User talk:Moriori/Archive 3

BIUF ALC

Tongariro It's currently erupting, you can confirm it at USGS Global Volcanism Program. PLEASE change the article. Thanks!

Edit warring and abuse of administrative powers

Hello, Moriori. I came here to comment to you about your editing of Staines. I was going to point out that you have been edit warring. Before deciding whether to simply give you a warning or to block you, I looked further into the relevant history. I was, frankly, astonished to discover that you were the administrator who blocked another editor in the same edit war. (Evidently that is what BWilkins referred to, above.)

You have been involved in an edit war. I am sure you are aware that doing so is grounds for a block. You have blocked another editor for a week for participating in the same edit war. You have further compounded the problem by blocking when you are involved, which is a breach of policy. It seems to me, therefore, that a block of at least a week, if not longer, would be justified. However, I have blocked you for just 48 hours. I take it that it is unnecessary to inform you how to appeal a block if you wish to do so. JamesBWatson (talk) 18:09, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Also take a look at this. The comments on my talk page are almost bordering on personal attacks. I'm also surprised that I never expected this user to be an administrator. Something should be done about this. Till I Go Home (talk) 10:09, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

It's nice to see the article has stabilised. The name change paragraph is little different to what I was pushing for, and the pov synth I objected to has disappeared. There are still some problems with the article because of unreferenced information. Moriori (talk) 02:24, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

		The RickK Barnstar
		For finally seeing there are more ways than one to skin a cat. I have been here longer than 10 years now (first as IP), editing sporadically really because I actually have work to do. I have always winced every time the project lost some of its vitality when productive editors like RickK became disillusioned with bullshit and left. He's been followed by many, many others, Andy The Grump being the most recent. I’m not perfect, and I can take my lumps if deserved. I was blocked for breach of policy. It made me think of quitting, not because I don't think policy counts, but because I don't believe “policy” always comes before protecting Wikipedia. But I thought no way, quitting would be a copout bigtime. So I am staying, and I will edit according to policy, but I will apply policy as well. When I need another admin to intervene you can bet your bottom dollar the first name that comes to mind will be JamesBWatson.

Thankyou

Thank you for the personal attack Moriori. I feel that my name implies that I use a dictionary to define words I am unsure about. Like, for instance, the word Indigenous. This word means 'originally of the land'. American Indians are indigenous as are the Inuit of Canada. Maori, however, are from Hawaiki, as per their legends. You cannot be indigenous as well as from another country, otherwise EVERY person in New Zealand would be indigenous. Hence my edit of the Maori wiki page. If you wish to continue personally attacking me, that is fine, but I suggest you change your name from a race of people who no longer exist so that your attacks can be seen as valid. Dunedingenius (talk) 10:11, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

I see someone else has reverted you today, making it three different people reverting your six edits to three different articles. Read Indigenous peoples. And then read Moriori to see just how laughable is your assertion that Moriori are ".....a race of people who no longer exist". Moriori (talk) 21:46, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

I have noticed that another editor has subsequently warned you re vandalism. Moriori (talk) 21:56, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Randi GA nomination

I have started a GA review of an article to which you have recently contributed. Any help in addressing the concerns raised in the review are welcome.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 18:10, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

That RFA

Hi, good comment on that RFA, but I think you'll find that Arbcom only zaps the rogues, not those who go rouge:) ϢereSpielChequers 18:12, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh no, I thought that when I sprayed the keyboard with aftershave before hitting send, that people would know what I meant. Darn. Moriori (talk) 01:10, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Lamason

I have responded on my talk page. Cheers, Spy007au (talk) 04:13, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Maori

Why did you revert my adding of Maori as illogical. Regardless of whether the page is moved, the spelling with no macron should be in the lead as an alternate. OttomanJackson (talk) 16:15, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

starchild new evidence deleted

Hello, I am Torah. I added scientifically proven facts and nothing more, to the entry on the Starchild skull. Why did you delete these new findings? Do you know facts that contradict this DNA test? If not, I suggest you undo the edit until you do have some. Uktorah (talk) 22:32, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello Torah. You added the following claim --"New DNA testing in 2012 has new evidence to prove that the FOXP2 gene from the Starchild skull is significantly different to the human equivalent of the same gene".

The reference you linked to actually contradicted your claim:

"Most important, perhaps, to keep in mind is that our FOXP2 results are preliminary, as are the results from the earlier nuclear DNA fragments, and the mitochondrial DNA fragments. All three preliminary results are highly indicative of what the final result will be, but they cannot be considered absolute proof. They can, however, be considered proof that absolute proof will come when the Starchild’s entire genome can finally be recovered."

Moriori (talk) 22:47, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Can you please explain this edit?

[1] Till 08:12, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Haven't you have already closed the discussion? User talk:Moriori (talk)

Yes. Opened it now. Or just say it here. It is unclear as to what you meant by huh. Till 08:20, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia can be very amusing and this was a great example. I saw Ryulong's note to you saying he had re-opened the Lana Del Rey issue. Status chimed in, saying it was odd he hadn't been notified as a major player, and asked whether it was because he hadn't voted delete. You told Status he had struck out his comment (so it is discounted). Status replied with "you're clearly blind". I then asked Huh? and linked to the edit showing Status had indeed struck out his vote (for keep). Chuckle. User talk:Moriori (talk) 23:21, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Moving Burma to Myanmar - ongoing poll

This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. I know this happened just recently but no administrator would close these frequent rm's down, so here we go again. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 05:01, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Brooke Henderson

Who is 14 years old, won a Canadian professional event this last June.[2] It is even mentioned in the AP article on Ko's win today.[3] The info and article saying Ko is the youngest is out of date and your wrong edit has been undone....William 00:45, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

I have reverted and given new ref. WilliamJE, your AP link says "Lydia Ko won the Canadian Women's Open on Sunday to become the youngest winner in LPGA Tour history and only the fifth amateur champion."

