User talk:SkyWarrior/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
THIS IS A TALK PAGE ARCHIVE
Please do NOT edit this page. If you leave a message here, I will not respond to it.

Click here to return to my active talk page


$uicideboy$ deletion review

Pardon me if I'm doing this wrong as this is my first wiki edit/post. I read over the deletion review page. The instructions say to first try to work out something out with the moderator who deleted the article, so this is my attempt.

According to item #3 under the Deletion Review Purpose section (new info has come to light), I believe the deletion of the $uicideboy$ article should be reviewed.

It's been 9 months since the article was deleted -- perhaps it was debatable if they were notable 9 months ago, but now I don't think there's much of a debate.

~450k followers on SoundCloud. ~300+ million streams on SoundCloud. ~100 million views on YouTube. ~200k followers (each) on Instagram. ~100k followers (each) on Twitter.

https://www.theodysseyonline.com/underground-rise-uicideboy https://www.marijuana.com/news/2017/04/420-with-the-uicideboy/ http://www.hotnewhiphop.com/tags/suicideboys/ http://www.dbknews.com/2016/12/12/suicideboys-rap-music/ http://www.xxlmag.com/news/2017/04/suicideboys-interview-the-break/ http://www.themaskedgorilla.com/unmasked-suicideboys-interview/ https://massappeal.com/suicideboys-open-space/ https://allhiphop.com/2016/12/20/uicide-boy-drop-new-project-no-fear/ http://www.runpoint.org/interview-don-krez-talks-buffet-boys-uicideboy-florida-scene-growth-underground/ http://www.allmusic.com/artist/uicideboy-mn0003530108/biography https://hypebeast.com/2016/7/suicideboys-getter-radical-suicide-ep-stream-download http://www.bombayknox.com/blog/2015/6/23/uicideboy-high-tide-in-the-snakes-nest https://thinkunconfined.com/2016/02/29/review-south-side-suicide-tour/ http://www.albumoftheyear.org/album/72961-germ-suicideboys-dirtiernastieruicide.php https://ktswblog.net/2016/10/13/uicide-boy-eternal-grey/ https://rateyourmusic.com/release/album/_uicideboy/eternal-grey/ http://www.oneavenue.tv/2016/09/16/uicideboy-eternal-grey-review http://www.sputnikmusic.com/review/71708/%24uicideboy%24-Eternal-Grey/

Is that enough "independent sources" or should I keep thumbing through the 1.4 million results for $uicideboy$ on google? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.10.73.156 (talk) 10:09, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For starters, I'm not the user who deleted the article, just closed the deletion discussion (I think, it's been a while and I don't have time to actually look).
Second, you have a lot of sources, but I'm going to have to check them to see if they really are independent and comply with WP:RS; I don't have time to do them now, but I'll give an update when I do get around to checking (unless someone else is willing to do so for me). SkyWarrior 11:37, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Here's my rundown of the sources you provided. Short answer is, in my opinion, this may be enough independent sources for an article (keyword: "may"), but some sources may not be usable.
A rundown of the sources provided
So. I would say you might have enough, but create a draft article (and create an account) first so it can be looked over. SkyWarrior 19:21, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Drake and Josh episodes

Thanks for commenting on the articles and for clarifying the titling convention. I got confused because of the "Really Big Shrimp" article had the incorrect one (already redirected). I really only sought to create the articles because I noticed that the "Really Big Shrimp" entry had its own article and thought why not do the other episodes? I was just starting them off and then others could jump in and move the project along. I wanted to also add the guest stars, repeat appearances of people, and other pertinent info on episodes in a place that wouldn't distract from the main episode list. Plus that kind of info was taken off the list some time ago. Just want to give people the ability to look up more info on a specific episode if they're curious. Thanks again for your help. Jay (talk) 00:45, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am curious if people can add quotes to episode articles or does that violate copyright? Jay (talk) 00:49, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jaywubba1887, quotes probably do not violate copyright as long as its like a sentence or two, and the whole article is not filled with them. It may, however, violate MOS:FICT, so I wouldn't add them personally.
Furthermore, I question the notability of the episode articles as a whole. WP:FICT states that episodes are deemed notable as long as reliable, secondary sources are provided about the episodes. Now, you haven't provided sources for any of the articles created, which is a must (at least one reliable source is required). I searched for sources myself, and I found very little that establishes notability. I could be mistaken, however.
I suggest reading both pages I linked, but as of now I doubt the notability of the episode articles, and unless proven otherwise, I do plan on nominating the articles for deletion within... a week or so?, providing no one does it before me. Just giving you a heads up. SkyWarrior 02:32, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know about the articles. I now understand why the articles might be deleted. I was just wondering if the "Really Big Shrimp" episode would be left in because that would kinda look weird to have 50-some entries with no linked articles and 1 entry with a linked article. I can ask people on the talk page of the Drake and Josh episode list if they can find better sources than we could. Thanks for your help. Jay (talk) 02:37, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There is no need to nominate the articles for deletion. Just redirecting them to the episode list with an appropriate note in the edit summary is all that is needed. --AussieLegend (✉) 03:35, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding revert of jahiliyyah

Hello. I am writing regarding the reversion of my edit on jahiliyyah article. Kindly specify the precise reasons as to why it was reverted, and I will undo it.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.196.180.163 (talk • contribs) 00:36 6 May 2017 (UTC)

I have responded on your talk. Long story short: sorry. SkyWarrior 00:37, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thank you, sir. No problem. Have a nice day.

