User talk:IronGargoyle/Archive 13
![]() | 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. |
![]()
|
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 |
DYK for Oksana Masters
DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Recorded Pianists
For God's sake, will you please stop deleting the red links without seeking some consensus? There's a section for discussing this issue on the talk page. Drhoehl (talk) 20:22, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
- Please see my reply on the talk page. The guideline represents the consensus of the wider community which I am enforcing. I offer some suggestions there as well. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 20:24, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of List of banjo bands (worldwide)
Hi Iron, I've just seen your note about deleting the list I created quite some time ago. Would you mind putting it back while we discuss your concerns? Apparently you have no problem with the existence of a list of cellists so I am unsure as to your personal opposition to a list a banjo bands. Regards, --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 16:52, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
- p.s., I, like you, are busy in the real world. In fact I'm producing an all banjo jazz festival this weekend, Sept 8th & 9th, 2012, so please have patience with my responses as well. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 16:55, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
- I don't have any personal opposition to lists of banjo bands, as long as there are notable banjo bands to include in that list. I undeleted the page and moved it to User:Scalhotrod/List of banjo bands (worldwide). This list should not include non-notable bands, and if you move it back to mainspace I will list it at AfD unless there are more bluelinks on the list. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 15:10, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi Iron, Thank you for retrieving it, I appreciate that. With regard to your concerns, within the banjo, banjo music, and jazz communities, all of these bands are notable. The fact that most of them do not have an associated WP article is unfortunate, but does not necessarily indicate that they are not notable to those respective communities. I am one of those that believes that "notability" on Wikipedia is a bit of a moving target and utterly relative. What is critical and vital to one is irrelevant to another, its just the way that the world works and Wikipedia should reflect that.
With regard to your demand (and I refer to it as such because of your comment to "AfD unless there are more bluelinks on the list), how many is enough? Is it a flat number or certain portion or percentage? Please understand, I'm not trying to obtuse or patronizing, but the list was seemingly just fine until your discovery of it so I am trying to better understand your criteria for making it acceptable to you. Best regards, Chris --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 19:55, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
- Only one of the entries actually has its own article (Peninsula Banjo Band). One notable entry is not a list. It may be that the other bands are notable, but there is no proof (i.e., they are not verifiable). Proof of notability requires reliable and independent sources. None of the sources in the article are independent; they just link back to band websites. I don't think there is a set number that the list needs, but there really should be more than a tiny handful of verifiable, notable bands to justify a list on Wikipedia. At the very least, the entries retained in the list should have reliable, independent sources (even if some of the entries don't have articles yet themselves). Everything else should be removed. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 20:46, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi Iron, Fair enough and I understand your concerns and recommendations. I'll do my best to address them and seek help with the addition of a sufficient number of articles. Best regards, --
Anthony Hargrove
Hey Packer fan, tell me anything that I wrote about Anthony Hargrove is untrue. Go ahead, watch the footage and tell me what I wrote didn't happen... I'm waiting... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.61.163.34 (talk • contribs)
- I'm not a Packers' fan, and you might want to check out Wikipedia's policy on neutral point of view before making any further edits. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 17:01, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
Social Psychology
Hello, I'm IronGargoyle. I wanted to let you know that I removed an external link you added to the page Social psychology, because to me it seemed inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thanks,IronGargoyle (talk) 10:34, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi IronGargoyle. I think indeed you made a mistake. Both In-Mind and the app links are free or low-costs ways to disseminate social psychological knowledge. In fact, both have been extensively reviewed and are created by academics for the general public. The apps are also non-for profit and can contribute to the reader's knowledge, much similar to Social Psychology Network (and in fact the app is endorsed by an association like Association for Psychological Science). Could you please put the links back? 137.56.43.220 (talk) 10:37, 10 October 2012 (UTC) Best H-Iz — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.56.43.220 (talk)
