User talk:EoRdE6/Archives/2014/November

User Talk:OlmecTrash

You removed my warning on this user's page in favour of your warning, but I was the one who reverted him. Meters (talk) 19:39, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

However, I had already posted the warning, therefore there was no reason for you to post another one. User Talk:OlmecTrash EoRdE6 (talk) 19:41, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

And there was no reason for you to leave a warning at all, since you didn't revert him. I understand that there are times when the system does not inform editors when they both do a revert, but when it happens and there is a duplicated warning, just remove the one that comes form the editor who didn't make the revert. Meters (talk) 19:45, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

It isn't the End of the world, but I reverted it and Twinkle left an automated message for me... EoRdE6 (talk) 19:47, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

I completely understand that. What I didn't understand is why you would remove my warning and not your own when you realized what happened. As you said, not a big deal. I was just explaining why I undid you, as a courtesy. Meters (talk) 19:53, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

I've run into this before (because I do my warnings manually). Maybe I'll see if it's a known bug with Twinkle. Thanks. Meters (talk) 20:01, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Reverting changes to Article on John O Pastore

On the 4th of October you reverted deletions I made to the article on John O. Pastore. I had not explained my reason for deleting the sections because they are plainly out of place, already included elsewhere in the article, poorly written, irrelevant and unsubstantiated and I thought it was eminently obvious why they were removed. I will make sure to be more careful to write a description next time though, in keeping with standard practice. I've copied the areas I deleted below so you can see that I was well justified in deleting them (or you can just go have a look at the article to see how they don't add anything of value).

__

Pastore married once to Elena Caito Pastore. The couple had three children, one boy and two girls. All three children were highley educated. The Pastore descendants maintain ties with Rhode Island and other political figures. The family owns property and homes in Newport, Rhode Island. Senator and Mrs. Pastore rest in the family plot in Newport, Rhode Island.

Notes: Pastore leaves behind a line of educated family members throughout the United States. The Pastore Family is mentioned in multipule books, including a Reflection of the Kennedys.

In 2013, Pastore's Wife passed at the age of 90.

81.98.132.50 (talk) 17:32, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Next time put a reason for deleting sections. Your actions were tagged as section blanking, and from my point of view that is all they were. Now looking more depth, I see you rational but just don't forget to give a reason for removal. Thanks! EoRdE6 (talk) 19:16, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

UNIX Network Programming

Hi. I've declined your speedy request, as you can't use A7 (significance) on books. You can use prod or AfD. Peridon (talk) 17:15, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Re: Don't post warnings...

I'm afraid you have gotten your story a little backwards about vandalism on Bad Girls Club (season 11). As you can see here there is record of my reversion. There is also no record of activity on your part in the history of Bad Girls Club (season 11). However, you did revert vandalism here on Bad Girls Club (season 10) by the same user. I understand the titles of these articles are very similar, but please double check in the future. Thanks. Kehrbykid (talk) 19:03, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Baseball

Non-civility is the calling card of the baseball AfDs. Spend a few weeks there. You'll catch on. It's mostly everyone calling each other stupid and saying their votes don't make any sense. It's not just me. It's everyone. Alex (talk) 05:40, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Thats great but when your on Wikipedia, I don't want to see it. There is no purpose to hating on other editors at all. EoRdE6 (talk) 05:42, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

When a dog is bitten, he bites back. Alex (talk) 05:44, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Two wrongs don't make a right. I'm sure someone has told you this before. EoRdE6 (talk) 05:45, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

But three rights make a left. Alex (talk) 05:55, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Rollback granted

Hi EoRdE6. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! — MusikAnimal ^talk 21:51, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

November 2014

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove a speedy deletion notice from a page you have created yourself, as you did at File:Zoe Levin at Red Band SocietyTour.jpg. Changing the CSD is in effect the same as removing these. If you continue to do so, you may be banned. As an experienced editor you so know how the works. reddogsix (talk) 02:47, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

I haven't removed a single notice. I would appreciate it if you would stop harassing me! Thanks! EoRdE6 (talk) 02:48, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Zoe Levin. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. –Davey2010 • (talk) 05:24, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

• IMDB isn't a reliable source, That's common knowledge and like or not it's policy here, Instead of edit warring perhaps you should find better sources and see if you can rescue the article,

Edit warring can and will get you blocked so I kindly suggest you take a step back and just relax & read all the relevant policies here

Cheers, –Davey2010 • (talk) 05:31, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

A bit of advice

Evading your block certainly isn't helping your cause. There are procedures to appeal your block, and editing as an IP isn't one of them. Follow the instructions above or risk having your block lengthened. Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 06:40, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Zoe Levin for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Zoe Levin is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zoe Levin until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. reddogsix (talk) 02:32, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

