User talk:KNHaw/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, KNHaw/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Gflores^Talk 19:17, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Flashman

Sorry about the delay getting back to you - I am a little confused by your page. I think that there is a great deal of merit in a Popular Culture section. I don't mind putting Flashman in there at all. I like GMF much more when he doesn't deal with subjects I know anything about, but I see no objection. In fact I think it would be a good idea and I think you deserve credit for the idea. Lao Wai 09:50, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I've completed the addition of the new section and Flashman reference. I hope you like it. --KNHaw 01:27, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

RE: X2 "assasination" Fix

KNHaw wrote:

I just wanted to thank you for catching my misspelling of "assassination" in the X2 movie article. It came as a surprise that I’ve been missing the second “ss” for all these years.

A very good catch. Thanks again.

That's quite OK. You're not the only one. In fact, you're one of precisely 80 misspellings of the word that I have corrected today. See my user page for a complete list, including the amazingly large number of people who can't spell "aggressive".

Just one other thing though - remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing "~~~~" at the end of your comment.

Which does this --- Gurch 19:25, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

Yeah, there are many like that. We just need to do the best we can to revert them. PS, I added a welcome since you haven't received one yet. You're free to move or remove it. Gflores^Talk 19:17, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Zarubina

The question at Talk:Elizabeth Zubilin about Elizabeth Zarubina being married to Blumkin I believe is in Pavel Sudaplatov's Special Tasks, and also was made at the SVR site bio scetch on her, but I'm having trouble bringing up the English language version of that. Nobs02 22:50, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Zheng He vandalism

No problem. You didn't step on my toes. -- Rob C (Alarob) 19:47, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

RE: Vandal Only Account Question

Hello KNHaw. Administrators usually type that in the edit summary when it appears that an account is solely used for vandalism. There is no tag or flag to place on the user or their userpage to indicate if they are...and personally even if there was I wouldn't advise that you add it to their userpage. If however their account is indefinitely blocked you are free to add the {{indefblock}} tag to their userpage.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 21:35, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Chi Mak

I appreciate your cleanup of my grammar mistakes,but why you deleting the public domain materials? You really though it as cleanup or clear up?--Ksyrie 04:57, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I know little about the american technic exporting law,the reason why I present the public domain here is his lawyer thought it to be an key evidence to prove his innocent.If you really the pubic domain doesn't apply to his case,you can explain it in the following section,but not to delete it.--Ksyrie 05:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Jerry Holkins fix

Haha, yeah I saw it...it's all good. Call me old fashioned, but I do vandal patrol/fix/notify manually. My only aid is caffeine:-P. -Cquan (talk, AMA Desk) 17:29, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Don't feed the trolls

Please do not feed the trolls, as you did here. Thank you! Wikihermit ^{(Talk • HermesBot)} 00:25, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem. Cheers! --Wikihermit ^{(Talk • HermesBot)} 00:33, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Template:Soft-drink-stub

Just a quick note- when you added the usage note to this template, you forgot to extend the noinclude tags, and so the usage notes were transcluded onto many pages. Try to be more vigilant when editing templates, as changes show up everywhere. I have sorted this problem, but I don't know if you have done it with others. J Milburn 22:20, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:MagellanChokeRingAndCover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:MagellanChokeRingAndCover.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 06:31, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:TrimbleChokeRingAntenna.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:TrimbleChokeRingAntenna.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 08:13, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Zheng He

Thanks for keeping an eye on the constant reversions by Sllee19. He did three in one day and still won't talk to the rest of us. I infer from his name and edit history that he is Dr. Siu-Leung Lee, the physician with the Chinese brass disk and the curious theory about Zheng He discovering America before Columbus -- as discussed on the talk page. If you're willing, we may need to ask for help with him, perhaps a Request for Comment. -- Rob C (Alarob) 23:56, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I think the first step should be to get other users to comment. But if Dr. Lee stays as uncommunicative as he has been so far, the next step is ab RFC on user behavior. -- Rob C (Alarob) 02:27, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