Hi

You left a message on my page telling my that you edited my addition on Musical.ly and you told me to message you back if I had any thoughts. When I checked I thought there would be a positive addition just to realize you deleted what I added. I am going to re-write it and if you think there is positive criticism you could contribute that'd be great.

Thanks,

brook._.4657 Brook. .4657 (talk) 19:05, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I'll see what you write, and then I'll respond on your talk. SkyWarrior 19:19, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Legends of the Hidden Temple episodes

Well, I was helping AldezD remove the section, who says in the talk section for it to not be in the article. What should we really do? --96.86.230.233 (talk) 20:01, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To be quite honest, I really do not know. It would be best to, at the very least, put a message on the talk page about this and see what kind of response it gets. SkyWarrior 20:37, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciation for talk page mess help

Some baklava for you! Some baklava for you! Some baklava for you! Some baklava for you! Some baklava for you! —A L T E R C A R I  ✍ 18:50, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad

It looks like you've made a mistaken revert on Muhammad. You've restored a very bold rewrite of the first paragraph in the lead, whose microscopic changes are being discussed in an RFC. Eperoton (talk) 04:52, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It was not mistaken (at least not at the time), though I didn't realize that was not the original version.
In any case, I just went elsewhere after my reversion was reverted, and I'm not interested in any debate over this. SkyWarrior 10:42, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled XIV

Hi.but I don't understand why are you removed my edit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SuNaW (talk • contribs) 19:35, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there SuNaW. It appears that I have mistaken your edit as adding a promotional link, when in reality it is actually the source. I am willing to suspect that the source provided is reliable, so therefore I will revert my edit. Sorry, I should really pay more attention when using Huggle. ;) SkyWarrior 19:41, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by SuNaW (talk • contribs) 19:55, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you are an admin, please delete my account

The user @MonsterHunter32: is harassing me. I am just crying right now and I don't want to have anything to do with you anymore. I added the template "civillian attack" to an article. He corrected my mistake, which was nice. But then he got full bully. He claimed I was edit warring (because of my mistake at adding the wrong template ONCE). And then he started bullying me at my talk page and on the talk page of the article. I am just crying now. This environment is toxic. Since there is no place to go against bullies, I decided to leave this place. I am devastated. If you have mercy, please just delete my account. I don't know how to do it. Thank you.--Rævhuld (talk) 00:58, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) @Rævhuld: User accounts are never deleted, you can however just stop using it. - Mlpearc (open channel) 01:03, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What Mlpearc said, though if you really are serious about this than there is the option of a courtesy vanish. Note that I cannot perform this, as I am not an admin, and it is optional and can be declined.
But truthfully, don't quit over this one incident. Just take a little break, step away from the keyboard for like a day or two, then, if you want, start editing again. To avoid this happening again, I would also suggest you step away from editing anything related to the Times Square car crash, just as a precaution. SkyWarrior 01:05, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I am glad to see that there is at least some nice people here. But I have decided not to come back. I got really sad and I figured out that it is not worth it. But thank you for your comforting words <3 ... --Rævhuld (talk) 01:28, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

These are no mistakes: Edits weren't mostly similiar, but all around the same theme of the attack being "deliberate". Here you represent it as civilian attack, here that the car was a weapon and here as terrorism. All of this is contrary to or not confirmed by sources. Oh and you restored the weapon box, revert. This is disruptive behavior in complete as you keep adding the same theme again basically even though not said so by sources. Not counting your actions at the talk page. Edit-warring? I can safely say by including your actions at the talk oage of article, and your comments that you are beyond that. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 01:13, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You won. After this comment I am logged out and will not come back. Hope that at least you enjoyed it.--Rævhuld (talk) 01:28, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

hihi~

You left me a message about undoing edits I made but I am absolutely certain that I have made no mistakes so if you could just leave my additions alone that'd be grand. I can say in complete confidence I am an expert on the matter and I know more than you. Seeya later. Larouby (talk) 00:34, 20 May 2017 (UTC) I don't understand how my insightful facts and knowledge is disruptive or vandalisation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Larouby (talk • contribs) 00:22, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Read what I have left you on your talk page. SkyWarrior 00:36, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

will it help i put in the citation needed bit on the end? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Larouby (talk • contribs) 00:38, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Larouby: yes, it definitely would. I can't guarantee it will stay on the page, though, since the WP:NPOV issue is still an issue. SkyWarrior 00:41, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The ongoing attempted [coup] of the democratically elected President Donald Trump

this is not meant to be negative or opinionated - this is the current situation. The media is now actually reporting on this. Have you been watching TV or listening to radio??

