User talk:Aeonx/Archive/2015/December

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
• The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you are interested, or you can add it directly to your user page by copying the following: {{WPMILHIST Announcements}}.
• Important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
• The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, writing contests, and article logistics.
• We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
• We've developed a set of guidelines that cover article structure and content, template use, categorization, and many other issues of interest.
• If you're looking for something to work on, there are many articles that need attention, as well as a number of review alerts.
• If you have an idea for improving the project, we have a strategy think tank that provides a dedicated forum for discussing it.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask any of the project coordinators or any other experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome, and we are looking forward to seeing you around! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 15:53, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

• For Suggestions: SuggestBot request page

Reviewer permission

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:00, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

The Reviewer Barnstar!

		The Reviewer's Barnstar
		Hey, I just wanna say, you're doing an awesome job as a reviewer. Have this shiny little thing! :) Endofskull (talk) 23:49, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Re:Ice hockey captains

Hi, thank you for your third opinion. Outside viewpoints are always good. I certainly appreciate your suggestion that adding a link to Captain (ice hockey) is beneficial, and had already suggested that Dolovis add such a link in context. We'll see where it goes from there. Thanks! Resolute 14:44, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi, Aeonx, I just wanted to say thanks for your work in assessing Military history articles. It is much appreciated. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 21:37, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Bernhard Deroy

Thanks for assessing Jean-Pierre Doumerc. I was afraid that the uncited German wikipedia references would preclude giving the Bernhard Erasmus von Deroy article a B-class rating. Removing the uncited material means a lot of the article will be missing, so I'm not anxious to do that and may just leave it as Start. Thanks for your thoughts. Djmaschek (talk) 02:48, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Your request for rollback

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

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

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Tiptoety ^talk 18:05, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks so much for your positive comment on the new ratings for the Guugu Yimithirr language which you have added to my Talk page. It is a real relief to me. Cheers and best wishes, John Hill (talk) 14:06, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Request for access to ACC account creation interface

Confirmation that I have requested access to the ACC account creation interface and that I have read the Wikipedia:Request an account/Guide. Aeonx (talk) 13:03, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for applying to access the account creation tool. Unfortunately I was unable to process your request. The ACC tool is a powerful program, and at the present time your account is either too new for us to determine whether you would know how to properly use the tool or that you have not attained the necessary level of trust to be granted access. Please don't take this personally and feel free to contact me if you have any questions. FunPika 17:47, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

I am curious as to why you made this decision. I reviewed the Wikipedia:Request an account/Guide#Qualifications for using the interface which state: Usually a user should simply be trusted by the approving administrator., further I believe I meet all the minimum requirements as I have not had a block on the English Wikipedia or any wiki or sister project; I do not have any history of account-related abuse; my account on Wikipedia was created on 8/5/2010[1] and is therefore over 60 days old; and lastly I have throughly read the ACC guidelines. Further, as far as I know I haven't done anything to demonstrate anything but full trustworthiness. The reason I applied for access to the ACC account creation interface is because I work in User Account management professionally and I am curious and willing to help in regards to the en-wiki account creation process, I have absolutely no intention on misusing the tool in anyway, and hopefully my use of other wikipedia tools including STiki, Twinkle, Huggle, AWB and my role as a Reviewer demonstrate this. So I am hoping you can review my case again, or refer it to another interface administrator. Regards, Aeonx (talk) 03:28, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

IRC Cloak request

Request confirmation for an IRC Cloak. Aeonx (talk) 06:00, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problem: Ellis M. Zacharias

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Ellis M. Zacharias, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from http://ussslcca25.com/zach04.htm, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

• If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Ellis M. Zacharias and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, Ellis M. Zacharias, in your email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0, or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Ellis M. Zacharias with a link to where we can find that note.
• If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Ellis M. Zacharias. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Ellis M. Zacharias saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:51, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

I realize you were notified of copyright concerns--not here but at the GA review--in April, but this template includes some useful information about our copyright policies and your options for verify license. Please see the talk page of the article for more information about the specific problem in this article. You may also wish to read Wikipedia:Copy-paste for an overview of Wikipedia's approach to previously published content. Thank you. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:51, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Wollongong meetup invitation

Hi there! You are cordially invited to the first Wollongong meetup to be held in the first week of January. Details and an attendee list are at Wikipedia:Meetup/Wollongong. Hope to see you there! John Vandenberg 12:35, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