P.S. The link is WP:RFC#Request comment on users. -- Rob C (Alarob) 17:27, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

banning 67.169.112.122

If you can, please take the next step with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:67.169.112.122 He she or it keeps vandalizing pages after your 'final warning' of April 26, 2007. He messed up burglary (ironically) by chopping out crucial information and adding misspelled blurts. Also...in case I don't do it correctly, could you please revert burglary to the way it was before 67.169.112.122 edited it? 69.152.169.2 05:02, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

banning 67.169.112.122

re: your reply at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:69.152.169.2 is a bit puzzling, you wrote: "It's very possible it was a different user who was screwing around and could be scared off by a simple warning. As evidence, note that the vandalism seems to have stopped." --when in fact, the vandalism has continued unabated since your "final warning" more than two months ago. And it is clearly the same "editor" all along. Just go down the list of edits offered by 67.169.112.122 click on "diff" and try and find a single edit that was necessary or accurate. The guy is apparently obsessed with the films Home Alone, Rugrats, and crimes depicted in the Home Alone films. It would be funny if (well okay, it IS funny) if Wikipedia weren't such a serious endeavor. 69.151.62.103 00:07, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Edits to Philippe Moureaux

The following was incorrectly added to my user page. I have moved it here:

Moria Scolas, a civil servant form Molenbeek, the town of mayor Philippe Moureaux. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mario_scolas

Political interference in an article Philippe Moureaux No vandalism in Moureaux, except from mister Mario Scolas, a civil servant WORKING for Philippe Moureaux, mayor of Sint-Jans-Molenbeek, see http://www.psmolenbeek.be/Liste.htm. At the bottom appears the name of Mister Scolas. Do you really think his interventions can be 'objective' if he is a civil servant working for the POLITICAL PARTY of the MAYOR ?

KNHaw, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:KNHaw, deleted this remark on his discussion page.

Please note that mayor Philippe Moureaux is an active support to terrorists in the Arabised town of Molenbeek

I responded on the talk page for the article here:

Look, it's very obvious that you care a lot about this. You obviously feel your criticism of this guy is deserved. Frankly, I have no idea about his politics or your criticism and I doubt that the other editors do, either. The problem is, you are stuck in an edit war and your criticism is never going to be heard unless you learn how to rephrase it in a tone that matches this encyclopedia. It is your phrasing, not your criticism, that is causing editors to assume you are a vandal instead of someone with a valid concern.

So, do you really want your voice to be heard, or do you want to just keep banging your head against the wall?

If you want to make an edit that isn't going to get reverted, you need to rephrase your criticism so it fits the format of an encyclopedia. Don't talk about "his hatred of anything Flemish," but cite how his policies are detrimental to the Flemish people. Don't warble about "what he thinks of as a nightmare," but instead dig up quotes from him about what he feels about a Flemish presence in Brussels (you're not a mind reader - none of us know what someone "thinks"). And for God's sake, if you want to be taken seriously, don't whine about the guy's mustache! Frankly, I think the guy elected president in my country looks like a chimpanzee, but I'd rather comment on his detrimental policies than his appearance.

Take a look at Karl Rove or Bill Clinton if you want to see how to write a critical article. Also, marking it in a dedicated section labeled "criticism" goes a long way to avoiding reverts by other editors. Try placing your edits on this talk page and asking for help in how to phrase it. I guarantee that you'll have people helping you come up with an edit that leaves your criticism intact.

Additionally (and I apologize if I'm lecturing you), getting an account instead of editing anonymously goes a long way to getting your comments treated with respect. The reality is that editors who see critical remarks without properly formatted citations (see Wikipedia:Footnote for how to do that) from anonymous editors are going to assume vandalism first.

Finally, don't modify other peoples user pages! If you want to leave me a comment, do it at User_talk:KNHaw, not User:KNHaw. When editors see people modifying others' user pages instead of talk pages, the assumption is that its vandalism, not discussion.

Good luck. --KNHaw ^(talk) 17:32, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:Bayeaux Cathedral Entry 1a.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:53, 23 January 2014 (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) 13:09, 23 November 2015 (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) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Removing AfD template

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with User talk:Chutiabanaya. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. This is an automated message from a bot about this edit, where you removed the deletion template from an article before the deletion discussion was complete. If this message is in error, please report it.—^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:47, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Universal Electronics Inc, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Sharp and Remote Control. 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) 11:51, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Festivus