The edit in question
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
A potential un-lawful, hostile and un-American attempt to oust President Donald Trump is ongoing and supported by the liberal media, the Left Wing Democrats and the "Deep State" within the United States of America. Multiple news media 'anonymous sources' have continuously leaked private conversations and meeting notes, as reported by such news outlets as the [New York Times] and [Washington Times], suggests that there is a sustained effort to remove him from office. Innuendo and a total lack of evidence is the tack of choice to try to establish a claim of Trump's 2016 presidential campaign collusion with Russians, although the Espionage Act specifically bans transmitting or communicating information "relating to the national defense". [1]
  1. ^ Jake Novak | CNBC May 16, 2017, This latest Trump-Russia leak smells like a coup attempt

(72.228.136.47 (talk) 00:36, 20 May 2017 (UTC))[reply]

Of course I have. Why your edits were reverted is because they weren't in a neutral point of view, which is a must. SkyWarrior 00:40, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

umm, okay. BUT I was merely paraphrasing the sited news article and the nightly news reports. Seems factual to me... Can you help clean it up??? (72.228.136.47 (talk) 00:45, 20 May 2017 (UTC))[reply]

Yes, I realize that. Still doesn't make your edit a neutral point of view. Read WP:NPOV for more info. SkyWarrior 00:47, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

can you help clean it up? a neutral point of view (72.228.136.47 (talk) 00:49, 20 May 2017 (UTC))[reply]

I would defer to your knowledge of Wikipedia standards. But, I really think this attempted coup attempt is appropriate to report on this page. Can you assist 72.228.136.47 (talk) 00:57, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can see what I can do. Just give me some time. SkyWarrior 01:12, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, here's what I've decided. Long story short, I will not add the info to the page. The reason is that the change would be controversial if it were to be added, plus it might violate the 1RR restriction set on the page.

We do have this article, though: Efforts to impeach Donald Trump. If you wish to include info about any impeachment efforts, I would suggest (in a neutral tone) you start a discussion on the talk page. SkyWarrior 01:28, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lindsey Way's Page

okay so i have edited Lindsey Ways' Page twice now so it actually has information on it instead of redirecting it to Mindless Self Indulgence. It says that you keep changing it back to the redirect to MSI and i have undone it twice now, can you like fix this so it doesn't redirect and actually has information on it. thanks Mychemforeves (talk) 01:46, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mychemforeves. Per WP:NMUSIC, "members of notable bands are redirected to the band's article, not given individual articles, unless they have demonstrated individual notability for activity independent of the band, such as solo releases". A discussion held earlier this year determined that Way did not meet the criteria set at WP:NMUSIC; your efforts have failed to do so as well, so by default the redirect stays. If you can convince me that Way meets WP:NMUSIC with reliable sources, then we can work something out.
Until then, Lindsey Way remains a redirect. Thank you. SkyWarrior 02:09, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Trump coup attempt

I am NOT trying to violate any wiki-protocol. I did edit my coverage of facts to merely report 'the facts'. why so negative? 72.228.136.47 (talk) 02:57, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

impeachment efforts

So I did not see your previous response. So I apologize - You did respond to me and I missed this... Yes, I will work on a new sub-title "Impeachment Efforts" and work towards a 'non-political' report of situation. Okay??? 72.228.136.47 (talk) 03:09, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

Thanks for helping me to get started on wikipedia. I actually used to be a vandal on here until I realized how pointless is. Just a quick question, how do I see a list of user's previous edits, so I can determine if they're regularly vandalizing or not? Thanks.

Ottgtbag (talk) 02:31, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ottgtbag. It might not be the best way, but if you want to look at a user's history, you have two options:
  • If it's someone you have reverted, simply go to your contributions (there should be a link at the top right of the screen, next to the log out button; click here to access your contributions) and click on a user's name in the edit summary.
  • If you're in Recent Changes, just simply click on the contributions link for the user. It should appear next to their name and talk page link.
If you have any more questions, feel free to let me know. SkyWarrior 02:36, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Also, don't warn users for edits they have already been warned for, or if they have already reached a level 4 warning. SkyWarrior 02:37, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alieu meaning

My first time using the edit option - the correction made is completely accurate; please consider it as a valid dictionary entry. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.66.134.253 (talk) 03:35, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Celebration Church Wikipedia edits

Hello. I recently tried to edit many of the dead reference links on the Celebration Church Wikipedia page. For whatever reason, you undid some of them, and replaced the new, active links in the references I had added, with the old dead links that do not go to active web pages for their reference.

You also re-applied a linj to something called the "Dream Center" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dream_Center which does not apply to Celebration Church, as Celebration Church is not a Pentecostal church, nor is it affiliated in any way yo Celebration Church, thus the link to and the connection to Dream Center needed to be removed.

Under "Ministries":

You undid my correction... In this sentence "Ministries are available for kids, youth (FUSE), " Celebration no longer calls their kids & youth group "FUSE" it is now called "RIOT." I did have the correct web reference to RIOT but you undid it and it is now reading "incorrectly "FUSE" again.

The correct edit for this would be as follows:

Change this: Ministries are available for kids, youth (FUSE)

To this: Ministries are available for kids, youth (RIOT)

Also in the same sentence, I had corrected this dead link: singles, marriage/family life, men and women. leaders.

Needs to be corrected like this:

Scrap the word "leaders that is in itself a sentence, and remove the dead link, as follows:

singles, marriage/family life, men and women.

Under "References":

The following references that I removed yet you replaced are as follows...