You were wrong to revert[4] my edit removing 'and is the youngest person ever to win a professional golf tour event'. My edit summary[5] even read 'A 14-year-old won a Canadian pro event this summer'. The reference you were putting back in was dated January 2012. You should have seen it was out of date. I do many heavily detailed golf edits. Take this[6] for example.

BTW I spread out the three references you had at the end of the first paragraph. They refer to separate events or facts and only one says she is the youngest LPGA winner which is what is said in the paragraph's first sentence....William 01:42, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Ohmigawd. Look. When you reverted, you left the edit summary "May I introduce to you Brooke Henderson- http://www.gao.ca/index.php/ci_id/93193/la_id/1". You obviously didn't read that AP link you provided because the very first paragraph says the following, "Lydia Ko won the Canadian Women's Open on Sunday to become the youngest winner in LPGA Tour history and only the fifth amateur champion." That's what our article says. Are you arguing it shouldn't say that? User talk:Moriori (talk) 01:59, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is approved!

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

• The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code you were emailed. If you did not receive a code, email [email protected] your Wikipedia username.
• To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
• If you need assistance, email or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
• HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
• Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 15:31, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Norfolk Island 2c stamp.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Norfolk Island 2c stamp.png. I see the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there are no completed rationales for any of the uses so it immediately fails. Besides which most likely those uses do not comply with WP:NFCC and WP:NFC#Images. I may even nominate it for deletion anyway but need to review the uses carefully first. ww2censor (talk) 10:24, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

65.121.30.164

Please add a Talk page block to your block of 65.121.30.164 to prevent him from blanking and redirecting the page. Meters (talk) 21:58, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Done. Ta. User talk:Moriori (talk) 22:53, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Reversion - suggest my amendment should stand

Moriori

I consider your reversion of my removal of the claim that ‘In other countries where the Monarch of the Commonwealth realms is the head of state, the usually fulfils the same function.’ was done in good faith. However, for the following reasons I suggest my amendment should stand.

In the United Kingdom, the VC is usually presented to the recipient or to their next of kin by the British monarch at an investiture held at Buckingham Palace. The Monarch has presented 905 VC awards or more than two thirds of all awards. More than 70 percent of these awards have been presented at Buckingham Palace. However, Governor Generals have presented less than 20 per cent of awards to Australian, Canadian and New Zealand Forces and with the three countries having their own honours systems, Governor Generals of these countries will not present the Victoria Cross in the future. There was no similarly in the past and there will be no similarly in the future of the extent of presentation between the monarch and the monarch’s representatives so I deleted an incorrect inference.

The description to the revision stated that be the changes you have made ‘such info surely needs community input’. I would agree that including presentation information and analysis should require community input but in this case I was deleting a statement that was not correct in the past and would not occur in the future. I did include an example of just nine presentations, all posthumous, by the the Governor General of Canada which is found in a reference listed at the bottom of the article - Pillinger, Dennis; Staunton, Anthony (2000). Victoria Cross Presentations and Locations. Maidenhead, Berkshire: Woden. ISBN 0-646-39741-9. You can understand why I did not trumpet this reference.

In the first instance I am including this comment on your talk page in the hope we can come to a consensus. Anthony Staunton (talk) 16:26, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I will now move this to the Victoria Cross talk page. Anthony Staunton (talk) 00:42, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

NOTE: blocking IP addresses

Hello Moriori. According to Wikipedia's IP blocking policy, it states that IP addresses, including static ones, should almost never be indefinitely blocked.

Therefore, the IP address concerned can face blocks of up to 5 years, not indefinite, as indefinite blocks apply mostly to named accounts. When you applied for adminship, you actually promised that you understand Wikipedia policies, however, you don't understand some Wikipedia policies. Please stop making statements in block messages that the next time you vandalise Wikipedia after returning of your block may result in indefinite blocks in IP address blocks, or you may risk being blocked or you may get desysopped (which stands for removal of adminship status). Thank you. Hto9950 (talk) 19:46, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

I thought User:Acroterion's messages on your talk page would maybe influence you, but apparently not. And, it would have been helpful for you to link to the "block messages".

If you are going to quote policy, you should read all of it before you quote it. How could you possibly miss "almost never"?

Also, which policy says admins can't warn a vandal he/she may be indefinitely blocked if he/she continues to vandalise wiki?

Blocks prevent editors from disrupting the project, and if when they return from the block they persist with vandalism they usually get a longer holiday. For instance, a few weeks back you were blocked for one week for persistent vandalism, and I'd hazard a guess if you vandalise again you will be blocked for a longer period, even indefinitely if you transgress often enough.

I notice the IP you used to play wiki cop while you were blocked has been blocked too. Moriori (talk) 22:42, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

thanks! Hto9950 (talk) 20:31, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

extended: The indefinite blocks to IP addresses you added, such as [7], did you mean to create a user page for these IP addresses and place the template indefblockedip? Or you can place the template on the talk page where you added the block message. Hto9950 (talk | contribs) 15:23, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

thanks! Moriori (talk) 21:09, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Hastings Blazon

A blazon MUST be copied from somewhere else as there is only one way to write it. It is a very precise description of a coat of arms and although the Arms may be drawn in several ways there is only ONE way a blazon can be written.

