Site Map |
Edits |
Email | ||||
Welcome to my talk page! I am an administrator here on Wikipedia. That means I am here to help. It does not mean that I have any special status or something, it just means that I get to push a few extra buttons to help maintain this encyclopedia. If you need help with something, feel free to ask. Click to start a new topic.
|
First, please remember that I am not trying to attack you, demean you, or hurt you in any way. I am only trying to protect the integrity of this project. If I did something wrong, , but remember that I am human, and I do make mistakes. Please keep your comments civil. If you vandalize this page or swear at me, you will not only decrease the likelihood of a response, your edits could get you blocked. (see WP:NPA) When posting, do not assume I know which article you are talking about. If you leave a message saying "Why did you revert me?", I will not know what you mean. If you want a response consisting of something other than "What are you talking about", please include links and, if possible, diffs in your message. At the very least, mention the name of the article or user you are concerned with. If you are blocked from editing, you cannot post here, but your talk page is most likely open for you to edit. To request a review of your block, add Administrators: If you see me do something that you think is wrong, I will not consider it wheel-warring if you undo my actions. I would, however, appreciate it if you let me know what I did wrong, so that I can avoid doing it in the future. |
You can email me from this link but in the interests of Wiki-transparency, please message me on this page unless there are pressing reasons to do otherwise.
Comments which I find to be uncivil, full of vulgarities, flame baiting, or that are excessively rude may be deleted without response. If I choose not to answer, that's my right; don't keep putting it back. I'll just delete and get annoyed at you.
Burial places of founders of world religions
I noticed you reverted my changes regarding Ahmadiyya Movement considering that they call themselves Muslims. And presented an argument that Mormons consider themselves as Christians and hence you enlist them under the category of Christians. Now, I'm going to put Joseph Smith's burial location in that article as a sub-section of Christianity section. I think it was missing there, since the founder of a movement which is followed by approximately 7 million people, which is a part of Christianity because 'they call themselves as Christians'. I understand that Wikipedia is a neutral community and hence I believe that the burial location of Mormonism's founder is also supposed to be listed there, under the very same section of Christianity.
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Your email
The userspace page was conclusive by itself; thank you for mentioning the cord thing, but even without reading, I am 100% confident that you've done the right thing. Definitely block-then-SPI, so you made the right choice a couple of hours ago. Sorry for the delay, but I just got off work at 2200 UTC and didn't have Internet access for a good while. Nyttend (talk) 23:08, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
- PS, the wording on the original arbitration case is weird, so I've requested a modification. I mentioned you in the request, since you brought this up just now, but of course I don't think you did anything wrong; I just wanted you to chime in if you felt like it. Nyttend (talk) 23:16, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello Doug, im trying to figure out how to add captions but im a bit of a rasclat so these things can be hard for me to learn,can you give me a quick explanation on how i go about it--Sleeveman (talk) 02:50, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi Doug, it's me again (mkingsense). I read the pages you suggested, plus some others going into more detail on Lead Section, Writing Better Articles, etc. I was all ready to create a page about Women Thrive, and then realized through the prompt to make sure there isn't already an article on the topic one wishes to cover that there is an article on this topic already - under the org's old name. The article was last edited in 2005, and was nominated for deletion in 2007. The ultimate decision was to "keep" it - but it's way out of date. Now I just want to edit it, but I can' t figure out if I can / how to change the actual "first heading." Should I create the new one, point out that the old one is out of date and ask that it be re-considered for deletion? Or should I create the new one, and edit the old one saying the org name has been changed and link to the new one? OR just edit the old one, if I can change the "first heading" to the new name? Mkingsense (talk) 22:36, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
The Signpost: 11 December 2013
- Traffic report: Deaths of Mandela, Walker top the list
- In the media: Edward Snowden a "hero"; German Wikipedia court ruling
- News and notes: Wiki Loves Monuments—winners announced
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Wine
- Interview: Wikipedia's first Featured Article centurion
- Featured content: Viewer discretion advised
- Technology report: MediaWiki 1.22 released
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- EdwardsBot (talk) 04:58, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Y DNA articles
I can't say I am enthusiastic to work on these and I also have difficulty to find the time, but I did get involved on a couple lately:
- R-M17, the main descendant of the once very controversial R1a article, seems to have slowly accreted some new problems, and I did a reasonably strict edit to remove some of the poorly sourced and strange stuff.