[4] (dead link) http://www.celebration.org/ministries/ [5] (dead link) http://outreach.celebration.org/ [6] (dead link) http://www.celebration.org/about_us/

The above links can be replaced correctly with new, live links as follows:

[4] http://www.celebrationjax.org/groups/ [5] http://www.celebrationjax.org/dreamteam/ [6] http://www.celebrationjax.org/beliefs/

The following reference links I removed because they are dead and no longer exist anywhere on the web (I did a Google search trying to find replacements)

[9] (dead link) (no new link to this reference is available) http://www.news4jax.com/news/29006723/detail.html [10] (dead link) (no new link to this reference is available) http://www.celebration.org/news/details/your_new_home_awaits/

Under "External Links"

Since the senior Pastor's web Blog had been added ("Stovall's Blog"), I researched and had included his wife's Blog (they work as a team to serve this church, at Celebration Church the Pastor's wife is also a Pastor herself), and I had left a link to her Blog for FYI future information for others interested in researching this church. The following edit needs to be replaced on the Celebration Church Wiki to reflect my research and the Pastor's wife's Blog that is as pertinent to be included for this Wiki as is the senior Pastor's Blog...

For the future... FWIW, I am an active member at this church and I can verify any and all claims to changes in the references, etc. that I have made. For information purposes I would like to be able to add even more information to this Wikipedia page in the future. This Jacksonville, Florida-based church has a weekly attendance of about 12,000 people and is rated as one of the top 100 largest churches in the USA. I am happy to see it on Wikipedia, and I am also happy to do my best to get current and correct reference links for this Wikipedia entry.

I can fully appreciate your position as a watchdog for the Wikipedia community.

This was my first go at editing Wikipedia, I want to be able to do it "your way" so that posts I may correct either now or in the future will have even better credibility. I hope m,y work and time spent has added to the Wikipedia community.

At some other day, I would also like to add to and edit another Wikipedia entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Greene

Ted Greene was a jazz guitar instructor who passed away in 2005. I was one of his guitar students for 2 years and I have some real-world information about Ted, including correct references, etc that I can add to that Wikipedia page as well.

I am also a published, scholarly author and I will do my best to use my experience in doing credible citations throughout any future edits I may do for Wikipedia

Lonewolf_Florida a.k.a. Jim


Lonewolf florida (talk) 23:35, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled XV

um, i gotta message saying i did something wrong...am I the right person. I can't remember doing this at all 24.212.182.166 (talk) 02:08, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The edits in question are linked to the IP, so your IP definitely made those edits. With that said, IPs can change, so it is quite possible that someone else, who is not you, had the IP address before you and made those edits. SkyWarrior 17:00, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

UGCY page

Hi

I wondered if you could help me properly create and write the content for the UGCY page - I understand why the speedy deletion tag has been added but I really want to be able to do this properly. Sorry if I am asking the wrong person.

many thanks

Lydia Sociallymusical (talk) 21:54, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For starters Sociallymusical, the page is a blatant copyright infringement; except for some changes to make it grammatically correct, it's literally a word-for-word copy of [1]. This is not allowed, and that is why it's up for speedy deletion.
If it was not a copyvio, then you would need to prove its notability with reliable sources independent of UGCY. See WP:N and WP:GNG for more details. SkyWarrior 21:58, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jimbo

Hey I didn't see your first revert when I made the second edit-- I wasn't intentionally trying to defy you. I just saw his page for the first time and he said you could edit it so I did lol. No hard feelings I hope, won't happen again. El cid, el campeador (talk) 22:43, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, though it is generally a good idea to get permission to make edits like that regardless. Fixing obvious graphical errors and the like shouldn't be a problem, but making those kinds of edits is generally a no-no without permission (see WP:USERPAGE, unless I'm in the wrong here...). SkyWarrior 22:48, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Daryl Morey edit.

Thank you for offering a place to communicate to you! So the Daryl Morey page has a sentence that, basically, spurred my entire response: "This has called into question the efficacy of having a general manager who keenly focuses on advanced analytics." I didn't see a citation for this sentence. It is more an assertion/opinion that is often asserted during television broadcasts, by sports reporters and by fans on social media or in face to face conversation. It's the same kind of opinion made about Moneyball in baseball--that it won't lead to a championship.

My problem with the sentence is that it is a one-sided assertion that makes no effort to acknowledge the other side, which I made--perhaps mistakenly so--at great length. Because that sentence has no citation either, perhaps it too should be removed! But I don't think it has to be, especially if my thoughts can follow it. However, perhaps what I wrote is too long or doesn't fit the kind of work that Wikipedia does. So, is there anything I can so to edit or transform my thoughts so that they fall into the same category as the aforementioned citation-less sentence?