Hi, KNHaw-Dan O'Keefe here. Thank you very kindly for your suggestions: they are very helpful. I did, in fact, have a question - over the years, on and off, a piece of false information has been added to and deleted from the Festivus page, the most recent deletion being made by me - the idea that there was ever a Roman holiday by that name, rather than the word merely being a Latin adjective until repurposed by my father. The vector for this stuff appears to be the claim in Allen Salkin's Festivus book that my dad "found the holiday in an old book," which is utter hogwash. My father was a scholar of anthropology and history of religion, and very consciously created this holiday modeled on the medieval Feast of Fools and a Beckett play he was obsessed with. There is no record of any kind, anywhere, before Salkin's published claim, that the word Festivus ever referred to a holiday before 1966, because it did not: I believe Salkin included this spurious statement out of spite because I published my own Festivus book instead of agreeing to help him with his. In any case, is there any way I can stop this claim from being re-added to the Festivus page? If anyone can find and cite one scholarly work or Roman history describing Festivus as a holiday before '66, then they may have at it, I suppose. But since they can't, how can I prevent my father's creation from being vandalized with this junk? I do understand this is an open-source platform, and there may well be nothing that can be done. Thank you. Best, Dan O'Keefe — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanOKeefe (talk • contribs) 06:09, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Hmph. An interesting dilemma. There's no way to block people who make edits in good faith (and, honestly, under Wikipedia's philosophy there shouldn't be). And, despite Salkin's error or motivation, the people who read his book *are* making their edits in good faith. Have you gone on record anywhere indicating that Salkin is incorrect? Even a blog would do. That would allow us to put up a sentence about "there is a claim that it originated as a Roman Festival<insert footnote to Salkin>, but the modern inventor of the holiday indicates otherwise <footnote to your source>." If I'd just read Salkin's book and went to Wikipedia wanting to improve the article, this would settle the issue completely for me.

Interestingly, a quick check on Google's NGram service *does* show usage of the phrase going back well into the 1800s. However, a quick dive shows it's a Latin adjective for "Jolly" and later used in various species' Latin names for insects and mollusks. Given the way [List of organisms named after famous people | biologists like to play with names], it wouldn't surprise me if some of those "hits" are from some scientists naming something "Jolly Insect" or "Jolly Clam."

There are other Latin sources I can't translate, but from context they seem to not be anything about a festival - just "Jolly." The complete absence of an English source saying "Festivus was a Roman festival" is telling. If push comes to shove, it would be pretty easy to leverage the folks over at the | Latin subreddit to do a quick translation of the Latin sources.

In fact, I'm wondering if the NGrams search might actually be the source of Salkin's claim. Perhaps he did a quick check and came up with all the hits and simply assumed they reinforced his own pet theory - that of an honest to goodness Roman festival. Approaching it from this angle also lets us leave out the notion of motivation from the conversation (which always makes this sort of thing go more smoothly).

I'd be willing to edit the article if you'd like to remove any conflicts of interest. If you have a source of you saying (preferably in a diplomatic manner) "Salkin has it wrong," I could link to it. Otherwise, I can just add it to the page with a link to the NGram search. In fact, even if you do have a "Salkin is wrong" quote, the NGRam search actually should be cited as well.

Talk soon!

KNHaw ^(talk) 23:24, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello again, KNHaw,

Thanks once more for your help. Yes, I did know that "festivus" was a Latin adjective before my dad repurposed it: at one time he trained to become a Jesuit priest, and would occasionally lapse into Latin. True, I do not know Salkin's motivations for certain, by any means. If I need to put up a blog post to cite I will, but perhaps it would best for me to leave things alone for now, and address them if they become an issue again in the future. But by all means, if at any point as experienced a Wikipedian as yourself cares to edit such a trivial article, I'd be more than happy.

Best,

Dan O'Keefe

DanOKeefe (talk) 01:24, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

OK. Sounds good to me. Let me know if the error gets reposted and we can move forward on this. KNHaw ^(talk) 18:31, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, KNHaw. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Film names has changed from ABYSM to ALTERSCAPE

Hi,

You have undone my changes for my film Alterscape - former Abysm. Can you please note that the movie's name has changed. Thank you User talk:179.218.95.87 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.218.95.87 (talk) 01:51, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

My apologies. I saw that the edit you made was correct and reverted it. I have also moved it to the new name at Alterscape. Please cehck it out and let me know if there are any problems.

Again, my apologies for my mistake and good luck with the movie!