Dear IronGargoyle -- today you were extremely quick in removing the links that you marked as spam. In my opinion they are certainly not spam, but I have been waiting for quite some hours. Would you mind getting back to me? H-Iz 83.83.56.15 (talk) 19:22, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
- You might want to take a look over Wikipedia's policies on external links to avoid seems particularly relevant. Social Psychology Network is not a fair comparison, as it is one of the largest organizations in the field. It also appears you have a conflict of interest in adding the link; if your resource is of sufficient quality to eventually include in the article, another editor (without a conflict of interest) may see fit to add the link at some point in the future. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 20:23, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
HI there. Thank you for your answer. I think this could be interpreted in two ways. If one continues to the issue of promotion (which is I think the vital point in what you point out), the page discusses advocacy, opinion pieces, and so forth. This is certainly not applicable here. Point 11 seems to be more applicable, that is, being a recognized authority. The site has an editorial board of graduate students, and an editorial review board of international experts (see the 'For Authors' page). See for example the issue of notability. It seems weird to claim that folks like Barsalou, Fiske, and Herbert are not recognized authorities. The app to which was linked is further endorsed by folks like Cacioppo and Reis, who are two of the most notable people in the field. And yes, the magazine is the largest organization in the field for communicating to lay audiences so the comparison seems fair (and certainly more recognized than the links to Wilderdom.com or the Shippensberg page - these are in no way recognized authorities). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.83.61.107 (talk) 08:15, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
I presume you don't agree with my assessment? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.210.134.246 (talk) 19:21, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
- You would be correct in your presumption. You have a conflict of interest. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 13:39, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
That would not be according to the guidelines you indicated. In any case, please see the European Association for Social Psychology's website for the recognition of Social K as a resource: http://www.easp.eu/themes/resources.htm. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.83.56.15 (talk) 18:50, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
Brograve
I did put an edit summary!--94.65.35.192 (talk) 20:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- You did. My mistake, sorry. IronGargoyle (talk) 20:56, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Help please
Could you ask for Zonga (music service) to be created please — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.139.246.133 (talk) 21:21, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- I don't know anything about the topic. But, if you follow the link I sent you and follow the instructions there, someone should be able to help you. Do you have references from reliable sources that talk about this music service? Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 21:25, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Re: Far-right politics
From GeorgePierBain (talk) 22:26, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello, this message is from the person who has been inserting the new section "The Far Right in America" into the article. Needless to say, the IP is not fake. I understand that this back and forth with the editing must be frustrating, and I sincerely apologize. Yes, I am new to Wikipedia, but I wish to do this properly from now on. As for the content of what I have attempted to add, it is accurate - and I will explain why. In the past, groups in the USA that can arguably be described as far-right have met the description given in the current version of the article. Today, any such groups have been marginalized to the point of insignificance. Where any individual lies on the political spectrum in the USA depends primarily on where he or she stands on the relationship between the individual and the state. On this American spectrum, therefore, Fascism is far to the left of mainstream liberals and conservatives. Without the distinction made clear by my section, the article unfairly and innacurately portrays the political views of many people in the United States. If you compare the current versions of the Wikipedia articles "Far-right politics" and "Far-left politics" with a truly objective mind, you will have to see some clear bias. The latter is brief and lacks any mention of the negative aspects of far-left politics, the negative parts of the ideology and of the history. In stark contrast, "Far-right politics" includes genocide, oppression, racism, and xenophobia as essential elements. In fact, these are common elements of far-left politics as well. The article "Far-left politics" does not even include a "History" section! Why is this? As for citations, the general description in "Far-right politics" (contained in the first two paragraphs) includes but one source. And this source is the work of one person who presents his own analysis, something that should not be considered indisputable fact. I can add citations to my own contribution, but they will be just the same; I will have cited the opinion of another who agrees with me. What is very clear is that these two articles must be altered in the interest of fairness and accuracy. I would like to achieve this with anyone whose primary concern is presenting the truth.
