User talk:Oknazevad/Archive 5

Hi, I've just undid your deletions in the Orthodoxy article, please take a look at the reasons. Those pieces of information are relevant, though maybe poorly presented. The only mention for 'coptic' would be lost due to such an edit. The second citation is also closely related to the subject (but shall be given a preamble, I agree with you). But both bring some interesting information to the article. I suppose we shall think on improving the wording and style, thank you.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at

An abusive, utterly incivil, unsigned comment from an anon IP with no other contributions struck me as nothing more than trolling, which is allowed to be removed. That's why I removed it. It contributes nothing positive to any discussion.

WP:DTTR; I've been here since 2004, and don't need a welcome message.[reply

]

Your change to a disambiguation has proved controversial. Perhaps you could comment at Talk:CAMRA. --Bob Re-born (talk) 08:31, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm just curious, but why have you been deleting articles, and then redirecting them to different pages. One of the biggest examples is Mr. Pibb, it's not fan-work, it's completely factual, and not saying that we favor the drink, may I know why you think this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.230.254 (talk) 03:46, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's entirely too fannish, and a

unneeded fork of an existing article. oknazevad (talk) 01:53, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

Fannish? That is not even a word in the dictionary, and shouldn't you know that if it was fan work, that it wouldn't be factual? Everything in the article is the history of Mr. Pibb, and you are not even a Wikipedia admin, so before you UNPROFFESIONALLY delete it, how about you learn what a real article means! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.230.254 (talk) 22:38, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

I undid your removal of the state flag of New Jersey in this article. While I understand your point that it may decorative, this article is part of a series of articles on state alcohol laws (e.g., alcohol laws of New York, alcohol laws of Missouri), and all of the articles use the respective state flag. I did not modify your other changes to this article. Debbie W. 12:33, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, many article on alcohol laws don't have flags; Wisconsin, for example. And I'd advocate removal on all the ones that do on the same grounds of pointless decoration. The maps are a bit different, as they provide some context for international readers that might not know where a given state is located, but the flags don't add anything. oknazevad (talk) 16:18, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Point well taken. I did more research and saw that some state alcohol law articles don't have a flag, so I removed the flag for New Jersey. Debbie W. 00:01, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

hello you deleted the Mainline novel from the Mainline disambiguation page because it has no wiki page; please look at the wiki page named Stasis - it is also a disambiguation page which has 4 links with no wiki pages which should also be removed, to be consistent; — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.201.80.240 (talk) 09:34, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS (or, just because something else is wrong doesn't make it right.). I have had no reason to go to the stasis page before, so I had no knowledge that it was not in compliance with the guidelines. Now that I know, I'll fix it as well. oknazevad (talk) 16:14, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

In recognition of all the work you’ve done lately! 66.87.0.254 (talk) 13:53, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Connecticut Lottery, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Data matrix (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) 11:23, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Golden Wiki Award You are among the top 5% of most active Wikipedians this past month! 66.87.2.96 (talk) 20:04, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		The Modest Barnstar
		Thanks for your recent contributions! 66.87.0.212 (talk) 19:59, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Oknazevad! I have put a lot of work into this page the past few days (have you seen the mess it was last week), only to find it had been undone by you. Please appreciate the amount of work I put into it by revising the comics so far. As for your reason: it is valid enough, so let me explain. I am not putting up summaries of individual issues, but individual story arcs. Such single-issue arcs are rare anyway. Many other comic pages on Wikipedia have summaries of each plotline and I hope to maintain that high standard with the TMNT. I have undone your recent edit, so please don't do the same again. My kind regards, CommandoJamie7. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.96.0.39 (talk) 15:32, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the American thing; I live in the UK. I'm changing that as I type. As for being unbalanced, you're free to edit it (not as if I can stop you!) as you please to balance it out. What I don't appreciate though, is you completely wiping out hours of work that I put into this article. I appreciate that you made the article, but it needed some form of improvement and that is what I gave it. My kind regards, CommandoJamie7. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.96.0.39 (talk) 16:57, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For a lot of the streets, the most you can do with them is redirect them to List of county routes in Hudson County, New Jersey, and lists like that. I've been looking to make subdivided versions of that list similar to what was started in Rockland County, New York a while back, and I generally prefer that it any of them are redirected, they should be redirected to those lists. In the meantime, I'm getting a crappy internet connection lately, so I'm going to be having trouble doing a lot of things on wikipedia in general. ----DanTD (talk) 20:29, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I actually wanted to use the redirect from