KNHaw ^(talk) 01:59, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Ryan (given name)

I've reported the user at WP:AIV - although at this point they could also be warned for WP:3RR as well. Rather than edit warring to revert their disruption, might as well wait until they are blocked for editing against talk page consensus and edit warring. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 01:24, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

OK. He/she isn't vandalizing any other pages. I'll back off. Thanks for the advice! KNHaw ^(talk) 01:27, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Flag Removal on HomeSlice Media page

Thanks for the message, Kevin. I'm wondering how to remove the flag on the HomeSlice Media page. It seems that everything has been cited and that the flag no longer pertains accurately to the information on the page. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluedog88 (talk • contribs) 22:18, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Pinniped

I feel like the edit was justified given the recent rearrangement by Chiswick Chap. Thanks. LittleJerry (talk) 21:37, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Correct link for the source

http://www.lincoln.com/blacklabel/rhapsody/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orangechallenger (talk • contribs) 05:19, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Great it looks good now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orangechallenger (talk • contribs) 05:37, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your direction. ANONYMOUS USER (talk) 19:16, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

How can I add a picture in editing page from kindle fire tablet🙋 ANONYMOUS USER (talk) 08:16, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Meticulous editing; with surgical precision

	Colonoscopy on Harry Houdini
	It is not true that Harry died from a punch to the colon. And all humans need them. Cheers 7&6=thirteen (☎) 22:00, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

| It isn't often that I smile from the results of a colon, but you did it. Thanks! KNHaw ^(talk) 22:34, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you!

7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it. To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:41, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Josh Umerah

You are invited to join the discussion at Josh Umerah. stuff... KNHaw ^(talk) 17:21, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

My Edit on Menelik Article not Biased

Hello KNhaw,

I only corrected Abel Gebramaiams' miswritten entry. Also, I only added what was in the Bulatovich source. Let's discuss to clarify any misunderstanding.CrumpPlint (talk) 23:34, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. On review, I agree and commented in your talk page. Mea Culpa! KNHaw ^(talk) 23:42, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

URN

My edit was simply to summarize the quote from the DOI Foundation page and provide a reference to the quote. As it stands, this quote has too much weight in the article. There are about 40 URN namespaces, and many more which have not sought or not been accorded recognition as URN namespaces. A fully NPOV discussion of why the DOI system is one of these would be long and would tend to unbalance the article, which is quite short. Some editor thought it was worth mentioning, so I thought the section should be kept, but shortened, with the DOI Foundation's point of view referenced. Person54 (talk) 02:49, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for reaching out to me on my edit. My big concern wasn't with your content, but using the diff view that the edit looked like a random removal of text (specifically the line break between "for the reason that" and "there is no"). At a quick glance, this looked like a removal of text. However...

When I actually read your edit, you wrote a perfectly formed sentence. Formatting of the raw text such as those line breaks disappear in the actual view.

Basically, I was sloppy. I quickly glanced at a diff view when I should have taken a moment to read the change more thoroughly. I apologize for my error and will review changes at a slower pace in the future.

Thank you again for reaching out to me and explaining your change. You were very diplomatic and assumed good faith (something I need to work harder at). I am actually a programmer (more on the embedded side) so I know the value of articles like URN regarding specifications, so I appreciate the work of people in making these articles more useful.

Best regards, KNHaw ^(talk) 17:57, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Dan. No problem. I appreciate your comment and that patrolling articles for vandalism must be difficult and, occasionally, subject to error. Best, Person54 (talk) 14:39, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

SmallJoe

Hi, I hope I'm doing this correctly. I'm pretty dumb when it comes to computerating.

Thanks a lot for cleaning up my edits to that Castillo page. I hope I didn't hijack Castillo's page too badly.

I was sort of disappointed that USS Takelma didn't have its own page. My father served on Takelma in the forties.

This is another reference link that you could insert if you would be so kind: http://www.navsource.org/archives/09/39/39113.htm

This reference provided the dates for Korean and Vietnam service, the combat awards, and the decommissioning date.

The "http://www.koreanwar.org/html/units/navy/uss_takelma.htm" reference provided a fairly general history narrative that I heavily edited for brevity and to avoid obvious plagerism.

The reference that posed the issue basically contained the same narrative the one above does. I found this posted a number of places, each time adding and ommitting different details. My entry is an abreviated synthesis of those. What I'm trying to say is that it can be deleted.

