User talk:Nightscream/Archive 13

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

Happy New Year, Nightscream!

Happy New Year!

Nightscream,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
–Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 13:26, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year!

Nightscream,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
–Tenebrae (talk) 18:03, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Spider-Man II and Spider-Gwen

Hi. I'd like to let you know that there is a mini-arc running between the issues of Spider-Man Vol 2 and Spider-Gwen Vol. 2 that will involved Miles Morales and Spider-Woman of Earth-65 coming together when it comes to a threat that will harm Spider-Man's Earth. Would that info when the issues come out be included on Miles Morales' page in condensed form once the mini-arc is done? I'm just asking. --Rtkat3 (talk) 17:26, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

We'll have to keep an eye on that and happy belated New Year. --Rtkat3 (talk) 20:16, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for cleanup at Camden, New Jersey

The article for Camden, New Jersey had been through some extensive expansion as part of an academic project and it's been clear that the article needs a great deal of cleanup. Thanks for making a big dent in that process. Alansohn (talk) 22:31, 16 January 2017 (UTC) (Diff)

RfC notice

There is a Request for Comment posted at Talk:New York Daily News#Request for Comment. You are being notified as one of every registered editor who has edited that article in that past year. --Tenebrae (talk) 23:13, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ArthurAdams1986WolverinePoster.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ArthurAdams1986WolverinePoster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:39, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Removing refs from med articles

Feel free to hide refs using <!-- --> but please do not remove them. Thanks Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:26, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:RandiCaricature.jpg

The file File:RandiCaricature.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused personal image

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jon Kolbert (talk) 13:45, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

List of suicides, May Brookyn

Hi Nightscream, I put up the New York Times February 17 1894 headline of May Brookyn's suicide. Also linked the HD high resolution PDF version of the entire article that would have been found on succeeding NY Times pages. The PDF wasn't linking as it was an https(secure) url instead of the traditional http. Can't figure they would upload highdef/high resolution but still use http instead of https. Thanks Koplimek (talk) 16:58, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Mackenzie Calhoun for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mackenzie Calhoun 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/Mackenzie Calhoun 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. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:48, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Steve Englehart

Tweaked the wording. Let me know what you think. --Tenebrae (talk) 21:20, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

I know we're both good guys operating out of good will. Since I'm not sure we're going to agree on the phrasing of that one sentence at Steve Englehart, I've restored the status quo and started an RfC at Talk:Steve Englehart where we each can state our position and then let our fellow editors weigh in. That seems the fair way to go about it. Again, it's not unusual for friends to disagree, and you know I respect your work and also you personally, and 99% of the time we're in complete agreement here. I very sincerely hope this doesn't cause a strain — and in fact, the more pertinent part of your edit in this section, expanding on McFarlane's notability, we wound up agreeing on! This is a language issue that seems minor in comparison. With regards and respect, --Tenebrae (talk) 13:39, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

デセプション・ポイント listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect デセプション・ポイント. Since you had some involvement with the デセプション・ポイント redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix (talk) 01:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

The truth of the ice listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The truth of the ice. Since you had some involvement with the The truth of the ice redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix (talk) 01:24, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Notes on format for comics character articles

In my defense for the Court of Owls response, you said you didn't want blow-by-blow plots in the "in other media part" where I have tried to keep them as short as you want them. For William Cobb's section of the page, I don't recall who expanded his history. For your addition revolving around bullets in in specific media appearances with sub-sections for one appearance so far, that was a force of habit which I apologize for. As for adding the publisher information and dates in the references, I wasn't the only one who did it and that it would be difficult for me to find the airdate for each issue in the reference. Perhaps if I just add Marvel Comics to the reference following the period like you did might help. As for your revert on Cheetah, some of the stuff you reverted was how the Barbara Ann Mineva version of Cheetah had dressed up which tends to vary depending on the artists similar to how She-Hulk would be occasionally done. Did I leave anything out? --Rtkat3 (talk) 15:53, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Notes on format from comics character articles 2

In my defense on Sun-Eater's page, it appeared at the time we can separate Sun-Eater's TV appearance from his film appearance without making use of the bullets. --Rtkat3 (talk) 15:59, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Publication history-related