Copyrighted material MUST NOT be copied and pasted into Wikipedia, whatever its provenance or uniqueness. Unless there is some sort of verifiable agreement with the owner of the copyrighted material, that it can be used on Wikipedia, verbatim, it cannot be cut and pasted. I see you have some experience in the coats of arms field. Have you tried to secure permission for Wikipedia to use this info? Also, any material in Wikipedia must be referenced, and this wasn't. And, User:Flags33, please sign your posts. Moriori (talk) 02:53, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Disability

Oops, my bad. Nice catch. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]} 01:10, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

ANI

If you feel a block is necessary to prevent further disruption, I wouldn't stand in your way. I am not convinced User:Till is really gone, or just trying to avoid being blocked. I was trying to avoid blocking and trying to get them to acknowledge there was some blame for everyone (although Till seems to have earned the lion's share) but as you pointed out, he was incapable of accepting any culpability. Looking at his antagonistic attitude in diffs, the claims in the original report do seem to be accurate to a point. I always dislike an editor leaving right before they might have been blocked, as it reeks of bad faith. I may myself if you chose not to block. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:48, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

• Looks like it is over without a block. As far as I'm concerned, he is on a very short piece of rope. Things like this [8] demonstrate the clue deficiency. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 02:23, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Cheers. Moriori (talk) 02:44, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

==MMA Event Notability==ti You are invited to join the discussion at WT:MMA#MMA_Event_Notability. Kevlar (talk) 18:58, 13 December 2012 (UTC)as

Please explain

I have fixed the issue by rewriting the paragraph is questions, so that it contains no copyrighted information Sk8terguy27 (talk) 01:04, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Please Listen

I'm sorry for accusing you of vandalism I just felt all the information I had was needed to create the article, but maybe it was a bloggy, pov, poorly written mishmash article but you could have rewritten the article to improve it without deleting sections I have worked hard one. I was trying to write the article like the Tim Scott article is all. Again I'm sorry accusing you of vandalism and it won't happen again. Sk8terguy27_Talk 22:59, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

AN

I have received your about the current discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding me. As for the Myrtle Beach Pelicans article I have edited it to removed the copyrighted text and there should be no problems with it now. As for the Sistersville, West Virginia article I wasn't sure how to rewrite the part I was copied and apparently was a problem with anyone else as the copied text is still there. I have been accused of copying pasting 1 other time (Proposed merger of T-Mobile USA and MetroPCS) which was later deleted, and I have gotten warned for disruptive editing (soapboxing, promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia), introducing inappropriate pages,adding unsourced content, vandalism, using inappropriate language on someones talkpage, and not posting with a neutral point of view. Sk8terguy27_Talk 22:32, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

ANI

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Sk8terguy27_Talk 00:15, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Message for Moriori

Dear User:Moriori, I am new on wikipedia and my first article "Mahipal Singh Deora" is chosen for speedy deletion. I have all information about this article but i lacks the information to create an article. my email is [email protected]. Can you prevent this article from deletion i will provide all information that you needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ImmortalSpartans (talk • contribs) 09:49, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

LeAnn Rimes

I've replied to your message on my talk page. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:15, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Thankyou

Thanks for removing that from my talk page. Till 01:47, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

HighBeam

Hi Moriori! Thanks for offering back your HighBeam account. I'd like to try and reclaim your account, but due to privacy issues concerning any identifying information it'd be best to try and do that via email. I'm sending you a message through the Wikipedia mail system. Alternately, if you prefer, you can contact me at wikiocaasiyahoo.com. Cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 02:34, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I updated the account with the details you provded in the e-mail, but it rejected the new e-mail addy because it says it is already in use. Got another one? Moriori (talk) 00:22, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

A team approach?

I see your comment regarding off-topic personal attacks on me by several editors in Talk:Wayne_LaPierre#Egregiously_Biased, thank you! In that context, please also have a look at User_talk:Scalhotrod#Personal_comments, User_talk:ROG5728#Rjensen_at_NRA_edit_warring and User_talk:Justanonymous#Rjensen_Contributions. What conclusions do you draw? --Zeamays (talk) 15:48, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

RfA: thank you for your support

Moriori, thank you for your late-breaking support and well-reasoned statement during my recent RfA. It was heartening to this candidate, especially in the teeth of a lot of sound and fury in the final hours. Warm regards, Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:56, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Hey

Thanks for your comment at my talk. The answer is yes, I will deal with those little things myself. Cheers! — ΛΧΣ²¹ 00:21, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Rewa

On Cyclone Rewa I put down that TCWC Brisbane upgraded to a Cat 3 STC "as it had developed an eye", however you reworked the sentence to say "and an eye became visible on satellite images" which bar the "and" im fine about. However I couldn't help but notice your edit summary which said "The change in category ranking was prompted by the increased intensity, not by the appearance of an eye" which while it is true that the increased intensity prompted the change in category ranking, it is also true to say that the eye prompted the upgrade since forecasters are known to use an eye as a sign that a system has developed into a hurricane or in this case a cat 3 STC. Regards.Jason Rees (talk) 13:53, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Jason, two points. (1) NASA says "A tropical storm becomes a hurricane if its winds reach 119 km/hr (74 mph)." There are different windspeeds for different categories, and different scales used but none of them say anything like a storm becomes a hurricane when an eye appears. In fact Hurricane Wilma, the most intense Atlantic hurricane of all time, was declared a hurricane before an eye was reported. (2) The source mentions two things -- the attainment of wind strength and appearance of an eye. It does not say it was classified as a hurricane because an eye appeared. That is what our article now infers, and it is misleading when it doesn't have to be. Moriori (talk) 20:50, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