SmallJoe — Preceding unsigned comment added by SmallJoe (talk • contribs) 05:17, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

No problem! Please look at the post I put on your talk page. KNHaw ^(talk) 05:53, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

SmallJoe (talk) 23:58, 8 February 2017 (UTC)== SmallJoe needs advice ==

Thanks for taking such an interest in helping with my USS Takelma project. Before we go much further I need some advice.

First off, the military.com site has no more info than the koreanwar.org site does.

Now that we've found the DANFS site we don't need either of those anyway.

The only other "primary source" info I have comes from 'http://www.navsource.org/archives/09/39/39113.htm' and it is pretty spare, just dates and the campaign awards.

SmallJoe (talk) 17:56, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

SmallJoe Has Update - Found My Source!!

I found the original source of the Takelma history article I was using:

https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs/t/takelma.html

edit: I just saw that you've already found it. My search skills really are weak!

If you decide to make a dedicated Takelma web page at least I can feel good about this source. I still wish Takelma had its own page, but if one can search "Takelma" and find Castillo's page, that's better than nothing.

I intentionally kept my original entry brief because I didn't want to hijack Castillo's website and I wasn't entirely confident of my source.

I'd like to post a picture of Takelma in US service, but I can't find a public domain image.

We might be done here unless you decide to change the page in a major way.

Plase let me know what you decide.SmallJoe (talk) 23:26, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for touching base on this! I want to status you on the article.

First, I asked at Wikipedia:HelpDesk and they pointed me to the standard for naming ships: Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(ships)#Ships_that_changed_name_or_nationality. As I expected, "an article about a ship that changed name or nationality should be placed at the best-known name..." The exception is "if the ship had significant careers in two navies, it may be best to create two articles with one ending at the transfer and the other beginning then..."

I think we have a strong case for rewriting the article as Takelma, but not for two articles. I'm going to post a suggestion on a few places and wait a week for any pushback. If there is none, I'll go forward on this.

Regarding a photo, we're actually in luck with the www.history.navy.mil post you cited. All US government publications are, by definition, in the public domain (see "How to add a copyright tag to an existing image" in Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions). I uploaded the photo and added it to the article.

Anyways, I will keep you in the loop on the article change. In the meantime, thanks for your work here. If you have some time, please think about poking around articles that interest you and see if they need work as well. KNHaw ^(talk) 02:42, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Takelma

Thanks so much for all your help with this project.

I agree that we should have a strong case for renaming the article given that the ship was built for the US Navy, served for nearly fifty years, and performed service in three wars.

There are a couple things that could spice up the article if I can find sources: Someone posted that Takelma's towing of the New York was the "largest/longest tow ever" No details, so I don't know what that really means. In 1954 Takelma was praised in a news release for participating in the refloating of a freighter that ran hard aground on some rocks. An anecdote: my father was on the ship when one of the cruisers brought back from Bikini was sunk by gunfire. He told me they had the target on a three mile towline and he swore some of the shells came closer to them than the target.

It's nice that you found the DANFS article. You really polished up the site; thanks for adding the "named for" entry. Is the DANFS article public domain? How much could be quoted without copyright issues? If we end up changing the site title I'd like to add a few more details.173.202.210.106 (talk) 16:59, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Joe Walz

Greetings. You asked me on my talk page to prove the existence of Joe Walz. Well, here you go: https://www.facebook.com/jdwalz?hc_location=ufi. He starred as the Assistant District Attorney on Investigative Discovery's episode of A Crime to Remember, The Gentleman Killer.Italic text' Want proof? Well here you go: https://www.investigationdiscoverygo.com/a-crime-to-remember/the-gentleman-killer/. Please stop your unwarranted criticism of my edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TexasFrank (talk • contribs) 01:42, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

I left the following on your page:

TexasFrank,

Thanks for the message on my page. First, you need to understand that when you put something in brackets on Wikipedia, it will attempt to link to an existing article on Wikipedia. Edits like the ones you created just make dead links, which is why people (including myself) kept removing them.

The proper procedure is to create an article first (see here) and then link to it later. A better source for that than Facebook is things like IMDB. Specifically, is [1] the guy? Is so, we can start building something. However, we have a few issues...

Wikipedia has a concept of notability. Basically, the not everyone or everything deserves an article. In a nutshell, "a person is presumed to be notable if he or she has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject." IMDB is a good start, but other articles (not just links to videos he was in) are needed. Could you find press clippings in a local paper? Work done at a playhouse or theater? Frankly, an actor with just one credit to his name is a hard sell for notability, so links to additional work is really needed to make a case.

If you're serious about this, post some links here (you should be able to post to this page even with the block) and I can give you some advice for making a case for another editor wants making the article. There's also processes by which a ban like yours can be removed, that might be a hard sell for you. I'm posting here to give you a chance at this under WP:BITE. However, you have to give other editors the same courtesy. Your snarky comment to User:Newyorkbrad did you no favors.

Anyways, good luck. I'll be watching this page for your response, if you make one.

KNHaw ^(talk) 17:53, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. FYI, I realized the "Joe Walz" business was probably not in good faith when I saw this edit. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:17, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

I agree 100%. The guy was definitely not operating in good faith. But I figured there was a slim chance, call it 10% tops, that he was just a newbie who could be corrected. I was willing to drop a paragraph or three just in case. If so, he can make the decision whether he wants to contribute or just fade away as yet another vandal. The burden of proof is on him, but an honest editor could step and meet it.

To clarify a point: it's important to me that you know I was in no way, shape or form criticizing your call on this. I saw that edit and I agree with your actions 100%. It doesn't appear you have interpreted my actions that way, but on the off chance I flubbed it, please accept my apologies if I was out of line. It is never my intent to denigrate good work being done here, including yours.

Thanks for stopping by! KNHaw ^(talk) 22:03, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

I happen to agree with you that new editors should be given the benefit of the doubt when it's reasonable to do that. (I'm working on a post on a related issue for my wikiblog page.) I appreciate your taking the same approach, and I didn't feel criticized at all. Best regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:06, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

I was doing a Wiki search for occurrences of "Joe Walz" and stumbled onto this discussion. Just wanted to leave an FYI here that there was more of the same from User:VermontJohn (now blocked), as well as from a series of IPs that all geolocate to the same U.S. state using the ISP AT&T Internet Services. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 23:35, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Someone accusing me of Vandalism

Hello KNHaw,

This user named Resourcer1 is accusing me of vandalism but I am not sure what he/she is talking about? (See [2] ) What should I do? CrumpPlint (talk) 04:01, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

I just compared your and the other user's edit history. It appears they're irate over the edits at Tigrayans. However, I don't see anything that stands out as vandalism on either side. Frankly, it seems to be someone taking differences of opinion a bit too seriously.

I'm honestly not sure how you should proceed on this. If it were me, I might try to extend an olive branch to them and ask if the differences in the article can be hammered out via the talk page. I'd start by getting them to clarify ("Hey, are you talking about Tigrayans? I understand if you disagree with my edits, but 'vandalism' is an awfully strong term..."). Failing that, I would suggest mediation (see Wikipedia:Mediation). That removes you as the bad guy if it goes against them.

Of course, that's just me. I'm a big olive branch kind of guy. It might be best to ignore and just edit judiciously and carefully.

However, if you feel you're being harassed, you need to escalate it. The question is when. There's only been the one comment so far, right? I doubt there's any action anyone will take about this, but Wikipedia:HelpDesk should be able to direct you on where to go with a complaint if you want to go that route.

Would you like me to step up as an intermediary to this person? I have no opinion on the article content and would be willing to give it a go to just contact them and see what's up.

Sorry if I can't offer more concrete advice. Let me know if you want me to reach out to this person.

KNHaw ^(talk) 07:37, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks KNHaw, this is alot of help. I'd rather not escalate if it is just a misunderstanding on points of view. I will wait and see. If the person continues, I'll ask you to mediate, if that doesn't help then maybe go to the next step. Thanks for your advice though. CrumpPlint (talk) 08:01, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Any time! Just let me know if or how I can help. Have a great weekend. KNHaw ^(talk) 17:50, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

World Heritage Encyclopedia

Hi. Regarding the ref you added,[3], you need to watch out for sites like World Heritage Encyclopedia. It's just a mirror site with old (and sometimes mangled) copies of Wikipedia articles. Sites like that are not usable because it is purely WP:Circular sourcing. See also Woozle effect. Alsee (talk) 23:46, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

I was unaware of their sourcing. Thanks for the information! I will skip that as a source in the future. KNHaw ^(talk) 00:05, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