Thanks for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kilgoretrout321 (talk • contribs) 00:30, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Kilgoretrout321. Your best bet is to initiate a discussion on the talk page explaining what you want changed. You should try to back up your claims with reliable sources (which the lack of caused your edit to be reverted in the first place). I would also advise you to read WP:NPOV and WP:BLP. SkyWarrior 00:45, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Yeah I don't really know anything about Wikipedia but it's clear to me that you have some pretty cool processes to ensure quality, especially when people like you and I put in the effort. I'm assuming that a 'talk page' is something every article has, and allows anyone with interest to reason towards a solution in the event that there are disagreements over anything in the article? Or, I guess, I could find this out myself. It's just that there are only so many hours in the day! Sounds like a personal problem, I know. Okay, thx for the help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kilgoretrout321 (talk • contribs) 01:06, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
For undoing all those PKK edits/moves/renames. That was a lot of work. Cheers, Yintan  21:52, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've done worse. Let me know if they do it again. Thanks! SkyWarrior 21:56, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Can you help me HASNER-JONES (talk) 04:27, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

HASNER-JONES, I would love to help you, but I'm about to log off now. In other words, sorry, but not right now. SkyWarrior 04:30, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
When? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HASNER-JONES (talk • contribs) 04:34, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
At the earliest, around 10am EST. SkyWarrior 04:36, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
ok babe — Preceding unsigned comment added by HASNER-JONES (talk • contribs) 04:42, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Milk Boston Band

"Do not create: pages about yourself, your company, your band, or your friends" . This page was created by a friend about this band, which violates Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy. Please revert it to the single paragraph, which is, again, a sufficient amount of information about the band for the general public.https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SkyWarrior&action=edit&section=new# — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.6.149.153 (talk) 18:14, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
You always beat me reverting while I'm mobile during my semi-wikibreak. Keep up the good work!😀 KGirlTrucker81 huh? what I've been doing 19:47, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CSD says not to tag articles undergoing deletion discussion

This is a quick heads up that WP:CSD says not to tag articles undergoing deletion discussion with a speedy deletion tag. Once an article makes AfD (article for deletion), we no longer tag it: “criteria for speedy deletion (CSD) specify the only cases in which administrators have broad consensus to bypass deletion discussion” — that doesn’t apply once an article is in AfD. Samboy (talk) 19:59, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to argue that. It doesn't specifically say that once an article is at AfD it cannot be nominated for CSD. I would also argue that, if it did, that since the AfD was created by a sock, and that there is endorsement from all other significant editors to speedy, then G5 would be except from that rule. SkyWarrior 20:08, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I see the diff. You’re right: Users can not use remove their own speedy delete tag. But, since it is in AfD, we need to now end it with a discussion. Samboy (talk) 20:18, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Samboy, I know I probably should've replied to this earlier, I don't know why I waited over a fortnight to do so, but this has kinda been bugging me so here it goes. I get the sense that you skipped over the first half of my comment, which gives my position on this whole thing. Long story short, WP:CSD doesn't expressly state, nor really imply IMO, that editors are not allowed to speedy an article once it is at AfD. Sure, the G5 didn't really apply in this specific case, but what about other cases? Can you explain instances like this, where, despite being at AfD, was tagged for CSD and then deleted because of it? If WP:CSD really did prohibit someone from adding a speedy tag to an article already at AfD, then why did someone do it, and more importantly, why did an admin confirm it? This wasn't even the only time this happened yesterday. Instances like this make me believe that what you are telling me is wrong, and that one can tag an article for speedy deletion even while an AfD is going on. Of course, I could be the wrong one, but as of now, I firmly believe that I am not. SkyWarrior 03:48, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of someone else's AfD vote

Just wondering what the justification for this was? Fqn9010e0754032 (talk) 20:26, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Fqn9010e0754032: Initially, for blatant trolling (see the user's diffs and block), but in that time the user has been confirmed a sock of a banned user. SkyWarrior 20:28, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, makes sense. Fqn9010e0754032 (talk) 20:29, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the fix

Apologies, that was my first try at using Twinkle for an AfD, I didn't realize it would append the text to the old one instead of starting a new one. I appreciate the fix, I'll know better next time. JamesG5 (talk) 21:00, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. By the way, there should be an option to create an AfD when you click on a page (without using Page Curation or going to actually edit the page) under the TW tab; this is how I was able to fix the AfD. SkyWarrior 21:02, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Mz7 (talk) 01:29, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. SkyWarrior 01:52, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the Attack on the Congressional Baseball Game

Hi there. Although I am an inexperienced editor to Wikipedia, I believe that we both share the common goal of improving it.

In the spirit of WP:BOLD, I edited Congressional Baseball Game to reflect that the article was now out of date due to the tragedy that occurred there. Specifically, I added the Outdated template.

A few minutes ago, I checked the article again and noticed that my edit was reverted!
At this point, I hoped that you removed it because you or someone else documented the attack.
Furthermore, half an hour later you created 2017 Congressional Baseball attack to redirect to Congressional Baseball Game.

My hopes were then dashed. I could understand removing the outdated template, but to me, adding that redirect seems like a deliberate attempt to prevent people from accessing information on this tragedy. Please help me understand what's going on here.

I hope you'll understand my point of view that this is a tragedy, regardless of anyone's political affiliations. Nobody deserved this.