I realise that none of the scales actually say like a storm becomes a hurricane when an eye appears, but forecasters have used it as a sign that hurricane strength has been reached in the past and Wilma did have an eye before it was upgraded to a hurricane but we also have to remember that Wilma had planes flying into it and this had its windspeeds directly measured where as Rewa didn't. Anyway to me the source saying "Hurricane strength was reached on the 31st when an eye appeared on satellite pictures" justifies the sentence "as an eye became visible on satellite imagery" especially since the upgrade was at 18z and it makes it flow nicely but i will ask other editors to give their opinions and defer to the consensus.Jason Rees (talk) 22:22, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Jason, it's not that big a deal. I used the word "and" quite deliberately, to indicate two things happened on that date. If you don't use the word "and" the article clearly infers upgrade to hurricane because of the eye. And that's absolutely not so. Cheers. Moriori (talk) 23:11, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

I see your point and am just overreacting over the inclusion of the word and which i just felt didnt flow in general with the sentence overall. Apologies.Jason Rees (talk) 23:24, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Argyria

Dr Alan BG Lansdown was a founder member of the British Society for Developmental Pathology. He has published more than 250 scientific papers and book chapters and lectured widely. Although presently retired, he holds the position of Honorary Senior Research Fellow and Senior Lecturer in Chemical Pathology, Clinical Chemistry, Investigative Sciences, Charing Cross Campus, Imperial College Faculty of Medicine, London. He is a toxicological consultant with special interests in the microbial efficacy and safety of silver and zinc, but writes on the toxicology of metals in the environment. See [9] and [10]. How much of this do you want to add? Wdford (talk) 11:28, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Enough to make the article encyclopedic and complete. We can't attribute quotes to someone without giving him initials/christian name and explaining who/what he is. Moriori (talk) 21:26, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

I appreciate your intervention, it can get rather lonely when Gaba is having a pop at you. Its been a rather effective tactic in deterring other editors from commenting. I really do appreciate your support in keeping the article neutral. Regards, Wee Curry Monster talk 09:18, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Sigh... more WP:PAs. No comment. Gaba ^(talk) 12:46, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi there

Hi Moriori, please stop by the talk page when you have some time and tell me what you think about my proposed text. I do not propose to "cherry pick" a line and leave other bits of information out, quite the contrary. Regards. Gaba ^(talk) 12:45, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Hey Gaba. I think your proposed text either goes too far or not far enough. Please see my explanation on the talk page. Cheers. Moriori (talk) 21:39, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Moriori. You have new messages at Langus-TxT's talk page.
Message added 06:30, 18 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Langus (t) 06:30, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Replied here. Moriori (talk) 06:46, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Moriori, can I ask you a quick question? Based on this comment of yours it would appear you believe I'm trying to slant the article. What gives you this impression? Just to make it clear: at no point did I say Argentina wasn't grandstanding (as your summary and comment would appear to imply) and I absolutely do not intent to slant the article to any side. You'll notice that since my first proposed version I've taken recommendations by you (adding the british point of view) and Slatersteven (mentioning "UK" instead of "Cameron") as soon as you made them adding them to the following proposed versions.
I've answered your comment here but I'd really like to know if you believe my proposed version is "slanted" in any way so I can fix it. Regards. Gaba ^(talk) 12:08, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't see your name mentioned. Moriori (talk) 21:18, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

OK, I thought you meant me since you replied right below my comment but if I'm mistaken then I apologize. I've made a small comment on your changes to the statements in the article, would you care to share your thoughts on it? Regards. Gaba ^(talk) 22:32, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Note on Wee Curry Monsters' behavoir

Hi Moriori, I'm pasting you a comment I made on Basalik's talk page asking him for help regarding Wee Curry Monster's recent behavior but since his answer was little more than "go away" I thought I'd ask you. Here it is:

I just want to let you know that the first thing Wee Curry Monster did just now upon returning from a brief period of no editing was to remove twice[11][12] content agreed in the talk page in a discussion that involved 7 editors. This is text book edit-warring. Since I am not allowed to leave him a message in his talk page asking him to stop this (he has told me not to write in his talk page) and I've already stated clearly in the talk page why his edit was reverted (and I'm really not interested in engaging in an edit war with him) what should I do? If I revert him again there's no doubt he'll just revert a third time and he is without a doubt fully aware that his behavior is edit-warring. He is also fully aware of WP:BRD and clearly knows he should try to get consensus in the talk page after having an edit reverted, as I did after he reverted me for the first time[13] more than a week ago. Regards. Gaba ^(talk) 02:54, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Moriori. You have new messages at Arre 9's talk page.
Message added 09:48, 24 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Arre 09:48, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

RE: James Cook

Hello Girly Brains, I'm Moriori. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to James Cook because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Moriori (talk) 21:25, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello Moriori,

No, that's absolutely fine (I should have reverted the three little changes myself otherwise!) Thanks for your message. I'm still very new to the website - as an 'editor' - so it's good to know I can contact you to explain. Now, how do I do that correctly?!

The reason for my little change was to prove a point to a friend. He is highly educated, well read and a government officer so should know better! The thing is he simply cannot get his head around the fact that a knowledge source that has potentially millions of eyes on it is vastly more reliable than one with but a handful, so belligerently insists that the only reliable sources of knowledge and information are printed books, and Wikipedia, precisely because it can be edited, is fundamentally suspect.