User:Bbb23 Look at Zoe Levin and then compare it to say Charlie Rowe an actor article that's only source is IMDb. This article is a gold mine of sources comparatively. Maybe we sahould fopcus on fixing articles like Charlie Rowe which have no good sources at all. just my 2 cents EoRdE6 (talk) 17:53, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

I agree with you that the Rowe article is poorly sourced. At a minimum it should be tagged, and the biographical data (like birthdate) should be removed. There's nothing to prevent youor any other editor from improving the article. Sometimes it just depends on who's looking at an article as to what gets done with it. In your case, editors were looking over your shoulder as it was a new article, and it may be that the new article patrolling is more vigilant now than it was back in 2011 when the Rowe article was created.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:41, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

"There's nothing to prevent you from improving the article" well I mean you blocked me so yes there is a bug something preventing me... EoRdE6 (talk) 18:46, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Now, now, this, too, shall pass. BTW, I've done a little clean-up at the Rowe article. What it really needs is someone to go out and look for reliable sources and add them to the article. I'm too busy, and, like you, I'm tired, except (Personal attack removed)--Bbb23 (talk) 18:49, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Now, now no need to throw insults around remember: Hello, I'm EoRdE6. I noticed that you made a comment on the page User Talk:EoRdE6 that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. User:Bbb23 needs to calm down... EoRdE6 (talk) 19:11, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

You think that was a personal attack? You advertise your age on your user page. It was a light-hearted, innocuous comment. Oh well, be defensive if you like. You can even remove this comment or the entire conversation on this topic. It's within your rights to do so.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:06, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Comment on WP:AIN

Reply to User:John from Idegon from WP:AIN: I truly am sorry about the reverting incident, and understand your concerns about WP:NOTHERE. However, you will see I have over 1,100 helpful edits to Wikipedia, and those three last night shouldn't instantly change that. I was frustrated simply because my less than 2 minute old article already had an AfD. Being part of WP:RETENTION I am sure you understand that editors can be frustrated if an article they put there hard work and effort into is being deleted without a single suggestion that I improve the refs first. As for AfC, I simply wanted to help out with the crazy backlog they are having issues with. If you are worried; all I did was add some cleanup tags to one article, fix a broken gallery in another, and added an infobox and published South Australian Gas Company. If you have any further concerns, feel free to contact me but know I can only reply on my talk page for the time being. Thanks! EoRdE6 (talk) 01:37, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

For my money his apology to me was disingenuous and misdirected. I never accused him of any harm and the problem I mentioned was not the problem he discussed in his so called apology. My concern was his clueless comment at a totally different AfD which was linked at ANI and how the lack of understanding of pillar policies he exhibited in that comment made him totaally unqualified to work at AfC, which he signed up for shortly after. Luckily another editor dug into his edit history and saw that out of his self claimed here "1100" edits, less than 500 were to article space, making him ineligable for AfC. But he promoted a few articles before he was blocked. My concern was and is lack of clue; all he has done here is re-enforce that. If Anna is brave enough to help, bless her. But if this editor wants the community's respect, he needs to get off his high horse and spennd these thirty days reading and working with a mentor, scratch that..engaging constructively with a mentor. John from Idegon (talk) 07:28, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to STiki!

Hello, EoRdE6, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Information about STiki, including: Using STiki and its hotkeys Comparison with other tools Information about vandalism on Wikipedia Here are some pages which are a little more fun: The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users! Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes! We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (developer) and Ugog Nizdast (talk) 06:21, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

@MusikAnimal: While I completely understand temporary revocation of rollback, I am honestly curious as to what action on STiki you were referring to at WP:AIN. A reply would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! EoRdE6 (talk) 19:17, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Sure thing, I was planning to write you here. I just feel some edits were misclassified. For instance, I think this edit was done in good faith, having removed unsourced negative content about a living person. They also removed a reference. Should probably be reverted at least in part, but I wouldn't consider it vandalism. The same is true here, here and here. Meanwhile I see nothing wrong with edits like this and this. They should have been classified as "innocent".

I hope you don't take me revoking the permission personally. I understand at least with STiki you were trying to do the right thing. Beyond that there is reason to revoke the permission, as you know, but that's not to say it will never be regranted. I look forward to you turning around as a long-term and valued contributor. Until then, we'll leave the rollback bit out of it. Thanks for your understanding. — MusikAnimal ^talk 19:34, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Edit Request

I know this isn't the place for this but I am currently blocked. Can a editor please move the references list to the end where it belongs? Someone put it in the middle of the article... Looks like a bad merge. Once again I would fix it but am blocked atm. Thanks! EoRdE6 (talk) 19:50, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Note: The references section in the middle of the page is not on the page itself, it's being transcluded from List of best-selling Xbox 360 video games. Will be fixed shortly. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 23:19, 25 November 2014 (UTC)