User talk:ElHef/Archive 2

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

I have replied to your question on the page. (A.R. Rahman)

Please check and let me know. I can send snapshots to your email if required.

Thanks.

Jahabar Sadique (talk) 02:57, 7 January 2014 (UTC) Jahabar Sadique

This is information that needs to be presented on the article's talk page, not to me. In response to an edit request I will only make edits to an article that are uncontroversial or have clear consensus on the article's talk page, as I am not familiar with the subject matter within the article. From a policy standpoint, the problem here is that there are multiple references all over the internet that contradict the information you're providing. Wikipedia operates on the principle of verifiability, and there are a great many clear sources verifying the existing article content. Your issue is not with Wikipedia - it is with the many sources online that have acquired incorrect information. Get the correct information out there and the Wikipedia article will be updated accordingly. --ElHef (Meep?) 04:21, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

You deleted my post about Amanda living in Rochester. Not only is this IP address registered to her but it also is located in Rochester, MN. There was no mistake in my edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.42.195.49 (talk) 03:55, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the message - sorry for my misunderstanding. When you edited out an existing reference to "She lives with me", I took that as vandalism to the article and reverted the whole thing. Please understand that Wikipedia operates on a policy of verifiability, and that we need to have verifiable, reliable sources for all information in an article - especially those about living persons. That being said, I have found a source that I can put into the article, and I will be changing it back momentarily. Thanks again! --ElHef (Meep?) 04:04, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

I refer to the edit you accepted here: [1] You accepted a film from 2003 being added to the list of nominees for a film award ceremony held in 2000 for films made in 1999. Please double check unsourced changes in the future. Have a nice day.

Fair enough, thanks for letting me know. I'll be more careful about that in the future. --ElHef (Meep?) 05:14, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

I have made changes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abcdefghijklmnopyz (talk • contribs) 04:11, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Yep, and you've been blocked for it, too. --ElHef (Meep?) 04:16, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Reference: http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/218383.html, on this page search for the words "Players of the series" and you will find A Flintoff (England) and SK Warne (Australia) shared the award for the 2005 Ashes series. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gazzatan (talk • contribs) 00:28, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Replied on the article talk page. --ElHef (Meep?) 02:56, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

what did i do i didn't do anything mean i was saying what my brother told me i didn't know — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hollcraftsrule (talk • contribs) 21:57, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Your edits thus far have been completely unconstructive and appear to be intentional

WP:NCHP for assistance. --ElHef (Meep?

) 22:12, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

I have reported IP:90.217.151.61 to AIV — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 21:56, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Weird, Huggle said it had already been reported. Guess I'll have to check that... thanks for catching it! --ElHef (Meep?) 21:59, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

It has — been Bot-reported on Gangsta Granny — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 22:01, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Ok, that would be why... Why manually report it if Cluebot already did? --ElHef (Meep?) 22:07, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I found out after reading your post above. I filed before the Bot.
Result: Seven days block. Cheers! — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 22:17, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

The article on Karachi is semi-protected, so I have left a note on the Talk page, please do the needful.-Khabboos (talk) 16:07, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Replied at the article talk page. --ElHef (Meep?) 18:13, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Some information has been edited out of the article on Sindhi_people and you can see the difference at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sindhi_people&diff=591578518&oldid=591430140 There were references for those sentences, but should I re-insert those sentences or is it against the 'NPOV'?-Khabboos (talk) 17:25, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

I am not familiar enough with that topic to comment on the references or the removal of the content. If you disagree with the removal of that content, I suggest you discuss it on

WP:BRD. --ElHef (Meep?

) 19:44, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

I assume you removed it because You didn't like it, not because it wasn't TRUTH. You can not prove it isn't the TRUTH. I can prove it is the TRUTH. Wikipedia is an Orwellian scheme to dumb down the public and create a world where nobody has any idea about the powers and principalities whom control Americans like slaves. Have a good day, and enjoy your life of Lies, Fraud, and Deceptions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.105.252.120 (talk) 17:28, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your ambitious quest to bring the truth to the world. I suggest you take a look at

WP:THETRUTH - it contains some good advice for you and seems to be right up your alley. Thanks for your interest in editing Wikipedia, and you have a good day as well! --ElHef (Meep?