In my defense, the creator lead was to be in the publication history like some articles I stumbled onto during my editing like how someone established that section in Silk's page to name an example. This would've been a way that can sort the publication history from the fictional character biography like I was doing with Hunter and those that had appeared in the Legion of Super Heroes TV series and what needs to be done for articles like Daredevil, Deadpool, and Mister Sinister to name a few. Did I leave anything out? --Rtkat3 (talk) 15:59, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Miles Morales in Secret Empire

I've been noticing the solicit info for Secret Empire #7 that states that Miles Morales would have a showdown with Captain America like Ulysses Cain foreshadowed in Civil War II. When that issue comes out, I suggest we keep an eye on what happens just in case it is worthy enough to add to his page. Just making a suggestion here.

Orphaned non-free image File:Slingshot.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Slingshot.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 20:32, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

New Jersey schools to photograph

Hi! I'm looking to see if you are interested in photographing the Japanese School of New Jersey in Oakland for Wikipedia. It would be really nice to have a photo of the building!

There are other international schools in New Jersey, and I believe Paramus Catholic High School hosts the Japanese Weekend School of New Jersey's classrooms (the offices are in Fort Lee: 2 Executive Drive, Suite 660, Fort Lee, NJ 07024). If you are interested in getting photos of those too I can make a suggestion list. WhisperToMe (talk) 10:52, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

You're welcome. Anyway, happy editing! WhisperToMe (talk) 14:03, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Snooki&JWowwLogo.jpg

The file File:Snooki&JWowwLogo.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Equivalent media under a free license at Wikimedia Commons. Not F8 owing to the different licenses.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:14, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Breathe poster.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Breathe poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:10, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

New to fictional characters

I am an experienced editor but totally unfamiliar with articles about fictional characters. I was watching page changes (Captain Janeway) while reverting vandalism and find this concept hard to understand. I didn't revert anything but realized that I don't know anything about writing about people that don't actually exist. You don't have to respond, but I am curious. I am a medical writer and didn't even know these types of articles existed. Best Regards, Bfpage (talk) 01:49, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Mr. Citizen listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Mr. Citizen. Since you had some involvement with the Mr. Citizen redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Lordtobi (✉) 21:15, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Sean Spicer

Hi, Nightscream! Just a comment: Your edits to Sean Spicer have been productive and your edit summaries are mostly helpful; thank you for that. However, you might want to avoid edit summaries like this. Just sayin'. --MelanieN (talk) 15:59, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Re: List of Suicides

Nightscream,

Thank you for your message. I did indeed place spaces at the end of 17 entries. I sincerely apologize. I didn't realize that was an error. I placed the spaces on all entries that ended in a Wiki link, believing that it was more cohesive, as the references for each entry elongated the Wiki links. Again, I do apologize. Thank you for fixing my mistake and alerting me to it. ExRat (talk) 04:52, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

I've left Freshacconci a note. As long as I have you, perhaps you could see the discussion at Talk:Buffalo Bill Jr. and possibly comment. --Tenebrae (talk) 21:09, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Re: Claude Jutra and List of suicides.

I have readded my original source when I made the entry of Claude Jutra to the List of suicides article. The original source I gave (l'Encyclopédie Canadienne) states in the very fist paragraph that Jutra committed suicide:

"Il se suicide en 1986 après avoir vécu pendant plusieurs années avec la maladie d’Alzheimer." Translation:"He committed suicide in 1986 after living for several years with Alzheimer's disease."

Please do not revert or remove material from the article when the cited source supports the inclusion. ExRat (talk) 19:19, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Miles Morales and Spider-Men II-related

In my defense, the first issue of the Spider-Men II confirmed that the Earth-616 version of Miles Morales used to work for Taskmaster and I had to add the info somewhere just like that information revolving around which episode of Ultimate Spider-Man did Miles Morales start calling himself Kid Arachnid. Also, I did notice that you were the one who created Spider-Men II as a redirect similar to Hammer Industries upon the announcement of the Spider-Men II miniseries. Perhaps the former information can be placed there when the article is started. Did I leave anything out? --Rtkat3 (talk) 16:12, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:CrimJusticeText TurnerMug.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:CrimJusticeText TurnerMug.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
  2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Train2104 (t • c) 23:55, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

References

On Pete Davidson, you should retain the style of references from the first main contributor, which is to put them in the {{Reflist}} template. Will you please undo that? Thank you. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:24, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

File:KiraDarknessLight.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:KiraDarknessLight.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:28, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Places in Harry Potter, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Japanese Air Force (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) 11:16, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Picture For Kayla Maisonet Page

Can you add a picture to a specific page. Justinis33 (talk) 04:36, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Images of the other killers

Since there is one image of Stu Macher and Billy Loomis the original Ghostface killers, could you add in three more images of the other Ghostface killers please?

1. [Loomis] and [Altieri], the second Ghostface killers.

2. [Bridger], the third and final Ghostface killer.

3. [Roberts] and [Walker], the fourth and new Ghostface killers. 31.48.57.250 (talk) 21:23, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

In the 'Appearances' section. 31.48.57.250 (talk) 20:36, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Nightscream. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Splatty Tomato

Your recent editing history at Splatty Tomato shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

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. SanAnMan (talk) 15:25, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

We need to work this out together instead of just reverting things. I'm trying to make the article smaller and more concise, you keep reverting it to a longer version with errors, typos, and synthesis. Please talk this over like mature adults instead of just reverting things. - SanAnMan (talk) 15:26, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

You seem to be engaging in the same reverting that I am. The difference being, I'm not persistently violating WP:UNBROKEN, nor am I writing grammatically incoherent sentences or employing redundant wording as you seem to be doing, nor ignoring attempts to point this out in edit summaries, nor gutting the summary of the episode in the Lead. That's all you.
For my part, I have incorporated or agreed with a number of your edits, such as changing in flagrante delicto, removing mention of the alt-right, adding Randy further up to the passage on the kids' realization of the Stranger Things and It references, the wikilink on the Rotten Tomatoes score, which I hadn't thought of during my first write of the Lead and Synopsis, fixing a verbal contraction, etc.
Why don't you try letting someone who knows how to write a sentence, and for that matter, a decent story synopsis, just do his thing, and make those little tweaks that you do pretty well? There is 'nothing about the synopsis that is too long, nor does the article need to be "smaller". The material I have written is relevant, and reasonable. All you're doing by fighting me ensuring the same illiterate, incoherently written gibberish of hit-or-miss clarity that tends to pass for content on the South Park articles when I don't write them. Nightscream (talk) 15:35, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
@Nightscream: Whatever happened to being civil? I'll admit I didn't know about the WP:UNBROKEN policy so mea culpa on that. I also have not been purposefully "writing grammatically incoherent sentences or employing redundant wording as you seem to be doing". I actually do know how to write a sentence and a decent story synopsis, I am actually a member of American Mensa so I'm willing to bet that I'm qualified in that aspect. You know, for someone who claims on their talk page to be a user who welcomes people and wants to be their friend, you sure aren't acting like one right now. Instead, you're acting like you own this article as well as any other South Park article. I suggest we bury the hatchet and try to actually work together so that we can make this article great again (pun intended). - SanAnMan (talk) 15:50, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
I'm acting like someone who, for years, has had to contend with people who can't right a coherent sentence worth a damn. I apologize if my tone comes across as hostile, but when I repeatedly cite policies like WP:UNBROKEN, or point out how you don't mix past and present tense in a sentence ("After Garrison dropped a nuclear bomb on Toronto in the previous episode, killing over a million Canadians, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau calls...") in my edit summaries, only for those edit summaries to go apparently ignored, it serves to heighten my frustration.
When presenting your case in an edit discussion on Wikipeda, saying that you're in Mensa isn't worth a warm cup of piss.
What matters is your reasoning. Not your vaunted pedigree, which I have no way of verifying, and which I don't put much stock in anyway. When the type of reasoning you employ to justify your edits includes such gems as the utterly mindless non sequitur "The term "in flagrante delicto" is not even mentioned in the episode so really not needed" –– thereby implying that words in properly paraphrased story synopses are determined by whether they're explicitly used in the story itself –– saying that you're in Mensa impresses me about as much as saying that you're president of the Adam Sandler Fan Club.
I will revert the edits of yours that I feel are not justified, like the one above. I will wait until you lose interest if need be, and correct the text, while retaining the edits that I feel are good ones. And if you continue to revert, then I will call for a discussion with other editors, ones who are acquainted with both the years I've spent on these articles attempting to fix and prevent the messes like yours, and the practices of mine that have come to be adopted by other editors as standards in the South Park articles, such as the episodic critical reception material, the talk page disclaimers, etc., and I can assure you, they will not side with you.
But in the mean time, feel free to waste your time replacing good, clear writing with grammatically incoherent sentences, redundant add-ons, and passages of unclear meaning to the uninitiated reader, all the while employing logical fallacies to justify doing so, if you prefer. Nightscream (talk) 16:52, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
@Nightscream: You know, I've tried my best to be civil here. I've apologized for the mistakes I've made and tried to make things better. I've even accepted some of your statements in the article and tried to incorporate them with the ones I've been trying to add. You seem to insist on insulting me. I refuse to stoop to your level. There will be actions taken. - SanAnMan (talk) 17:04, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Bring it. Nightscream (talk) 17:23, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

ANI notice

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.

And the same discussion is apparently back. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 15:21, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

List of suicides/Peter Bergmann

(I'm sorry, I don't know if you get notified if I answer below your post on my own page and I am not completely familiar with the communication-etiquette among wikipedia-users. If I offend, that wasn't my intention. I never really dived into the functions etc. of talk pages)

You contacted me before, regarding my edit about Martin Bormann in which I didn't provide a source, don't know how I forgot that. I corrected that you contacted me.

Let me quote my source: https://www.irishcentral.com/news/the-man-who-went-to-ireland-to-disappear-video

  • "In June 2009, a man with grey hair and a leather jacket arrived in County Sligo by bus with the intention of disappearing without a single trace."
  • "Investigators think Bergmann may have believed that his body would be washed out to sea and never found."
  • "We were obviously getting a picture at that stage that this man had meticulously planned his final days, his final act. And the lengths that he went to were just unbelievable.”"
  • "It just shows the level of planning, the level of detail he had gone into to ensure that he was never identified"
  • "Bergmann had found the place where he wanted to die."
  • "Also unclear is why he chose Ireland of all places, and Sligo specifically, as the best place to attempt to vanish without a trace."
  • "but all it revealed was the seemingly painstaking measures the man took to disappear anonymously."
  • "what we do know is that he went to tremendous lengths to erase all proof of his existence before dying on a beach at Rosses Point, Co. Sligo."

How my source doesn't establish that it was most likely suicide (and therefore belongs in the "possible suicides"-section) is frankly baffling to me.

Regarding the cause of death: Wikipedia names "drowning" with "no sign of foul play" and gives a citation that's a dead link, unfortunately. A google search didn't give me a 100% established cause of death so I left it open as a conscious decision. Neozoen (talk) 02:19, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Gay Street

Hello,

I have been notified that you commented on my talk page 2 months ago, talking about my edit to Gay Street. Two things must be said:

a) How do you get it to say "This user wants to be your friend.", and b) The edit in question was not a test or anything like it. It was a statement, one many people have pondered. After all, the gay revolution happened in Lower Manhattan, not far from Gay Street.

In the future, please think twice before you edit. Signed, ～～～～ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Declan128 (talk • contribs) 02:43, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

@Declan128:"How do you get it to say "This user wants to be your friend.", and..."
Easy. By virtue of the fact that one can be open to friendship, while still being critical of bad writing, policy violations, etc,. that harm the project. Since these two things are not mutually exclusive, it's quite simple.
"The edit in question was not a test or anything like it. It was a statement, one many people have pondered. After all, the gay revolution happened in Lower Manhattan, not far from Gay Street."
It doesn't matter. Adding a passage at the end of a paragraph that:
A. Contradicts the opening sentence of the paragraph that sets the tone/subject of that paragraph
B. Does not include an inline citation of a single reliable source, per Wikipedia's policies on Verifiability, Citations, etc.
C. Doesn't even have punctuation at the end of it
...does not constitute constructive writing, or constructive editing.
Given this, and your inability to even sign your talk page messages, as well as the fact that you've racked up a total of 29 edits here since you began editing on May 2 of this year, I'm gonna go ahead and say with a fair dollop of confidence that maybe, just maybe, you're not qualified to tell other editors to "think twice before editing", unless you're going for the 2017 Self Delusional Hypocrite of the Year Award. Mind you, I'm not saying that it's unreasonable to ever remind others to think twice before editing, but maybe you should have a legitimate example of a bad edit or error on hand to justify doing so. The edit you point to isn't it. Bottom line: Learn how to write a coherent sentence, how to compose a paragraph, and please learn Wikipedia's policies on citations, or go elsewhere for your Web hobbies. Nightscream (talk) 03:17, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

@Nightscream: Sorry

Happy Holidays

Hello Nightscream: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Tenebrae (talk) 17:36, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message
@Tenebrae: You too, buddy! :) Nightscream (talk) 18:53, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

BOZ (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings".  :) BOZ (talk) 01:02, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Maureen Wroblewitz

Help expand this article. Thank you! 171.248.246.138 (talk) 02:21, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

@171.248.246.138: Hi, and thanks for your message. Unfortunately, I had never heard of Ms. Wroblewitz or Asia's Next Top Model, nor had I ever seen its American counterpart, so I don't have much interest in those articles. Expanding an article isn't something I taken on lightly or do often, and when I do, it's usually on a topic that holds some appeal or personal interest to me. But don't be discouraged! Why not be bold, as Wikipedia encourages us to, and expand the article yourself?
Just out of curiosity, how did you become aware of my past article expansion efforts?
Anyway, I don't know what holidays you celebrate, but if you are at all affected by the Western holiday season, have a Safe and Happy Holidays! Nightscream (talk) 02:34, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas Nightscream!!


Hi Nightscream, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,
Thanks for all your help and contributions on the 'pedia! ,
   –Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 13:47, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

@Davey2010: You too! Nightscream (talk) 18:35, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Seasons' Greetings

...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 17:08, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

@Bzuk: Thanks, you too! Nightscream (talk) 17:31, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Happy Holidays
From Stave one of Dickens A Christmas Carol

Old Marley was as dead as a door-nail. Mind! I don’t mean to say that I know, of my own knowledge, what there is particularly dead about a door-nail. I might have been inclined, myself, to regard a coffin-nail as the deadest piece of ironmongery in the trade. But the wisdom of our ancestors is in the simile; and my unhallowed hands shall not disturb it, or the Country’s done for. You will therefore permit me to repeat, emphatically, that Marley was as dead as a door-nail.

So you see even Charles was looking for a reliable source :-) Thank you for your contributions to the 'pedia. ~ MarnetteD|Talk 19:26, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
@MarnetteD: You too, Marnette! Have a great one! :-) Nightscream (talk) 20:39, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

I just stopped by here to wish you a Merry Christmas. --Rtkat3 (talk) 15:39, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

REPCITE and Divorce in Islam

Hi-- Please don't remove repeating sentence-level citations where they exist, particularly in articles on contentious topics, such as Divorce in Islam. WP:REPCITE is not a policy or guideline, so there's nothing to violate, and I disagree with the suggestion that this citation style is necessarily overkill. Its purpose is to avoid the situation where someone inserts a sourced passage in the middle of a paragraph, thereby making the preceding content appear improperly sourced. This is especially problematic when the source is not readily accessible, so that another editor may remove it as having failed verification and if there's no editor to track down the misplaced citation, the content may be gone for good. Thanks. Eperoton (talk) 02:44, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

@Eperoton: Hi, Eperoton. I have been removing consecutive citations of the same source in the same paragraph for years, for as long back as I began editing on Wikipedia in 2005, and I will continue to do so, as WP:REPCITE, and the wisdom behind, are sound and valid. Treating each individual sentence in a paragraph as if they need their own individual citation when the source for them is the same, resulting in several cites of the same source in the same paragraph (up to seven in the DiI article, as I recall) is indeed overkill, and that's why WP:REPCITE was written, and is a good practice on the part of good editors here on the project. Contentiousness of topic does not mitigate this, nor do I see how verification failure necessitates it (though if you could clarify that one I'd appreciate it). If a source fails verification, then the solution is to replace it with ones that pass it. Not put more citations of it in the same paragraph. Nightscream (talk) 03:03, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
Ok, let me clarify. Suppose we have a paragraph like: "Sentence A. Sentence B. Sentence C. Sentence D.<ref1>". Now someone comes along and inserts another sentence: "Sentence A. Sentence B. Sentence X.<ref2> Sentence C. Sentence D.<ref1>" I've had to dig around to fix a number of cases like this. Then another editor checks ref2, doesn't find support for sentences A and B and removes them because of failed verification. If ref1 isn't accessible to editors watching the page at that time, the material may be gone for good. For articles with a history of such interpolations, citing each sentence serves a purpose.
The bottom line is, there's no policy or guideline against repeated citations, and I see no evidence that there's a community consensus for enforcing REPCITE. You may have a history of doing so, but you're the only such editor I've encountered. This is a discretionary choice and its rationale is based on how likely the above scenario would be in a particular passage and article. Before you remove citations, please take a closer look to see if this is likely to improve the article or risk doing the opposite. Thanks for your consideration. Eperoton (talk) 03:36, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
@Eperoton: If by your example you mean someone who inserts a sentence or fragment without adding a corresponding citation, allow me to express sympathy, because I hate it when editors (those who apparently have no regard for WP:V) do this, and when I come across it, I either fact tag or remove the addition promptly, and leave a message on their talk page. Usually it turns out to be an anonymous IP editor, whom I presume to mostly be newbies or one-off editors (though I could be wrong about that). It's an aggravating problem, but making a mess out of paragraphs by cluttering them with consecutive citations of the same source for each individual sentence is not the way to address it.
As for the legitimate reference not being "accessible", what do you mean? You mean when a cite of an online source goes dead? In that case, I would point out to you and the material will not be gone for good, since WP:LINKROT makes it clear that material should never be deleted solely because of it. So the next time you encounter an editor who deletes material for that reason, you have a page you can cite. (If you were not talking about dead links, please clarify.)
Policies and guidelines are not the sole criterion by which to judge edits. There is a wealth of wisdom in the overall editing practices here on Wikipedia that isn't necessarily formally codified in a policy or guideline, and it's a mistake to think that they all have to. Remember, Wikipedia's policy and guideline pages describe its principles and agreed-upon best practices, they do not dictate them. There's a reason why that essay has been around for over eight years: It's because it reflects the practices of a significant swath of the editing community, even if it hasn't been formally codified into a policy.
I acknowledge that I may be the first person you've encountered in your two years here to uphold this principle. For my part, you're the first person in my nearly 13 years here to oppose this practice in any non-science article. Again, the criterion is the consensus of the editing community, and my reading of that consensus over the course of the past eight or so years reflects WP:REPCITE.
But if you really, really need a guideline this Christmas, fine, then: Please see WP:CITEBUNDLE. It's linked from WP:REPCITE, is part of the Wikipedia:Citing sources guideline, and says pretty much the same thing. Nightscream (talk) 05:51, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
I didn't mean insertion of unsourced content. Please take a closer look at my schematic example: Sentence A. Sentence B. Sentence C. Sentence D.<ref1> becomes Sentence A. Sentence B. Sentence X.<ref2> Sentence C. Sentence D.<ref1>. Ref 2 is being cited for the added sentence X, but because sentences A and B didn't have sentence-level citations, it now looks like they are sourced with ref 2, and another editor who checks this source later will think they failed verification. It's not the only reason to use sentence-level citations in certain articles. There's been a lot of cases in Islam-related articles of citation needed tags being inserted in the middle of paragraphs with paragraph-level citations, and those sentences being later removed, despite being properly sourced. Causal watchers and folks using automated anti-vandalism tools have a hard time catching those cases, so this is a real danger. It comes with the contentious nature of the subject: some editors are looking for any specious excuse to remove content they don't like. Perhaps given your versatile editing you are less attuned to the issues of editing a subject like this. From the front-lines, I can tell you that in some cases repeated sentence-level citations go a long way to help counteract misguided or disruptive editing, and removing them is unhelpful.
By not easily accessible sources, I don't necessarily mean link rot. For example, most citations in Divorce in Islam are behind paywalls. Most editors won't be able to check these sources to deal with confidence with the editing patterns I describe in the previous paragraph.
WP:CITEBUNDLE isn't about this subject at all. It's about gathering citations of different sources under a single ref. If you have other evidence of undocumented consensus on this point, please let me know. Thanks. Eperoton (talk) 02:29, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nightscream/Archive_13&oldid=1220728416"