GeorgePierBain (talk) 22:26, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Your edits seem in pretty clear violation of that, and you're not proving any evidence to the contrary with your statement above. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 13:31, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
Andy Stanton
dear iron thingo the edit i made earlier was consective to me and i directly copied it from the book [except for the whole dream pop music thing, i added it myself.] please as i am new, i am begging you [nao] that you restore thoese edits or do i have to report and block you to sanne? yours LolaPop
- You just admitted that your edit violated Wikipedia's cite your sources. Why would I restore the edits after you told me that? The threats are also not appreciated. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 13:38, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
Edits to List of Euphonium Players
Could you detail your logic in the recent, and repeated, edits to this list? I will admit it only exists to deter the previously unending additions to the list of those very few who shaped the nature and use of the instrument in the Euphonium article itself, but I am mystified by some of your deletions. For instance, you retain Derrick Kane, while dropping Ryan McCrudden and Aaron VanderWeele - all Salvation Army, but the dropped two being from the premier group, the New York Staff Band. You keep Roger Behrend, a highly skilled, respected performer (we had the same teacher) from the US Navy, but drop the Coast Guardsmen - is this a diminution of that service? You keep Matt White, but drop David Thornton - in terms of who is more significant as a player, that seems truely odd. Finally, you drop Glen Call, Ray Young, and highly notable radio personality Harold Brasch, which just seems to be leaving out some of the bigger names from this secondary list. I looked at your WP rule, but do not understand how you are applying it in this case. Can you detail your criteria?--Rwberndt (talk) 18:49, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, please see notability guidelines) or be supported by reliable, independent sources. To be completely honest, I was rather lax in removing entries. Entries should really be supported by multiple sources to be included in a list. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 19:00, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
- Since I went through the list and sourced appropriate inclusions with the goal of every inclusion being either independently sourced or having a wiki article with associated sources, I see you have had quite a battle with persons unknown to preserve that work. For being such a little known instrument, euphonium and baritone articles seem to generate a remarkable amount of self-promotion and vandalism. Thanks for your considerable efforts to keep this one looking good!--Rwberndt (talk) 12:18, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
- Good work with that sourcing and thank you for the kind words. It is somewhat baffling that a list of euphonium players would attract such a level of self-promotion and spam, although not as baffling as the amount of spam that "List of classical piano duos (performers)" (!) attracts. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 21:25, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
- Since I went through the list and sourced appropriate inclusions with the goal of every inclusion being either independently sourced or having a wiki article with associated sources, I see you have had quite a battle with persons unknown to preserve that work. For being such a little known instrument, euphonium and baritone articles seem to generate a remarkable amount of self-promotion and vandalism. Thanks for your considerable efforts to keep this one looking good!--Rwberndt (talk) 12:18, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
MGM-52 Lance Edits regarding potential copyright issue
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/54/Information.png/25px-Information.png)
An Issue you are involved in, regarding the MGM-52 Lance Article is taking place on that Article's Talk Page. Several Users have repeatedly removed the section "Operators" with the assertion that it contains copyrighted material. Several Users, including myself have just reverted the edits on that Page. I am opening a discussion on that Article's Talk Page in the hopes that a consensus can be reached and the constant reverting can be ended. I am notifying all of the editors involved in the hopes that the problem can be discussed there and a satisfactory conclusion can be reached. King of Nothing (talk) 03:39, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
- I have no involvement in that page aside form having once reverted vandalism from it. You should be more selective with these blanket notifications. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 16:50, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
- Actually what you reverted was not vandalism, per se, as the edit summary in your revert was incorrect when it stated "unexplained removal of content" as the User that removed the content stated that he did so because of Copyright Infringement. There were several Users both removing the Section and reverting the removal over and over. I think it would have been inappropriate for me to not inform any of the Users that have either removed the content in question or reverted such removal (and those are the only Users I have notified, making this not a "blanket notification" as I only notified those directly involved and could not have been any more "selective"). King of Nothing (talk) 06:08, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
- Ok, sorry about that. The explanation of removal by the IP was neither apparent, nor accurate. You can't copyright facts; only creative works. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 11:50, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry to bother you again. I think I may have gone above and beyond what was sensible with the whole "good faith" thing with that IP Address (talk). I left him warnings on his talk page, like other people have, and i opened a discussion on the Articles Talk Page. Yet he has twice since then removed the section without any discussion, comment, or edit summary. Its been his only edits for over 9 months now. I respectfully ask that you block him for whatever time you feel is necessary to prevent further vandalism and disruptive editing. With Thanks, King of Nothing (talk) 16:51, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
- I'd rather not block the IP myself, given my semi-involvement and given the slow nature of the reverts. If it persists, I think a better avenue might be
- Okay, thanks. If it continues i'll go through one of those avenues. Cheers, Mate King of Nothing (talk) 17:31, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
- I'd rather not block the IP myself, given my semi-involvement and given the slow nature of the reverts. If it persists, I think a better avenue might be