- I noticed your intervention on F-M89, where there has been a flurry of edits, and I have rewound things a bit because I think some of the changes need more discussion.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 12:06, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Early American peoples with skull shapes similar to a current Asian culture as noted by the Smithsonian...
Surprised you would erase a side note to this excellent article on the Ainu. Tracing ancient cultural movement by skull shapes, genetics, teeth structure, language (i.e. IndoEuropean, etc), is broadening our understanding of man and his development. In no way have the anthropologists indicated that the Ainu peoples as they are currently structured or located, journeyed to North America...but their current skull shapes are similar...and may suggest earlier movement. The Smithsonian has tons on research and comment on this.
I understand that it is perhaps your personal wish (and I am puzzled at just who you are(?), to limit this discussion, but it in no way detracts, and opens yet another door to those who find Wikipedia a treasure trove of information and discovery. That is why I make generous donations to what I thought was an open source experience. Htstanley (talk) 17:11, 12 December 2013 (UTC) HTS
- Thanks for your reply, Htstanley, and I'm sorry if your first edit is not what you hoped it would be. Your edit had no sources that I could find that meet our criteria at WP:RS - we really need academidc reports, etc. [1] is an example of a source that looks good but fails at the first hurdle as the author, a science writer, not an academic specialist in the field, calls the Ainu " the first group to colonize the archipelago." That's clearly wrong. The text sourced to Cavalli-Sforza didn't say anything about the Ainu. And frankly I think that it is genetics that we need to look to - skull shape, teeth structure, etc can be interesting but not at all definitive. A number of factors can shape skulls. Do you know if there are any reports or planned reports for the Texas stuff, which might belong somewhere but I don't think in the Ainu article. As to who I am, I'm an editor with an interest in this field - a very experienced editor but that's not really relevant here. If you wish to discuss this more can I suggest Talk:Ainu to make it more public? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 17:34, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
BAR
Now that I've outed myself, I can say that you should scope the new cover of BAR. Now THAT's archaeology.Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 10 Tevet 5774 00:37, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
- It is indeed, haha. That's how you say Archaeogod, good sir. I had to self-out because of that awesome cover and also some academic work being done involving Tel Kabri. For the most part they do have something of a language requirement in the US because when you have archaeology departments outside of anthro departs they're typically rolled into (or heavily associated with) classics. This has actually been the topic of conversation on several pub trips (an essential element in archaeology). Thankfully it's never too late to dig though, so age isn't a factor in the actual process of digging.Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 11 Tevet 5774 03:00, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Copied stuff
Hi thanks for your tip, I actually didn't copy that material, I wrote them both, the second one I adapted the concepts to the context of the second article. Anyway, I don't understand what should I do if this is considered copying!! thanks Etimo (talk) 19:41, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Great, thanks Doug re. Women Thrive. I'll take it from here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkingsense (talk • contribs) 21:45, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Need a good laugh?
Check out the "discussion" on the Alhazen talk page. --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:43, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Your recent edits
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
- Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
- With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 19:14, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Question re: how to rewrite to you specifications.