Okay, but Metro-North as an entity really didn't exist until 1983, hence the redirect from a Penn Central station. ----DanTD (talk) 15:00, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did you mean to conclude your remarks with the phrase "what they were doing wash actually a proper navbox"? Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 16:40, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i know that you are opposed to that solution to the problem of navboxes hiding at the foot of articles. But what do you think about this solution? Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 17:30, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not too shabby, actually. That I can see being useful if there's more than one navbox, as it groups them and provides a link from the see also. Float that one at VPP and see if it gets support. oknazevad (talk) 17:34, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For now I'm starting smaller based on this post. Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 19:26, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, since I hate ping-pong user talk page threads, I've followed my usual practice of replying on the one where the thread began, i.e. User talk:Shakescene#Re: Talk:New York City. Have a good weekend. —— Shakescene (talk) 02:41, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for going a bit overboard on the

No problem, it is a relatively new term, and it's taking a bit to filter through, but it is more than just the one producer. The issue was an over specific reading of the source. oknazevad (talk) 00:17, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(cur | prev) 03:25, 4 June 2012‎ Oknazevad (talk | contribs)‎ . . (75,233 bytes) (-2,740)‎ . . (Revert to remove inappropriate images (as this is the article on the product, not the company!), with ridiculously inappropriately long, incredibly poorly written WP:MOSIMAGE violating captions.) (undo) (cur | prev) 12:34, 3 June 2012‎ Ohconfucius (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (77,973 bytes) (-7)‎ .

Hello Oknazevad;

Having noticed your recent search and destroy mission concerning and directed at a lot of my work recently posted on Wikipedia, I thought it appropriate to waste some of my valuable time to write and give the courtesy of writing you.

Let's start with the "Coca-Cola" post and photographs that I recently labored over to post.

It was not very considerate of you to just chop and discard without regard for what the content was - that I placed up on the "Coca-Cola" subject category - which is very historical content.

Certainly both the founder of Coke Asa Candler, his son Charles Howard and his grandson Charles Howard Jr. - along with Dr. Pemberton too - are all turning with disgust in their graves! You took the VERY FIRST PUBLICATION of both the VERY FIRST DOCUMENT and PHOTO of the dawn of Coca Cola and just heaved it into the digital garbage can! And you also took a photo of the documentation for that written by the founder's dear son HAND SIGNED by the guy as well - and thrashed that to high heaven! Then of course you blew away the "ONe BILLIONTH GALLON OF SYRUP" certification photo from Coca-Cola given to the founder's son - in to the garbage as well! BY ANYBODY STANDARDS, especially Coca-Cola buffs - not a cool thing to do.

It's okay though. I cleaned it up and yes, it did need to be trimmed a little. I have trimmed the captions for the two photos I have reinstated and made appropriate modifications.

But how can you justify the following is beyond me "Revert to remove inappropriate images (as this is the article on the product, not the company!)," How is it that the photo of a 5 cent FREE Coca-Cola ticket ADMITTEDLY ripped off out of WIRED magazine is more important than never before seen high quality images of the beginning of the making of the drink Coca-Cola? Please logically explain this to me.

And how is it that the section I was posted under was called "HISTORY" - and even though I was providing a NEW PART of the HISTORY behind the drink "ARTICLE", how is it that it did not apply in your eyes? Especially when there was already at least 5-7 paragraphs SOLELY on the Coca-Cola drink "HISTORY" already in place YEARS before I ever placed my new additional post! You make no sense my friend.

The TOP CATEGORY in the "Coca-Cola' says "HISTORY" - but to make it more appropriate, I have changed it now to "19th CENTURY HISTORICAL ORIGINS"

Below that, where the "One BILLIONTH GALLON OF SYRUP" certification from Coca-Cola given to the founder's son - you blew away as IRRELEVANT - The darn thing is about THE SYRUP that makes the drink and was an in-house thing and so tell me what is NOT MORE RELEVANT than that my friend!??? How is a metal BOTTLE CAP OPEN PICTURED in the front end of the HISTORIC CATEGORY AT ALL SIGNIFICANT and any more relevant than that! ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MIND!!!??