For a long while, therefore, I have challenged him to alter a page on Wikipedia by inserting erroneous information ... and see just how long it stays there!

He would not take up the challenge. So I did it for him on the James Cook page and your intervention - virtually within seconds - provided stunning support for my position! Superb! And thank you very much indeed for that! Most impressive!

As I say, I would have reverted the page within a few hours myself otherwise. And the 'change' was carefully thought out - James Cook was for a large part of his naval career and in particular during his (arguably most famous) 'transit of Venus' voyage in the Endeavour, indeed, a lieutenant.

Sorry for being a bit naughty and thanks again for your spectacular vindication of my claim that the more eyes there are on a knowledge source, the greater the chances of its being reliable.

Regards, Girly Brains (talk) 21:12, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

(I hope I do this reply correctly!)

You have disclosed here that you vandalised Wikipedia by deliberately inserting erroneous information, which compromised the integrity of the project. You can be blocked from editing for vandalism so it is in your own interests that you don't do it again. Moriori (talk) 23:23, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism is deliberately defacing or damaging a thing in order to permanently disfigure it.

As I said: the edit was temporary and not entirely erroneous.

My interests are entirely unconnected with the internet or any of its websites including Wikipedia. My interests are, among other things, to resist fascism and Stalinism.

Regards Girly Brains (talk) 01:18, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

You stick with your definition of vandalism if you like, but Wikipedia will stick with WP:VAN. If you again deliberately vandalise the project you will find that WP:VAN trumps your belief, and you will be blocked. Moriori (talk) 01:37, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

And then the World will end and we will all die. Wikipedia will stick with rationalism, not Anal retentiveness thank god.Girly Brains (talk) 01:46, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

WP:DRN

Why the hell did you revert my commentary on WP:DRN to a thread that I am a party to?—Ryulong (琉竜) 07:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

WHAT THE FUCK?'. I have not visited DRN talk, let alone made an edit. I have not made an edit today since the middle of the day (my time) several hours ago. WTF is going on? Where to now? Moriori (talk) 07:32, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't know. Maybe you misclicked something somewhere?—Ryulong (琉竜) 08:15, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Impossible. I have not visited WP:DRN at any time today, so I couldn't misclick on anything there. It's a real worry and if something similar happens again, I guess I will need to get the boffins in. Moriori (talk) 09:25, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Referencing

A reply in regards to your reverting edit. What if a reference does not clearly show any proof or evidence for text that is stated in an article? I have found this to be as such. Azirus (talk) 12:22, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

The reference did not specifically reference the information that was being claimed to have referenced. Azirus (talk) 10:01, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Could you please explain...

Could you please explain this reversion? Geo Swan (talk) 02:10, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

No I can't. I have no knowledge of it. I have not visited BLP noticeboard today, have never visited the Ford article or edited any article allied to him.

Please see the entry two above this one, headed "WP:DRN". Something unintentional is happening beyond my control, so I will have to have it investigated. I restored yopur information to the noticeboard. Moriori (talk) 04:01, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

You may have mis-clicked "rollback" on your watchlist, I have done it several times accidentally.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 20:53, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

(Moved from Village Pump technical) I have twice experienced something which may be related. Quite embarrassing. See User talk:Moriori#WP:DRN and User talk:Moriori#Could you please explain. I did not make either of the problematic reverts mentioned in those items. Are someone else's edits somehow being attributed to me?

Moriori, both those edits attributed to you look like accidental rollback clicks to me. I've experienced the same thing a few times, where while scrolling through my watchlist I might accidentally click the rollback button on a random edit. Usually I notice it, but there have been a few times when someone has had to pop round to my talk page to let me know, for one reason or another. The edit summaries match the default rollback edit summary, which for me is pretty conclusive evidence. Now, if you don't have either of those pages on your watchlist, then we have a whole new set of problems... Evanh2008 ^{(talk|contribs)} 20:54, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. Each time I visit my watchlist, I scroll down with the cursor on the left, deliberately, to prevent (I thought) accidentally clicking on rollback which is usually on the right, so it seems very unlikely I would accidentally do an involuntary revert. So much for the theory! This morning I see one entry in my watchlist like this:

"(diff | hist) . . Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates‎; 06:52 . . (+248)‎ . . ‎Patrick87 (talk | contribs | block)‎ (→‎Dealing with former needed parameters:

re) [rollback]"

so that stymies my theory about being on the right. However, I can't see why I would hit rollback instead of the diff on the line following. I guess I must have become blase, and will need to be more careful. Cheers. Moriori (talk) 21:34, 23 May 2013 (UTC) Apologies to Geo Swan and User:Ryulong. Moriori (talk) 22:37, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Hat-trick

Hi Moriori - please forgive my newbie keeness. Wondering if your keen eye could assist.

My source for the information was from the bowler himself (whom I work with) who achieved the rare triple hatrick when at school in 1977. Apart from, I'm told, a trophy which is still in his possession, there is nothing in the way of online evidence to support the fact. My queries are: what is the correct way to cite this? And, would a photograph of Mr Lucas' trophy assist clarification? Yours sincerely Simon Bedak, Sydney — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.200.236.178 (talk) 22:34, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Your newbie "keenness" (note spelling) is very welcome in Wikipedia, and hopefully you stay to become a great contributor.

Unfortunately, the information you added about your friend could not remain because content in Wikipedia needs to be referenced by reliable independent sourcing, which of course does not include an account of the incident from the person involved.