Owen a ferguson (talk) 19:23, 14 December 2013 (UTC)hello. Just noticed you slated an article I wrote ( Bob's Watches )for fast deletion. I am wondering if there is any way to bring that article up to a standard that you would approve. Thanks for your assistance, -Owen--Owen a ferguson (talk) 19:23, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
- I don't see how, but it would have to meet WP:ORG. I noticed that some of the sources really discussed the owner, with Bob's Watches only being mentioned once. Dougweller (talk) 21:44, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Graphs and charts
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Graphs and charts. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Buddhakahika
I've replied to this request but I'm a bit flabbergasted that it was even written. Is this not obvious given the SPI archives? I know how the system works but do I really need to provide diffs in such a situation? They'd just be rehashing what has already been said. - Sitush (talk) 01:02, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
- (Talk page stalker) Yep, you have to provide diffs, if only to show to the admin's what you've been noticing and what your line of reasinong is. Maybe you should also add 136.159.160.67. By the way, following the links, I just noticed that Buddhakarika is the same as Rocky. Good to know. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 09:04, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Wrong revert
Dougweller, I have not done any vandalism What I have mentioned is correct
Rather the contents now are portraying the living person :Muhammad Ilyas Qadri" in a wrong spectrum The content say "Qadri served as the president of the Punjab branch of Jamiat-e-Ulema-e-Pakistan's (JUP) youth wing, Anjuman Tulaba-e-Islam (ATI)."
Rather this info is wrong, he was serving in a small organization called, Tanzim islah o aqaid" this can be verified through a recording of Muhamamd Ilyas Qadri himself on You Tube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oqy5vzRhtIo)
Also, the content that a man believed to be a member of Dawate Islami is wrong... My edits are 100% accurate, still if you feel that I have done vandalism, please let me know how?
- I didn't think you were vandalising, the edit summary mentions good faith. Most of it is sourcing problems. You need to read WP:VERIFY and WP:RS. The Hindu is a reliable source by our criteria, you need to find something similar independent of Qadri or Dawate Islami. We don't use photocopies of anything as a source unless it is linked to the original official source of the document. Influences/influenced need sources at least in the article. The same for converts, you need independent sources that are nothing to do with Qadri or Dawate Islami. As for adding Attar to his name, the title of the article and his name in the first line should be the same. His name was discussed a while ago at Talk:Muhammad Ilyas Qadri where I suggest you now post. Dougweller (talk) 09:38, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Jewish economists
Hi Doug, thanks for alerting me to the fact that there had been a discussion which unfortunately led to the extirpation of the category "Jewish economists". It seems to me short-sighted and perhaps even prejudicial when there is a category "Russian economists". I had to remove Rubin from this category because as a Latvian born Jew active in the Bund, it is hard to imagine why anyone would think of him in such terms. No doubt those who were involved in the discussion did not consider the way in which Jews constituted a national category in the Soviet Union, and this perhaps explains why Wikipedia:Overcategorization#Non-notable_intersections_by_ethnicity.2C_religion.2C_or_sexual_preference was invoked. I think this is an unfortunate side effect of the cultural bias of Wikipedia, which perhaps reflects the way the Bund was more or less wiped out by Nazism, Stalinism and Zionism.Leutha (talk) 12:25, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks!
For taking the trouble to deal with rktect sock puppies! Egil (talk) 19:47, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Direct quotation
Ok, I inserted Orel's direct quotation (what the author says word for word). Hope it's ok now!! Etimo (talk) 11:01, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
- That's brilliant! I hope you understand why I removed it - wording like that is so strong it almost always needs attribution and a quote. Dougweller (talk) 11:07, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Pleasure, although I think rephrasing is important to fit the quotes in the article's proper context. There are also a few irregularities in the article I'd like to fix, e.g. the part when it says 'the terminology for fish and agricultural activities is borrowed'. This part is misleading, as it represents a partial truth (and in fact is unquoted) the way it is written. It should be specified what has been borrowed and what has been not in order to explain better the historical background (I was trying to do it but the editing has been repeatedly deleted). How can I do this in the proper way (or in the appropriate phrasing)? Thanks Etimo (talk) 11:47, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
The list
You know, when you said "as a recreation", for a moment I thought you meant "for fun". :-) Deb (talk) 13:59, 16 December 2013 (UTC)