- Sorry to bother you again. I think I may have gone above and beyond what was sensible with the whole "good faith" thing with that IP Address (talk). I left him warnings on his talk page, like other people have, and i opened a discussion on the Articles Talk Page. Yet he has twice since then removed the section without any discussion, comment, or edit summary. Its been his only edits for over 9 months now. I respectfully ask that you block him for whatever time you feel is necessary to prevent further vandalism and disruptive editing. With Thanks, King of Nothing (talk) 16:51, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
- Ok, sorry about that. The explanation of removal by the IP was neither apparent, nor accurate. You can't copyright facts; only creative works. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 11:50, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
- Actually what you reverted was not vandalism, per se, as the edit summary in your revert was incorrect when it stated "unexplained removal of content" as the User that removed the content stated that he did so because of Copyright Infringement. There were several Users both removing the Section and reverting the removal over and over. I think it would have been inappropriate for me to not inform any of the Users that have either removed the content in question or reverted such removal (and those are the only Users I have notified, making this not a "blanket notification" as I only notified those directly involved and could not have been any more "selective"). King of Nothing (talk) 06:08, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Jab Tak Hai Jaan Protection
The Jab Tak Hai Jaan page is getting vandalized on an hourly basis by random IP addresses. It's the same ones over and over again who claim to be, and I quote, 'fans of Salman bhai who will depromote SRK and JTHJ'. Could you please protect it or give me instructions on how to protect it? I think semi-protection is the correct term that only lets users who have registered the ability to edit. Ashermadan (talk) 01:17, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
- Looks like someone else got to this first. IronGargoyle (talk) 13:28, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
Man with a mission
Can you please read
- The policy you cite has to do with the notability of the list topic not the notability of entries on said list. The relevant policy for this case is WP:LISTPEOPLE. I should also add that I definitely encourage the deletion of non-notable articles on said lists (and their entries on the list being deleted as well). Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 01:29, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:11, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi
Hi : )
Just noticed you on my watchlist, and thought I would drop by and say hi : ) - jc37 18:40, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
- Good to see you, although I probably see you around quite a bit more than vice versa due to my Wikipedia-space lurking habits of late. Where did I show up on your watchlist? Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 16:37, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
- Lol could be.
- I mentioned the other day Kbdank and Hiding as two of the excellent admins I learned from (if I mentioned them all, we'd be here for quite some time : )
- Needless to say you're one of the key ones.
- Dunno if I ever said thank you. (I'd like to think I have. But regardless, I do thank you : )
- (And to try again: One of these days we should see about nudging you towards bureaucratship : )
- Oh and I think it was when you edited your userpage.
- I hope your days are treating you well : ) - jc37 17:52, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
DYK for Marfa Girl
DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
- [January 8, 2013] Hi IronGargoyle. It seems you have incorrectly listed my title/credit in the Film Box under the Marfa Girl poster. My title/credit should be Art Director - Fernando Valdes and you have next to my name the title/credit "edited by". You can verify my title/credit by checking the IMDB Marfa Girl page. For whatever reason Wikipedia would not let me edit your entry and I am hoping you would be kind enough to do so. Many thanks!
— Preceding unsigned comment added by FERNONSET (talk • contribs)
- I've fixed the editor line. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 07:39, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted flautists
Why did you delete the two flautists I added to the
- WP:LISTPEOPLE requires that all entries on lists of people must be supported by reliable sources. Typically this means the entry on the list has an article of its own (with its own reliable sources), but it can also mean that the entry has reliable sources within the list itself. Your entries to the list did not meet either of these criteria. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 21:09, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Coaster Star
![]() |
The Coaster Star | |
This is for all the work you've done with amusement park articles! Also nice job with Mill Race (log flume), its always nice to see new articles in the project, especially ones that might be difficult to find information for. Keep up the good work!--Astros4477 (talk) 01:36, 30 November 2012 (UTC) |
- Thanks! I got awarded the barnstar I invented! :) IronGargoyle (talk) 02:54, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:52, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
Trek races
I'm restoring the redirects you've undone for several Star Trek races, but I'll also initiate a thread in the Star Trek wikiproject talk page to hit this topic. Essentially, it looks to me like you're restoring content for subjects that are "major" within the fictional universe, but whose subjects don't clear the
- I'm not a fan of the unilateral redirection here, but at least you've subsequently redirected them to better targets. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 21:56, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
DYK for Mill Race (log flume)
DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Disambiguation link notification for December 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Invasion of the Sea, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Berber (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) 09:30, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/23/Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg/40px-Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg.png)
Message added 04:55, 23 December 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Nomination of Francis Stokes for deletion
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/5f/Ambox_warning_orange.svg/48px-Ambox_warning_orange.svg.png)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Francis Stokes 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/Francis Stokes (2nd nomination) 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 template from the top of the article.
DYK for François Élie Roudaire
DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |