. There are no sources that I've seen on Jackson's page that state where his father is from. Peachywink (talk) 07:05, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
I probably should have noted that I responded on User:Peachywink's talk page. Donner60 (talk) 02:48, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Indus Script

Hi Donner60. My edits were not test edits. The evolution of Brahmi Script from Indus Script is more accepted than evolution from Proto-Sinaitic, hence, Khmer alphabet must have Indus Script as the origin, in addition to the disputed other three script families. This gives out true information to Wikipedia readers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.188.112.77 (talk) 03:06, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

I will accept your explanation in good faith and have deleted my message on your talk page. However, it would be better if your edit were supported by a reference as the second message on your talk page indicates. Also, I considered it strange that question marks were inserted with the edit. If in fact you are sure of the facts, I do not understand why question marks were used. This also leads to the conclusion that the edit should be sourced. Donner60 (talk) 03:12, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
I reverted them as well. This is one of those Righting Great Wrongs issues that happens in the Indian/Pakistan side of Wikipedia. Ogress smash! 03:17, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know about the background of this. I left a further comment on your talk page. Donner60 (talk) 03:22, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Belva Ann Lockwood

Hi there! I would like you to know that my edit was completely unintentional and happened while my mind was traveling in the sixth dimension. I hope you understand and are lenient.

The editor currently known as 178.59.24.94 (talk) 07:39, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

I see you have made a number of edits corrected misspellings. I will accept your message that the edit referred to in the message I first left on your talk page was a mistake and have deleted that message through strike through. Keep up your productive editing! Donner60 (talk) 07:43, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Donner60/Archive_8&oldid=1077675401"