Thank you very much for your consideration, and I truly hope that you have a great day or night or wherever the sun is where you are. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lol MD4 (talk • contribs) 15:42, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Lol MD4. I'm getting the sense, by the above, that you didn't even look at the edit I made to Congressional Baseball game. If you had actually looked, you would've found that I did add info about the attack, which is why I removed the tag. Furthermore, there is already an article on the shooting, and 2017 Congressional Baseball attack redirects to there, not to the game. SkyWarrior 15:49, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for clarifying this. I shouldn't have assumed bad faith, and here's why I did so:
As it turns out I was trying to diff edits in the wrong way. I didn't notice who added that paragraph. Since the addition was on the left side instead of the right of my screen, I had assumed that someone other than you had added that paragraph and then you removed it.
Beyond that though, I really assumed the worst in you. This was certainly bias on my end against some people (or nobody, perhaps) who I thought might actually try to censor Wikipedia. This division in mindset is part of what caused this tragedy in the first place.
Thanks for only slightly roasting me, because I definitely deserved it. I'll definitely work on challenging my assumptions more in the future.
Cheers
lol md4 U|T 16:20, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Maher

It is not my "personal analysis" that it was racist that he (Bill) said House Nigga. do you know what house nigga even means? He's referring to the slaves that stayed in the house. Quit acting like this is my opinion, analogy or point of view. There's plenty of sources out there about his racist joke. 68.115.102.188 (talk) 18:27, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:LABEL, which discourages (if not prohibits) uses of words like "racist" unless supported by multiple reliable sources, which doesn't appear to be the case here. Therefore, the edit fails WP:NPOV.
Also see WP:CIVIL. SkyWarrior 18:30, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(posting as IP since he is hitting the edit filter) https://urbanintellectuals.com/2017/06/02/bill-maher-makes-racist-slave-joke-real-time-im-house-nigga/#.WU1eWDPMxE4. Dat GuyTalkContribs 18:37, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for that. I can now see where the IP is coming from, but that's an opinion piece (as explicitly stated at the bottom of the page) and therefore cannot be used as a reliable source. Neither of the two sources provided in said opinion piece confirm the IP's claims either. SkyWarrior 18:45, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's no longer an opinion, and it's not your opinion. Maher has been making racist jokes. Entertainment Weekly, TV Guide and others confirmed it. STOP undoing my edits. Use the talk page. 2600:6C46:4A00:131A:A51A:E207:5AAB:59B2 (talk) 18:04, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:UNDUE and WP:BLP. SkyWarrior 18:05, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Thanks for your help with that vandal on my talk page! Marianna251TALK 17:04, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. It really wasn't that big of a deal (I've dealt with stuff like this a few times before), but I'll keep an eye out just in case they come back. SkyWarrior 17:05, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


LGBT history of Russia

I am sorry, I have no idea how to reply to personal messages on Wikipedia.

I did give you a reason in the edit summary (the article the sentance I removed was talking about did not have the content the sentence stated it had). However my edit was reverted without an explanation. So, I reverted it back. I would highly appreciate if you pay more attention to the edits you make on Wiki. Thank you. 194.67.216.222 (talk) 04:47, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I warned you for this edit, which, in contradiction to your claims, was in fact not explained, only given the generic reversion message. Please explain your edits, or they could (and probably will) be reverted. Thank you. SkyWarrior 04:49, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a screenshot: http://imgur.com/a/Gb0BL I think you should apologize for wasting other people's time. 194.67.216.222 (talk) 04:55, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Still explain any reverts that could be construed as controversial, even if you already explained it, which would (arguably) apply in this situation. SkyWarrior 05:08, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Queried reversion

About this queried reversion, I obeyed a request to move Dunning School to Dunning school; then within half a minute I received a request to revert the move and to treat it as a queried move request and start a discussion, which I then did: see Talk:Dunning School. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:00, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, note taken. But as I have stated in the edit summary, once you have performed a move request and removed it from WP:RM/TR, you are to not readd it back, unless you are specifically requesting to revert an undiscussed move, which isn't the case here. I'm glad you started the move discussion, just don't do that again. SkyWarrior 05:08, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi SW. Thanks for your work in dealing with tonight's (my time) drawer of socks. I saw this post and I wanted to let you know that I was suggesting they file the SPI against me that they were asking for :-) I just wanted to make sure you knew where I was coming from. Again thanks for your efforts and cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 02:15, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, it's no big deal. I saw where you were coming from, btw; I was going to post the link to the SPI anyways and you gave me the opportunity to do so. ;) SkyWarrior 02:17, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Good deal. Enjoy the rest of your week. MarnetteD|Talk 02:18, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, you too. SkyWarrior 02:19, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

See this. I'm not sure what's going on. Yours, Quis separabit? 03:27, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can explain, [email protected]. Mister Ernest Thayer creates the article. JamesBWatson tags the article for speedy deletion per A10 criteria. Mr. Thayer removes the tags you added, but was reverted for being involved. In a "fit of pique" as he puts it, he nominates the page for G7. I revert it back to A10, but then self-revert to G7 once I realize my error (I don't know why I made that error, probably a brain fart). Mr. Thayer apparently decided to change his mind and reverts it back to an A10. SkyWarrior 03:33, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

STOP REVERTING!