(this automated message was delivered using replace.py to all users in Wollongong)

Wikipedia trainers requested in New South Wales

Wikimedia Australia is looking for experienced Wikipedians to help out at training sessions across New South Wales, in particular in Newcastle, Wollongong, Port Macquarie and in Parkes. If you're interested, the details are at the following link:

• http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediaau-l/2013-July/003677.html

We'd love to see you there! Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:44, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Help in maintaining NPOV on historical Pacific War aviator

Hi Aeonx. I'm looking for some third parties to review a problem editor who (in my opinion) continues to violate the NPOV policy of Wikipedia on the page of a Pacific War aviator, Mitsuo Fuchida. After exhausting myself trying to maintain viable content in the "Controversy" section, I'm asking for a page ban for this user. If you have time and motivation, I'd really appreciate your consideration to review this issue. The Noticeboard Request is to be found here: [2] I hate to take anyone's time, but this problem is why many won't trust Wikipedia. Thanks for your consideration.--TMartinBennett (talk) 18:04, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:23, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Dutch surprise!

You're an inspiring person ;) Lemon 18:12, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

References

Remember that when adding medical content please only use high-quality reliable sources as references. We typically use review articles, major textbooks and position statements of national or international organizations. WP:MEDHOW walks you through editing step by step. A list of resources to help edit health content can be found here. The edit box has a build in citation tool to easily format references based on the PMID or ISBN. We also provide style advice about the structure and content of medicine-related encyclopedia articles. The welcome page is another good place to learn about editing the encyclopedia. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop me a note. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:00, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

One review from 2009 does not meet scientific consensus that is absolute. At the very least there is a minority viewpoint that A2 has advantages over A1+A2 milk which needs to re represented. I'm going to raise a formal Dispute on this matter as clearly there are senseless editors such as yourself reverting proper changes. Aeonx (talk) 00:11, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

• A2 milk (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:20, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello Aeonx. There may still be time for you to avoid a block, if you will agree to wait for consensus before changing the article again. The complaint about your edits is at WP:AN3#User:Aeonx reported by User:Doc James (Result: ). Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:34, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Please revert or strike out your talk page comment at Talk:A2 milk#Rewrite required but not possible with editor nazi's. You refer to other editors as Nazis and morons. You are risking a block for personal attacks. Administrators may be asking themselves if you are actually here to help Wikipedia, or to promote some off-wiki cause that you support. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 23:38, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Removed the offensive remarks. Aeonx (talk) 23:44, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

A2 milk

I understand your frustration with the A2 milk article and share some of your concerns about the behaviour of some editors: I welcome a healthy scepticism, but some edits are clearly part of a fairly unprincipled campaign to rubbish A2 milk. I'm a bit worried, though, about your intention to start your "own complete rewrite". Past attempts to do that have failed and my own well-intended but probably over-ambitious attempt in mid-2014 (see this version) ended rather badly. In short, the dogs began barking and a pack mentality took over; possibly the low point came when, without being informed, I was reported at the Fringe Theories Noticeboard#A2 milk by an editor who also whistled up more dogs at WikiProject Medicine [3] by blatantly lying that I had "rewritten (the A2 article) to make health claims based on anecdotes and a few primary sources". So good luck with your project, and I will assist where I can. I remain interested in the topic but I'm not sure I want to get too deeply involved again—and I'm about to head to the beach for a couple of weeks! BlackCab (TALK) 10:45, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

I think the best way to fix this problem is to separate two sets of information, being The a2 Milk Company-related and scientific-related regarding the A1 and A2 casein which WikiProject Medicine have apparently claimed and are heavily influencing with their own POVs. I have drafted a branch here User:Aeonx/The_a2_Milk_Company; would appreciate any assistance in clean-up and separating A2 Milk specific and detailed scientific information which will go into User:Aeonx/A2 Milk from Company-information. -- Aeonx (talk) 00:06, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXVII, December 2015

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-Class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on the German retreat from France in 1944 Op-ed: TomStar81 on empires of World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 05:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

December 2015

Your recent editing history 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 get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:02, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

A joke? Firstly, I'm adding value by provided references, including university studies which are valid; secondly the only undoing is removing BIAS. Go Read WP:NPOV. Aeonx (talk) 00:09, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Also WP:DTTR Aeonx (talk) 01:35, 28 December 2015 (UTC).