) 17:34, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

i do not appreciate that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chase987654 (talk • contribs) 18:02, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

why did you do that seven works for me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chase987654 (talk • contribs) 18:06, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Duly noted. If you would like to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, feel free to do so. If not, you'll continue to "not appreciate" me and other users. --ElHef (Meep?) 18:06, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, ElHef. You have new messages at Talk:Afghanistan–Iran relations.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

~ Anastasia (talk) 22:50, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

As you accepted this edit, please note discussion at Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Cara_Delevingne. HelenOnline 15:52, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Duly noted; I was unaware of that discussion. Thanks for the quick revert! --ElHef (Meep?) 16:01, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello, ElHef. You have new messages at 109.255.139.0's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 01:27, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes I can't get it to edit the source properly on my phone would you mind adding it for me and reinstating the edit. The source is as follows http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/robicheaux-et-al-the-little-equality-case-that-could/marriage/2014/02/14/83219

Also I'm a plaintiff in the case. I also write for the new civil rights movement. I'm citing my own article.

Thanks, Derek — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nolamedic77 (talk • contribs) 03:40, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

 Done, though I strongly recommend you take a look at

Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy. --ElHef (Meep?

) 03:50, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the edit and reference. I'm going to spend some time expanding that section of this article within the next week, inuding the constanza/brewer section. They have since had a good ruling. I'll have all the references in irder and can bring this page more up to date. Thanks again for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nolamedic77 (talk • contribs) 04:29, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I realize I shouldn't have blanked the Twitterbot article. My students are working on revising it, so should I revert it to it's version before the redirect was added? That looks like the one from 01:55, 25 January 2014‎ Cloudchased (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (24 bytes) (-3,765)‎. I have already posted on the Twitterbot Talk page and I just posted on the Twitter article Talk page as indicated.Cleeder (talk) 03:42, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Your best bet here is to do it all in one step. Replace the redirect with the article itself rather than blanking the page to work on it. Until you're ready to actually do that I don't really see a need to make any changes to that redirect; it's currently functioning as intended. If you need a place to work on a draft, you may want to look into the

education noticeboard. Thanks! --ElHef (Meep?

) 04:05, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

OK, so we should edit the stub without removing the redirect? Can we revert the article to it's earlier state without removing the redirect, so we can expand what was previously there? Cleeder (talk) 04:11, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I see what you're trying to do now. You have some options:

• Blank the page and start working on a new article. (Which is legitimate - I didn't revert you the other day because you blanked the page, I reverted you because you didn't explain the blanking and it looked like vandalism.)
• Revert the article itself back to the state it was pre-redirect (roundabout January 15th, looks like) and work on it from there. If you want to work on the article live it's not usually a good idea to try and do it behind a redirect; either there's content in the article and it's live, or there isn't and it's a redirect. Make sure to keep your lines of communication open here - liberal communication on the article talk page what you're working on, use edit summaries, etc.
• Work on the article somewhere other than live article space. The article could easily be
  draft namespace
  . There may also be a way to do it under your class in the Education Program space - I know very little about the policies there, though.

Working on it live could very well involve working with other editors as you're working in a live encyclopedia article, while working in another namespace will probably be a bit calmer for you and your students and could be moved into the article once you've completed the work you'd like to do. Either is a workable option, and if you'd like any advice or assistance with any of that, I'll be happy to help as much as I can! --ElHef (Meep?) 04:33, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your help! Using a Draft version sounds good, although I've never done it. To create a draft, do you create an entirely new page, or make a copy of the original? I looked at WP:DRAFTS but I'm not sure. Cleeder (talk) 16:35, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Having looked over the relevant policies I think I need to take back some of what I said earlier - you're better off working on the article itself (since it already exists) than trying to create a new one and insert it later. The draft namespace is great for brand-new articles but not so good for collaborating and working on an existing article. The reason for this is that it would create a situation known as a

{{underconstruction}} tag on the article. --ElHef (Meep?

) 22:45, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

OK, I reverted to before the redirect. Should I delete the banner "It has been suggested that htis article be merged..." or leave it? We have added the banner "This article is/was the subject of an educational assignment in 2014 Q1" to the Talk page. Cleeder (talk) 02:31, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

No, leave the merge tag there. Just removing the merger proposal without consensus isn't a good idea. If the article is measurably improved and stands on its own when your students are done, then there may be grounds to remove the tag. --ElHef (Meep?) 02:46, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

I am looking for newspaper articles. I was just reminiscing about my week at the 1981 Girls State in Baton Rouge and told the story of the boy who either jumped or fell from the 8th floor. (We were told it was suicide, but there are always suspicions of foul play with something like this with one or no witness.) It is absolutely true. I remember having a newspaper summary of the week, but don't recall if the death was mentioned there. At Girls State, we were told of the death. One of my friends was at Boys State and we have talked about this frequently over the years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.38.19.90 (talk) 04:20, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

While I have no doubt of your recollections, Wikipedia operates on a policy of

reliable newspaper article to back up your information, then it can be added to the article. --ElHef (Meep?