Stop reverting! I have sources that prove that the rightful Pontius Pilate invented Pilates! I am simply changing it first then I wil add the references!!!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Herbert McCallum (talk • contribs) 15:29, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide reliable sources confirming this fact. The current sources in the article suggest otherwise. SkyWarrior 15:33, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

BOTN discussion

The discussion regarding the edit summaries of Magic links bot has been moved to WP:BOTN#Concern about Magic links bot. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 16:12, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up, responded. SkyWarrior 16:43, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Jack Black Has Sign on to play R.L.Stine agian in the Sequel

can I ask you that Jack Black Has Sign on to reprising as R.L.Stine so can you check this news: http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/goosebumps-2-jack-black-rl-stine-welcome-to-horrorland-trailer-release-date-a7787371.html and it is confilmed so you could put jack black film that he is in the sequel oh tell any users that Goosebumps 2 has a title called Goosebumps Horrorland and tell them to leave it alone and don't change as untitled because Horroland has been confilmed as a title. oh it me or That Goosebumps Horrorland filming this October can you plz check this if is it confilmed: http://omegaunderground.com/2017/03/16/jack-blacks-goosebumps-2-begins-filming-october-atlanta/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liamgoosebumps (talk • contribs) 17:05, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Liamgoosebumps: how about you read the hidden note that says 'Per WP:NFF and WP:CRYSTAL, do not add films that are listed as "pre-production"'? This film is currently in pre-production, which means we don't list it on Black's page yet. SkyWarrior 17:20, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok but I don't know if that Goosebumps 2 filming this October but it is pre production I know that so are user going to make Goosebumps Horrorland film page for now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liamgoosebumps ([[User talk:Lia Demgoosebumps#top|talk]] • contribs) 18:28 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Per WP:NFF, if principal photography has not begun for a film (and Goosebumps 2's has not), then the film does not get an article. Once its been confirmed by reliable sources that is has commenced, then it can have an article. Until then, no. SkyWarrior 17:46, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

195.99.251.83

SkyWarrior, I received an email regarding your reversal of an edit by 195.99.251.83 (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:195.99.251.83&redirect=no). The edit applied to File:Anne Schuth.jpg. I don't know why I received the email. I never knew about the photo of Anne Schuth. I don't know who she is. And I always sign my edits. If you or anyone else thinks that I am 195.99.251.83, they are you are mistaken. Iss246 (talk) 21:09, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Iss246, I did not send that email, nor do I suspect that you are the IP. I don't know why the IP sent you the email instead of me; that is something beyond my control that you're going to have to deal with yourself. Sorry. SkyWarrior 21:58, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,Im Jenevee!

When I changed the information on Anderson Paak's Wikipedia page it was because of a bet.Not because I intended to deceive but to prove that I can edit pages in wikipedia,so I hope there are no hard feelings about it.Sorry about that.Though I do have a favour to ask of you.Could you make a wikipedia page for "Joyner Lucas" or if you dont feel like it could you teach me how to do it myself

-Jenevee Jenevee (talk) 16:54, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jenevee

Well since someone already made a page on "Joyner Lucas" could you have a picture of him there too. Jenevee (talk) 17:01, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Reviewing

Hello, SkyWarrior.

I noticed you've done some constructive editing recently.
Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After gaining the flag, patrolling is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. Thanks.—usernamekiran(talk) 20:58, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank

I am a new user. So, I want to learn. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rupesh Adhikari (talk • contribs) 21:49, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A basic message explaining how Wikipedia works has been posted on your talk page. I would highly advise you to take some time and read up on the links provided, which include our policies and guidelines. SkyWarrior 22:01, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Apology

I was a little brusque- rude, even- with you on my talk last night, SkyWarrior, and I apologize for that. It had been a looong day, and I probably should've stepped back from keyboard slightly sooner than I did. Anyway, hopefully no hard feelings? Take care, — fortunavelut luna 07:06, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine, really. To be quite honest, I essentially just ignored it and moved on. No hard feelings here. SkyWarrior 16:20, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"The dogs bark, but the caravan passes on"  ;) cheers caravan! :) — fortunavelut luna 16:38, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of references

Your assertion that we don't need references for date articles is false. All material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must be verifiable. While the information about events or people listed in dates articles may (or may not) be verifiable in the article about the event or person, removing references from lists is not at all helpful and flies in the face of WP:BURDEN. Toddst1 (talk) 13:56, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:DAYS, Toddst1, where it says the following:

References are not needed in Wikicalendar articles. However, references to support listed entries must be found in linked Wikipedia articles and not external links.

This applies to date articles. So as long as it is verifiable in the subject's article, we don't need references in the date articles. Take it up to the WikiProject in charge if you have a problem with this. SkyWarrior 14:58, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wow. Thanks for pointing that out. I had no idea that was added to WP:DAYS. I will definitely challenge that. Toddst1 (talk) 15:03, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Reviewer granted

Hello SkyWarrior. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

  • URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
  • Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
  • You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
  • Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
  • Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Mz7 (talk) 17:26, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NOTMEMORIAL

I agree with you taking out the names of the victims, but that is not the meaning of WP:MEMORIAL. Memorial states that the SUBJECT OF ARTICLES must be notable, and that articles should not be created for the purpose of memorializing those who do not meet the notability guidelines. There are articles that list the victims, and that is in accordance with WP policy. It's really just a case-by-case decision. Just wanted to say that. ‡ Єl Cid, Єl Caɱ̩peador ᐁT₳LKᐃ 22:37, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, el cid, el campeador, I realized that shortly after making the edit. Probably should've dummied up and corrected myself. With that said, WP:NOTMEMORIAL applies in this instance, even though I explained it wrong. SkyWarrior 01:12, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, you're good- I hope it doesn't look like I was trying to tell you what to do. All the best! ‡ Єl Cid, Єl Caɱ̩peador ᐁT₳LKᐃ 13:47, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting other user's comments