What is with this crazed wonton behavior of yours?

Now about my writing. If you take a closer look, you will see that the day before at 12:34, on 3 June 2012‎ a fellow WIKIPEDIA editor named Ohconfucius - OHCONFUCIUS - only made seven 7 bytes of corrections. Now check him out - go to his name and you will see that he is a very serious editor who is a high level WIKIPEDIA EXPERT and HIS PURPOSE is very HIGH LEVEL.

He did not chop the heck out of my post nor did he go on a RAMPAGE and ON a CONCERTED SEARCH AND DESTROY MISSION seeking all of my other posts and and chop them up as well. The person simply made a few understandable corrections to some data in some of the reference links to Pendergrass's book or two on the "Coca-Cola" post............ period.

And everything was done in a considerate and respectful manner. And by the way, OHCONFUCIUS used up maybe "7 bytes"! You blew away ALL THAT I POST ON COCA COLA - over 2,700 bytes! WHo do you think you are!

Looking at the others who were nice to write back to you that you have attacked, I noticed that you SEARCHED OUT AND DISCARDED AND DESTROYED several other posts in a wonton manner as well! This tone of your 'approach' apparently shows that a certain pattern is developing with you that does not look good.

Just so you know - after you tore out and blew away my complete post on "Coca-Cola" - I see you also took out, within minutes the following the posts I added to as well;

"FRENCH COCA WINE"

"ASA G. CANDLER"

"WILLIAM FOTHERGIL COOKE"

The "WILLIAM FOTHERGILL COOKE" post by the way has been up for several months and there has been some very logical corrections by others before yo came along to deliberate search it out and attack it within minutes of wreaking havoc on others.

JUST SO YOU KNOW MY FRIEND, WHAT YOU HAVE DONE TO MY POSTS - WHICH LOOKS LIKE A CONCERTED EFFORT TO JUST ATTACK - MANY WOULD CONSIDER OUTRIGHT HARASSMENT!

I am writing this to you just so you understand that I am making this email to you as matter of record, so if the Wikipedia hierarchy ever needs to read it, they know what is what.

Also, please note, and some people at WIKIPEDIA already know - that I am a scholar and that the book I self-published in 1996 has been a SOURCE of REFERENCE and has been LISTED as SOURCE MATERIAL on one of their most important site categories for as long as WIKIPEDIA has been around. AND THE BOOK TOO HAS BEEN 'NOMINATED,' or shall I say 'ELECTED" by WIKIPEDIA to be part of a special several year long STUDY PROJECT that the HIERARCHY at WIKIPEDIA is working on now as I write this to you.

AND, THE SAME BOOK has been chosen by many Universities worldwide for their libraries - and TWO COPIES are maintained at HARVARD and ONE is at CORNELL, by the way. And, it was just reviewed on the DENVER.EXAMINER 15 years AFTER it was written.

So, just so you know, although I do not mind criticism, I do not appreciate the manner that you took NEW HISTORICAL data and TAMPERED WITH IT and DELETED IT TOTALLY with disregard - instead of cohesively adding to it.

I do want you to know, that to better give a cohesive tone to the "Coca-Cola" post I have also ADDED below "19th CENTURY HISTORICAL ORIGINS" and moved some data around to fit more appropriately and added same to a new one called "20th CENTURY LANDMARKS."

I have shortened data and tidied everything up and I trust that you have a more respective approach to your slash and destroy tactics.

But checking out your history, all I can find is that you slash and destroy peoples work. Do you EVER or have you WRITTEN ANYTHING?

If so, please bring it some to my attention - as I certainly would like to see if you can do more than hit the delete button.

Thanks,

Sorry if I rudely didn't drop an explanatory note at your talk page; it was rude of me and poor behavior.

Please see our

WP:W2W

. They also had inappropriate use of capitalization, boldface and other formatting issues.