I have left a little message containing great hints about editing Wikipedia on your talk page for User:SBedak. Next time you edit Wikipedia, create the SBedack account. Cheers. Moriori (talk) 00:47, 30 May 2013 (UTC).

Thanks!

Thanks for reverting my edit in the homeopathy article - you're correct, I did the reverse of what I intended! Will take more care in future :) Cjwilky (talk) 00:09, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Changes to Timeline of Climbing Mount Everest

Hi, unfortunately you reversion of my edit is incorrect.

If you refer to the article Rongbuk Glacier, you will see that the East Rongbuk Glacier was indeed discovered by Wheeler on the 1921 expedition (that article references Into the Silence by Wade Davis, where pp. 282, 292 and 332-336 discuss how Mallory completely missed the East Rongbuk Glacier, whereas it was in fact Wheeler who discovered that the glacier led up to the north side of the mountain. I edited the Timeline article to reflect this, since it incorrectly states that Mallory discovered the route.

Now either you think the Rongbuk Glacer article and its sources (viz. Davies' book, which is based on the original 1921 expedition documentation and the private diaries and letters of the expedition participants) are incorrect, in which case you need to edit the Rongbuk Glacer article and provide references to other sources; or, you need to let the correction to the Timeline article stand - otherwise, there will be two WP articles contradicting each other (the Rongbuk Glacier article with the correct information that it was Wheeler who discovered the route, and the Timeline aricle which currently has the incorrect information that Mallory discovered it.

Changes to Timeline of Climbing Mount Everest

Hi, unfortunately you reversion of my edit is incorrect.

If you refer to the article Rongbuk Glacier, you will see that the East Rongbuk Glacier was indeed discovered by Wheeler on the 1921 expedition (that article references Into the Silence by Wade Davis, where pp. 282, 292 and 332-336 discuss how Mallory completely missed the East Rongbuk Glacier, whereas it was in fact Wheeler who discovered that the glacier led up to the north side of the mountain. I edited the Timeline article to reflect this, since it incorrectly states that Mallory discovered the route.

Now either you think the Rongbuk Glacer article and its sources (viz. Davies' book, which is based on the original 1921 expedition documentation and the private diaries and letters of the expedition participants) are incorrect, in which case you need to edit the Rongbuk Glacer article and provide references to other sources; or, you need to let the correction to the Timeline article stand - otherwise, there will be two WP articles contradicting each other (the Rongbuk Glacier article with the correct information that it was Wheeler who discovered the route, and the Timeline aricle which currently has the incorrect information that Mallory discovered it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.3.137.194 (talk) 10:16, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

The system works!

I saw your edit on this timeline article. The name you inserted didn't seem to fit with the flow of the text. I saw this was your first and only edit to Wiki and that you didn't leave a summary explaining it.

So I reverted you, BUT, I also left a courtesy message on your talk page saying your edit didn't appear constructive to me but "If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page.".

Voila! Here you are, with further information I have now read. Your point is taken, but I do have a quibble. You say that reading Rongbuk Glacier I will see the east glacier was "discovered by Wheeler". Not so. That article says the east glacier was "first explored" by Wheeler. No mention of "discovered". However if there is a reliable source which says "discovered", then please reinsert it into the article. Cheers. Moriori (talk) 23:19, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Forehead vandal

Hello, Moriori. Regardung this and this revert you made, you may be interested to know more about this forehead/gum matter. Thanks for being there to revert this vandal. Flyer22 (talk) 03:56, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

No prob. I see someone else has zapped that dreadful image. Great. Moriori (talk) 03:18, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Kerikeri

I've just made a change to the Kerikeri article to remove an apparent contradiction in the lead paragraph. On Checking the history to see whether the visual editor screwed anything up (it doesn't appear to have done), I noticed that you reverted an identical change in May.

The version prior to my edit read "Kerikeri, the largest town in the Northland Region of New Zealand, is ... 80 km north of Whangarei the largest city in Northland.". While I see now that it is contrasting town and city, I didn't see that at first and read both as the same, and it seems likely the anon making the edit you reverted did too.

If you don't like the version I have changed it to (replacing "Northlannd Region" with "Far North District") feel free to change it, but please don't simply revert as the previous version was misleading. Thryduulf (talk) 23:17, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I have rewritten it slightly. I have changed Northland Region to Northland because it was a redirect. As the stats at Northland clearly show, Kerikeri is indeed the largest town in the whole of Northland, not just the Far North District. I have made a couple of changes to Northland as well, hopefully to make it clearer. Cheers.

Yes, that wording is much clearer. Thryduulf (talk) 07:45, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kerikeri, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Northland (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Regarding removal of PJ Norman from page Staines-upon-Thames

Hi Moriori, One of our team recently added PJ Norman (an artist on our label) to the list of prominent people from Staines-upon-Thames.

We appreciate your time doing the editing, but we would like to question why you feel this addition was not constructive.

Norman's work with 100m Records is well documented and he is certainly proud to call Staines his home town.

Please can you offer more information on your decision and/or reinstate him to the list.

Best regards. 100mrecords (talk) 20:29, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

An article about PJ Norman was deleted "A7: No explanation of significance...." by User:Nick yesterday, and User:100mrecords was indef blocked today by User:Orangemike (spamusernameblock). Moriori (talk) 21:07, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Moriori. You have new messages at Talk:Invercargill Airport#Small is more.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Anderson I'm Willing To Help 06:23, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Disregard my TB, I found a source, Although i am unsure if it's reliable.--Anderson I'm Willing To Help 08:45, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

manning talk page

request input on talk page for article on Manning regard recent edits to reach rewrite of sentence all party satisfy with. Lakdfhia (talk) 03:31, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Ok, responding there, but need to add that all parties will only be satisfied if an article complies with wiki ideals, and that precludes including something that is not actually stated in the reference given. Moriori (talk) 04:09, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Whanganui Page

What is your opinion with the process of the spelling review? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.80.123.42 (talk) 07:11, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 19:56, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Sheldrake

It's very nice to see an uninvolved admin taking a hand in trying to clean this mess up. You should know that your redlink approach has been rejected on the talk page as a POVFORK. I've gone along with that view on the talk page, so far, but I've come to think your approach is right. Apparently, there WAS such an article before, at some point in the past, but it was "merge-and-deleted".

This approach would very nicely solve the problem which I've stated a number times before as "We must treat the Biographies of Living fringe theorists very differently than we treat their fringe theories. WP:FRINGE is not a license to to turn a WP:BLP into an WP:ATTACK piece."

I've been working on cleaning up the article today,, mostly without objection from anyone. But one of my edits has been absolutely murdered. Would you please review these two edits and see if you think there's any sense in trying to revive my version.

My edit. The edit summary is taken, verbatim, from the section I wikilink to. In my view, it fits the subsequent sentences like a glove.

Reverting my edit and going even further into "ATTACK" mode. With a resounding edit summary "Huzzah!", no less.

Thanks for joining us. I fear you'll be sorry before it's over. David in DC (talk) 04:33, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

You should also know that a second editor has WP:BOLDly scotched your redlink idea by recreating Morphic resonance as a redirect to Sheldrake. Lacking the admin tools to revert this edit, I cannot engage in WP:BRD. David in DC (talk) 11:46, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 14:49, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Titan T-51 - airshow1.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Titan T-51 - airshow1.jpg, which you've attributed to Ivan and Sandy Campbell of Campbell Aero Classics N.Z. Ltd. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [email protected], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [email protected].

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:29, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for your message. I agree with you and am learning how to be a good wikipedia editor. Kind regards. Kingslove2013 (talk) 00:15, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

BlueSalix

Hi, I noticed your response at BlueSalix's talkpage and that: "I have only scratched the surface of this ruckus and wish I had more time to look at it in its entirety. But I don't, so hopefully someone else will get to it.". Well the overall issue has now proceeded to AN and I gave as best as I can a chronology of the events between BlueSalix and me, with Murry1975 also involved.

I would post this at BlueSalix's page but seeing as they are stating I no longer post there per WP:P&P (which is what exactly?) then I am posting this here. Mabuska ^(talk) 14:24, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

February 2014

Your recent editing history at Penn & Teller: Bullshit! shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. --Guy Macon (talk) 21:53, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Get a grip. I protected the integrity of Wikipedia, by restoring the quoted statement of someone which had been altered by another user. When he changed it back, I reverted, once. I left the edit summary "We NEVER change quoted statements attributed to anyone. NEVER." and on his talk page I left the message "You changed a verbatim quote which is not acceptable. We never change the quoted words of others." If you believe one revert is edit warring, then please take me to ANI and we can put it to the test. Moriori (talk) 22:13, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

There is a difference between edit warring, which is covered by WP:TALKDONTREVERT and WP:BRD, and blockable edit warring, which is covered by WP:3RR.

As for your assertion that you are allowed to edit war if you are right, please read WP:NOT3RR and tell me which 3RR exemption you are claiming.

BTW, simple edit warring is best reported at WP:3RRNB. WP:ANI is for more complex cases. And of course edit warring that is not a blockable offense shouldn't be reported in either place. The proper response to edit warring that is not a blockable offense is to warn the user so that he knows not to continue. Which is exactly what I did. --Guy Macon (talk) 01:31, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Nowhere did I assert that I am allowed to edit war if I am right.

You took that inference, so let me explain that had I thought it pertinent, I would have quoted WP:IAR which states "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it."

That is Wikipedia policy.

Also, I guess I have to explain something again, but with more detail. I did a run of the mill edit to an article (I make quite a few of them) to make a quote faithful to the source. I did not know who had changed that quote or when it was changed. I was unaware of any hoo haa there. My watchlist revealed that an editor changed it back, so I reverted him and explained why. If you consider that an edit war, I think you would perhaps be more helpful to the project by trying to improve content instead of creating drama. Moriori (talk) 02:10, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Titan T-51 - airshow1.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Titan T-51 - airshow1.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 18:18, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:Broken.coated.Jack.Russell.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:22, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Can you add more eyes to this?

I have seen your edits on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentich_Disappearance and you have been balanced and fair. Today the page was done over big time, the standard hit.... I was hoping that you could come over and have a look in.

I have got it back to as close as I can with some more ref but I am affraid that the page is going to be dumbed down... There is a pattern to isolate the word UFO and then link it to fringe etc In the last section we are in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Valentich_disappearance&diff=598220278&oldid=598215098 the DOT stuff is fine but I am trying to get it Neutral within that section...

I see what is going on, more to do with creating the idea that its is fringe and then later taking it all out under that banner... if you can look at my change of text and if you see what I am trying to say/stop then I would appreciate your input Moriori.

Also in this section the word Ufologist seem redundent as there are so many of them within the section and the reference gives the reader some idea who cameup with the idea.

The page section that needs to calm down is 'Explanations' by UFOlogists.

Before the hit the page seemed well edited & very stable... I am sorry to say that this gameing will eventually kill wiki, but until then.