The other user is trying to report other users on my report of Mossimo203 (talk · contribs). He can simply make his own report. Gropeypopey (talk) 03:52, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's not how it works, Gropeypopey. A report to AN3 means that the actions of all parties are evaluated; since you are a "party member", your own behavior is to be examined and criticized in addition to the reported person. What you cannot do is remove legitimate comments that are not harmful. See WP:TPO for more information. SkyWarrior 03:57, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Talk: At the hub - new section

I added it as a new section because, when I went to edit, the Puffery section had been deleted again. Weird dispute. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 20:10, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fair explaination. And yes, it is indeed weird. SkyWarrior 20:12, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of Interest

How may I clear up any possible conflict of interest? Not sure which article it is directed.(Carol Smallwood (talk) 21:13, 21 July 2017 (UTC)).[reply]

Hi Carol Smallwood. Please read WP:COI for more information about confilct of interests. To answer your question, however: the article in question is, of course, Carol Smallwood, and you have a suspected COI because, based on your username and edit history, you may be Smallwood herself. To clear up any COI, just post a message on your user page or the talk page of the Smallwood article telling if you're Smallwood or not. This page should go in depth on what to do.
Also, why bring this up now and not a year ago? SkyWarrior 23:02, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

Thanks for supporting my run for administrator. I am honored and grateful. ) Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:37, 25 July 2017 (UTC) [reply]

Thank you for your fix

Thank you for your fix at [2].

Is there some way we can advise the user not to make POV section headers at that particular location? Sagecandor (talk) 20:44, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Given that it is standard practice for section headers at AN3 to be in the form of "UserA" reported by UserB", it might just be best to simply let them know to only title section headers in that form only, and not in any other way. SkyWarrior 20:58, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Might such advising be better coming from a third-party such as yourself? Sagecandor (talk) 20:59, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That might be a good idea, I'll leave them a message soon. SkyWarrior 21:01, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done. I got other things to do, so I may not respond to any further inquiries on this for some time. SkyWarrior 21:13, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

SkyWarrior, does it appear the people behind the Baldassn account did not take your advice, and did the same thing, again? [3] That you had to then fix, again? [4] Sagecandor (talk) 21:05, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that, oh well. I don't think there's anything we can do now, except watch their edits and (if confirmed) wait for them to be blocked as socks. SkyWarrior 21:07, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It seems like some admin pages are backlogged. Any ideas on how to get help and admin attention to this? Sagecandor (talk) 21:19, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Backlog notices are typically posted at WP:AN, so you can try there if the backlog is really bad. Alternatively, you could ask for help on one of the IRC channels. There may be other options, but those are the two that I can think of right now. SkyWarrior 21:24, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'll think about the former, but I generally don't do the latter. If you want to, that's cool. Sagecandor (talk) 21:45, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. Personally, though, I would just wait a few hours or so for someone to act naturally, since they're not really being that much of a bother right now. SkyWarrior 21:48, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You mean wait for the sock investigation? Or hope the two (2) bogus reports by the Baldassn account filed against me are seen as bogus? Sagecandor (talk) 21:52, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Both, actually, though if the sock investigation is closed as confirmed, then very likely the AN3 reports will be closed as "filer blocked as sock" or similar. SkyWarrior 22:04, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
SkyWarrior, I hope you're right! Sagecandor (talk) 02:24, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled XVI

Is what I said about trump a lie he does use the term fake news and he there has been more than a few possible times where he has lied Dedulas21 (talk) 01:30, 1 August 2017 (UTC) Why did you delete my edit Dedulas21 (talk) 01:33, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't add that information to his disambiguation page, though, Dedulas21. It's not needed and your edits can easily be construed as vandalism. SkyWarrior 01:35, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony R Graham - Page

This is [email removed] in response to your message about the article added about Anthony Graham. I have created the page and the account. Perhaps I should have done this on my AlexGaul account. Please advise.Anthony R Graham (talk) 21:49, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony R Graham, please stick to one account. Per WP:SOCK, you may only use one account per person. Please use either the account used to message me here or the AlexGaul account, not both.
Furthermore, please see WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY, which states that creating an article about yourself is highly discouraged. SkyWarrior 22:09, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Original Research Claim on Ransomware Page

SkyWarrior, please indicate what aspect of the Aug 3, 2017 post to the Ransomware page you believe is original research. Please answer both of the following questions: (1) Why didn't you explain what aspect of the contribution you believe is original research when you deleted the contribution? and (2) Why did you wipe out the entire contribution and not the limited phrase/sentence that you claim was original research? 173.56.74.61 (talk) 02:16, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To answer the first question: pretty much the entire edit after the source, especially that final sentence. I did not find anything saying that in the article, so I assumed it's your opinion, therefore original research. To answer the second question: I didn't feel it belonged, at least not in its current state, not to mention some (minor) POV concerns. SkyWarrior 02:24, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You did not answer question (1). Please answer question (1). 173.56.74.61 (talk) 02:32, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I did answer question 1; what part of "pretty much the entire edit after the source" don't you understand? SkyWarrior 02:37, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SkyWarrior/Archive_3&oldid=1143312110"