As for the Coca-Cola additions, I took them out for lack of relevance. The Coca-Cola article is about the drink, not the company; that's at The Coca-Cola Company. The information in those images is better placed there, but in the article text, not the image caption. (As a ln aside, the correct way to sign a post is with four tildes (~).) oknazevad (talk) 16:46, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Oknazevad:

Having some time now, I have had a look at the Coca-Cola post and read though it. It reads very nicely and the edits / deletions that you did were good. I see what you mean about the 'caption' thing and will be more cognizant of it in the future. I like that you reinstated the header for "history" and then let the other new - what we can call 'sub-headers' run below it. This format as it stands now will allow for more cohesive data to placed or addressed more appropriately and give the category post more significance. The site page is looking much more tighter now and flows better. As for the statement you keep reiterating about regarding the 'drink' as opposed to the 'company, I understand your 'angle,' and obviously making sentences treat the 'drink' rather than the 'company' is all fine and dandy, but that is a bit going too 'altruistic' in concept one can say: as then the 'drink' wouldn't exist without the existence of 'company.' And that said, the need for the header title "HISTORY" would not be necessary, now would it? And like I said before, the header title "HISTORY" was there before I ever came to the site, with a lot of 'history' about the 'company.' All I set out to do was add and align the facts more succinctly about the company vis a vis the development of the drink. And I think now that that has been properly achieved.

It is good we were able to knock this out to make it all more cohesive looking. To have a cheap non-descript $10 German Coca-Cola bottle opener as an 'opener' to the story - really is a bit lame. The location at Asa G. Candler & Co. location at 47 Peachtree St., technically was where all of the initial "Coca-Cola" bottling took place starting around 1888. Candler had much more room than Jacob's pharmacy had and had a nice storefront with expansive window space - which Jacob's really did not. All of the initial "Coca-Cola" syrup making apparatus, I have been told, was moved from Joe Jacob's pharmacy to 47 Peachtree Street, and that Coca-Cola syrup production equipment was placed into the basement at 47 Peachtree Street I have learned. Apparently the bottles of this syrup was stored on the second floor, as the photos does reveal. This data is very significant, and IS ABOUT THE DRINK.

I know many people in Atlanta now for many years and know one who knew the Candler and Woodruff families intimately and had relatives that did as well - and I am learning about these stories that have been handed down - and expect to be posting some of that data with other newly discovered pictures.

Well, I am glad to see the post has shaped up.

Thanks Oknazevad,

Epochwiki77 (talk)Epochwiki77 Epochwiki77 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:17, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have start discussion here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Credit_cards How you like it, you're invited. Feel yourself welcome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.10.229.1 (talk) 10:13, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

apologies if this is the wrong place for this, but I corrected the Logo section of the devils' page (twice) and I've now been blocked (!) from making any further changes. you said that "there is no d there"... um, dude -- for real? everyone knows the devils' logo is so great because it's an "n" and a "j" combining to form a lower-case "d". this is common knowledge. please update and unblock me. this is crazy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.217.110.14 (talk) 05:31, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot unblock you, as I am not an administrator, and that's not hey the page is semi-protected anyway (as a hint, it has to do with last night's game). That said, I don't know where you got your info from, but there's no "d" in the Devils' logo, at all. Maybe if you squint really hard. But no. oknazevad (talk) 21:09, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

dude i feel like this is the twilight zone. the "n" and "j" CLEARLY made a lower-case "d" for devils -- that is the ENTIRE POINT. this is COMMON KNOWLEDGE. i lived in new jersey for years. see, this is why wikipedia has such a bad reputation. people cannot even correct existing info. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.217.110.14 (talk) 04:35, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I live in Jersey, too, have my whole life, even before the Devils got here. Never heard your claim in the least. So its surely not "common lnowledge". More importantly, from the Wikipedia standpoint, your claim has no backing in reliable sources, while It being just an NJ is supported by that, as well as seen in the prototype logo which didn't have them as one piece. In short, it is not the entire point, has never been the point, and you are sorely misinformed. oknazevad (talk) 12:29, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking on nominating you as an administrator, because I noticed your edit history and I'm thinking that you will have enough wits to become one. So, are you gonna join the admin mothership? Fairly OddParents Freak (Fairlyoddparents1234) 14:56, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the compliment, but I'm not interested in going through the process (which is rough, supposedly), and the responsibility. Thank you, though, for the kind words. oknazevad (talk) 01:29, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]