) 04:33, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

I just amended the page on the physician and author Dr. Sherwin Nuland, to reflect his death tonight. He was a personal friend.

I was accused of vandalism, and my changes were not accepted.

Not sure why this occurred, but I will not be attempting again. Hopefully someone else will.

Dr. Harold Schwartz Woodbridge CT SchwartzHM (talk) 04:22, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

First let me say that I am very sorry for your loss. The reason your edits were reverted was that no

verifiability, and while I have no doubt you are telling the truth, until the information can be independently verified it cannot be included in the Wikipedia article. I do understand your frustration and I will keep an eye out for such a source myself; once I can find one I will see that the correct information is included in the article. --ElHef (Meep?

) 04:42, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello ElHef. I noticed where you reverted a pending change from 74.95.154.161, stating: "there's no MLS team in Georgia".[2] As of 04/16/14 however, "Atlanta has been awarded the league’s 22nd team" and although the expansion team doesn't begin to play until the 2017 season, the fact that Atlanta has a MLS team is correct.[3] Therefor I will be accepting the change. Cheers.—

Yeah, I spotted that shortly after I reverted the change. I didn't reinstate it and accept it myself because saying that Atlanta has an MLS team seems a bit misleading to me. Atlanta will have an MLS team starting in 2017. Having reviewed the

Atlanta MLS team article I agree that it should be mentioned in the Georgia article, but I think it should be clarified so it doesn't imply that there's currently an active team there. --ElHef (Meep?

) 13:24, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited States and union territories of India, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tamil (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) 08:57, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello, perhaps you should have checked the content of the brief edit I made before erasing it. All I'm stating is that the party in question was never anywhere close to having any national impact, or to being the main communist party of Sweden. They are a very small fringe party, they've regularly scored a fraction of a single percent in Swedish elections, even in their heyday. I don't think they've ever gone past ½% in parliamentary elections. The main communist party of Sweden has always been a different one (the current Left Party) - a fact which was conspicuously absent in the entry, and which can be fairly easily sourced from election statistics and from any number of boooks in Swedish, once I get to the library and get a few librarians on their feet. Unfortunately very few of those will be easily available outside of Sweden or to anyone who doesn't read and speak the Swedish language. The KFML(r)/KP have had a mass adherence about as powerful as the Plymouth Brethren.

I'm not making this input about circumstances on a foreign planet, thank you very much. The reason I added it was that just about any non-Swede reading the article in its present from could get the impression that this party is a potent communist party simply because they have lately adopted that name. In reality they're little more than a sect. 83.254.151.33 (talk) 00:16, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

My revert of that edit had nothing to do with the specific content of the edit; I have not made any judgment regarding the truth or accuracy of your edit. My revert was based in Wikipedia policy, in that no source was cited and the statements you added seemed to me to be

WP:SOURCEACCESS. Put a source with it and I see no problem with your edit. --ElHef (Meep?

) 19:37, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Ivan Mauger is the only person to have won six world individual speedway championship finals. Tony Rickarddson only ever won one final and five GP championships. Two different events. Kind regards John Darby — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.113.247.140 (talk) 17:46, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Fair enough, I know nothing about those events so I'll admit to probably being wrong there. However, Wikipedia's

guideline on notability in articles on days of the year states that sports records are not considered notable for inclusion in the day-of-year article "unless they are significant world records (speed) or social precedents (e.g. first black man to play in Major League Baseball)". It's fine to mention it in Ivan Mauger's article, but not appropriate for inclusion at September 2. --ElHef (Meep?