Best Regards Vufors (talk) 07:58, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

• Oh.. I just read your comments in the battle on the talk page under "Is it still unexplained? Not necessarily, so it is "purportedly unexplained"... unbelievable asinine logic some people have... its a fear of the unknowen... I don't think we can stop the attacks, they are out for payback and they will eventually try and get us into RRR. The new weapon this WP:REDFLAG look like another skeptic tool, how it got in I have no idea. No idea how I can help but let time kill the page :( Vufors (talk) 14:56, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Vufors, I try to be balanced and fair with all of my edits. I hesitate to rain on your parade, but anything described as a UFO is an unidentified flying object. UFO does not stand for alien spaceship. (If a UFO is identified as an alien spaceship/whatever, it is no longer a UFO because it has been identified. We await the day).

When the DOT officer wrote UFO on his report sheet it was his shorthand for "unidentified flying object". Other shorthand he used on that sheet was "SOC MELB", "Rgr a/c reported UFO", "SOC's EST Posit", "5-10 NM NW" etc.

I think the fourth paragraph in the article right now gives undue weight to the UFO term and could be interpreted as implying that aliens were at work here. I think it should be further down the page in the Ufologists section.

I hadn't seen that report sheet previously, and I note something interesting. DOT said that Valentich reported "rough running engine as an afterthought".

I noted too that the claim "and the newspaper police rounds reporters on duty that night at HQ gets the story and run with it next day" is not supported by the reference. Moriori (talk) 21:22, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

March 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Valerie Adams may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• female shotputter. On 27 September Adams underwent surgery on her left ankle and right knee,<ref>[http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11216603 Adams wins third world

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:44, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Staines-upon-Thames

I notice you removed the biographical detail for Terence Dackombe, but I wonder if I could ask you to comment, here or on the article's talk page, as to whether (as a redlink) he belongs in the list at all? I feel he does not; bit parts in movies do not notability make (and the question can be neatly settled by going via the AFC process.) Pinkbeast (talk) 12:43, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

irongron

You should check your facts before placing bans to protect anonymous, accountless users who conduct harrasment campaigns against dedicated wiki editors. An anonymous user took offence when I reverted his edit and called it "absurd" (as it was) he changed a 104 °F (40 °C) to -40 °F (-40 °C)!!!! That's absurd. I resent you protecting morons that don't check facts, references or edits They are now using the Lockheed A-12 page to get back at me out of spite. One of them placed a whole bunch of 'citation needed' tags in a Section as he read my talk page and knew that would "piss me off". You do not deserve the powers you have you intellectually crippled, mouth-breathing, half-wit. Stay away from my talk page and stop using your power to perpetuate the cyber-bullying campaign waged by 2 anonymous dickheads!!! Regards IRoNGRoN

If you can contest your block, do so per the advice on your talk page. Make sure you address the reason for your block, your insulting comments to another editor. Also, remind anyone reviewing your block that you subsequently described another editor as a "intellectually crippled, mouth-breathing, half-wit". That's sure to help your case.. Moriori (talk) 06:35, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Possible Sock of IronGron http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/220.236.1.216

Hello, I was reviewing the edits of IronGron to the A-12 article and discovered unquoted word for word copies of an article here: https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/kent-csi/vol15no1/html/v15i1a01p_0001.htm The author wrote a book on the A-12 and its program Oxcart and has provided a brief to the CIA Public Affairs website. I discovered it was word for word copied and removed it out of concerns over plagarism, fair use, and potential copyright violations. IronGron has since restored the removed copied material under the IP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/220.236.1.216 which he also flamed your talk page with. Thanks for your time. I feel much sympathy for those who volunteer to deal with this daily, I know I would likely not last long. 172.56.3.87 (talk) 07:44, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Irongron

WP:ANI#Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#IRoNGRoN_indef_block_-_more_eyes_requested

It's quite possible I'm not seeing the whole story here, but I see this rate of escalation to an indef as quite wasteful of someone who looked like a useful editor. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:16, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Another Likely Block Evasion of ☭ irongron ☭ (talk)

Hello again. I apologize for my IP changing randomly due to using a cellphone hotspot. I am in the process of trying to correct potential copyright violations by IronGron on articles IronGron previously edited as he has a demonstrated a knack for copy and pasting and I cannot reread all the sources to ensure no copyright violations have been made. I am slightly rewording and improving the article on the Gary Gabelich article to avoid any potential copyright violations. I am also improving the article layout, paragraph and sentence structure as they needed much improvement. While doing this Special:Contributions/58.108.147.54 appears changing the article layout and leaves this comment "Biographical articles always have birth and death and any ancestry and foreign language transliterations and translations etc at the start of the article, Moved the relevant paragaph back to the start of the article for consistency." The American driver is known for breaking the Land Speed Record and that I put in the lede and not his ancestry. The remarks seemed like alot of bull so I checked the contributions and found the only other edits were to the previously disputed A-12 talk page. I then checked the IP on Google and found it from Macquarie Park, Australia (Optusinternet) which is the same location and companies as IronGron's previous 2 attempts to avoid a block. Here is the IP info: http://db-ip.com/58.108.147.53 (current block avoiding), http://db-ip.com/220.236.1.216 (previously used to avoid block and currently blocked), and http://db-ip.com/220.236.52.29 (previously used and blocked). The connection between the A-12 article, the same location and company, and the tone of the editor all point to IronGron. I believe this is another attempt to avoid the block. I do not know what can be done because they likely turn of their modem for a some time and back on and get a new IP. I thought I would at least point out IronGron's latest attempt to avoid the ban for uncivil behavior. Thanks again for your time and efforts. 11:26, 20 April 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.56.11.206 (talk)