) 18:08, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure if this is the right way of replying but first I would like to point out I have again inserted Ivan Maugers achievement as being a significant event. He is the only person to have won six Individual Speedway World Championship Finals. He did this when the whole of the planet could qualify for such an event, it was a true World Championship. In 1995 the International Speedway Organisation (FIM) dropped the one night final for an elite GP championship, which is like F1 and is not a genuine world championship. So as it stands Ivan Mauger possibly will retain this title indefinitely. You would be hard pressed to find a motorcycle world championship open to the world and this was such an event. I do feel this event worthy of an entry

Secondly I find entries I would consider inevitable eg: Jim Gentile of the Baltimore Orioles becomes the first player in baseball history to hit grand slams in consecutive innings. Or as you put it the "first blackman to play in Major League Baseball" I wouldn't consider these notable and only of interest on a local level. Most world records are inevitable but this accomplishment will probably stand for the foreseeable future. Perhaps I should have also stated it was his last final.

Thanks for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darmech (talk • contribs) 02:45, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

I agree that Jim Gentile's accomplishment is not notable under

WP:NDOY and I've removed it from May 9. The example of the first black man in MLB is not so much a sports accomplishment as it is a significant social milestone in race relations in the United States, and so does meet the notability criteria for inclusion. The fact that Mauger will likely maintain his record for the foreseeable future is admirable but not relevant in this case. There are certainly hundreds (if not thousands) of other sports records that are difficult or impossible to match, and opening up the DOY articles to such records would bloat them beyond belief. --ElHef (Meep?

) 03:20, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your response, okay I will have to except your judgement over this entry. I don't think you appreciate the recognition other motorcycle racers from all breads of the motorcycle racing world would acknowledge Ivan’s achievement. Maybe I can convince you later. But the first black man is still a bit pushing it. I don't understand the racist implications you probably feel with this issue. How about the first black salesman in Harrods, London England. Where do we stop here? First Woman, Teenager, Maori, Invalid, Ginger haired people, Asians and not forgetting the next group of discriminated people Muslims. Not milestones just inevitable steps. This more so would swell the pages of events in the wiki calendar than sports records. I can only think of a handful of sports comparable with this event, not hundreds. It was and is one of the world’s top sports with exceptional riders from the states such as Bruce Penhall and Greg Hancock. Ask either of one of these chaps and they would agree I do understand that we could fill the events with endless sports milestones. I thank you again for your time to such a small part of this vast webpaedia. Kind regards John — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.114.139.25 (talk) 22:50, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

I understand your arguments, but I'm not the one you need to convince. I'm just implementing the content guidelines which have already been established by consensus. If you would like to take this discussion further, I suggest you raise it at Wikipedia talk:Days of the year. And thank you for being willing to discuss this issue! (Speaking as someone who frequently deals with vandalism on Wikipedia, it's a welcome change!) --ElHef (Meep?) 01:43, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Um ? There are new members and I am updating the page. What is going on? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A000:A502:6E00:40ED:AEB0:FA8F:2ADA (talk) 21:36, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

If that's the case, please provide a

reliable source to support your changes. When I see what appear to be nonsense words with no cited source, I tend to treat that as vandalism until shown otherwise. --ElHef (Meep?

) 22:10, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine "Most Jews in Palestine and around the world reacted to the UN resolution with satisfaction, but some did not." Then elaborates on how the Jews did not support the resolution. This is a mistake. Most people danced in the streets and pledged to build the country. Why is it not written? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.218.118.42 (talk) 21:40, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

The way that reads to me is that most Jews were satisfied, but some were not, which seems like an accurate assessment. Going beyond that statement would require that a

reliable source be cited to support what you've added. --ElHef (Meep?

) 22:12, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

i make a minor change on page name BAJWA with ref.but you have objected on it and delete it and give me warning.i want to know which thing made it wrong. i give one re but i can give more if need.i changed this (Bajwa are believed to be the bravest clan of Jatt)[1]

if i make some wrong please guid me becoz this is my first change in wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saifi118 (talk • contribs) 21:57, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

If you can provide different sources please do so. Open wikis such as the Jatland Wiki article you've linked to are not acceptable sources on Wikipedia - see

WP:UGC. Information on what constitutes a reliable source is contained elsewhere within that page, and if you have any questions or would like me to review any other sources, please let me know. --ElHef (Meep?

) 22:16, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello, ElHef. You have new messages at ElHef's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— Elijahthebrain • Help Please! 08:02, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Remember how you said a while ago that if I needed help updating the Gallery of Country Coats of Arms page I could ask you for help well, help is needed. I still have not figured out how to edit the code, and have made a request of the talk page for the article however, everyone is being difficult about updating it. So, could you please finish converting the last 3/4 of the page to match the format of the first 1/4 and add the information about each coat of arms. Thank you in advance for any help you can provide.Elijahthebrain (talk) 23:08, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.