RE IP vandal's decidedly non-good faith edits

Just thought I'd point out that good faith should not be automatically assumed in cases of disruptive editing, especially with IPs (see [4], [5]). Yours, Quis separabit? 21:12, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

UbiCare page lists wrong company information

Hi, You wrote to me that you restored information I had changed on the page for UbiCare. The information up there now is inaccurate. Please see the company website www.ubicare.com for proof that the current wikipedia page is wrong and the information I added explains what the company actually does. Let me know if anything further needs to be done to correct wikipedia's listing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.245.18.213 (talk) 15:21, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Your revert rollback in spinal muscular atrophy

Hi, I saw you revered rolled back an edit to spinal muscular atrophy [6]. Just a quick note that it was a WP:GF edit and doing a WP:ROLLBACK was certainly too much. Normal undoing with proper edit sumary would be appropriate.

Another doubt I have is that the edit should have perhaps been kept per WP:PRESERVE. The infomation was analogous to what the preceding sentence was saying about patient registries in EU. Regards, — kashmiri ^TALK 16:37, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Apologies. I restored the edit and added a website link (the original reason I backed it out) and asked the original editor to review my modification of their edit. I will try to have a lighter hand in the future.

--KNHaw ^(talk) 17:24, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for removing that comment from my page. DJAustin (talk) 18:29, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Follow up: they just did that again. DJAustin (talk) 18:31, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

They've been reported. We'll have to see how it goes. --KNHaw ^(talk) 21:26, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Update: They've been banned. --KNHaw ^(talk) 21:38, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! Also, thanks for the barnstar!

Thank you for helping out. --KNHaw ^(talk) 23:50, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Bastyr University Vandalism

The details included on the page are not only defamatory, but should fall under the category of vandalism. The "citations" are supported by Quackwatch, which is not an unbiased reporting source, but instead has its own agenda. References to "pseudoscience" and "quackery" need to be deleted immediately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dblanton03 (talk • contribs) 23:17, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

You need to take your concerns to the articles talk page - not just make major changes without consensus. Making major changes such as deleting portions of existing articles without discussing the issue is simply going to result in your changes being reverted.

If you actually want to get results, propose your changes on the talk page , get consensus, and then make the change.

Good luck!

--KNHaw ^(talk) 23:28, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Reverted changes

I noticed you reverted my edit on Doublelift. I'm going to quote the wikipedia guidelines on living persons.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous.

A reddit post is not a viable source, nor is its libellous nature allowed on wikipedia.

98.229.61.221 (talk) 06:52, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Reply

The reason I made that edit is because the apostrophe was italicized, so I used Template:' to fix that. I am a user on the Super Mario Wiki, so I know of the template from there, though if there is a better thing I could use on here, please tell me. --74.134.13.42 (talk) 20:50, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

First, thanks for letting me know what you were trying to do. I appreciate it!

As to an actual fix, I'm honestly as stumped as you are. I worked around it by changing "Time's Richard Schickel called Fiona..." to "Time magazine's Richard Schickel called Fiona..."

Please take alook at my edit and tell me if your think it's OK.

Thanks again, and feel free at any time to ask me questions on my talk page.

--KNHaw ^(talk) 21:42, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

I feel that you're edit is ok. Though, from what I know about about Template:' from the MarioWiki, it usually also fixes it (for example, Times's would show up as Time's with the template). --74.134.13.42 (talk) 00:05, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Well, I'm not going to go and revert good faith edits that actually work, so I won't be sticking my nose in MarioWiki. However, I think that the template thing you did is just a side effect, not an intended use. If you *really* want to disable formatting, you can try using the <nowiki> tag. For example:

• Original - Time's Richard Schickel called Fiona...
• Template - Time's Richard Schickel called Fiona...
• NoWiki - Time's Richard Schickel called Fiona...

Honestly, I do *not* think using <nowiki> is an improvement, but it is using the tag for its intended purpose.

Have a great weekend!

--KNHaw ^(talk) 00:18, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Actually, you might be right that <nowiki> is better. I looked at the template on MarioWiki, and it works differently on there and does not add the extra bit of space. So while the template is better on there, <nowiki> might be better here. --74.134.13.42 (talk) 00:39, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Your signature

Please be aware that your signature uses deprecated <font> tags, which are causing Obsolete HTML tags lint errors. Your signature is also causing Tidy bug affecting font tags wrapping links. Also, it's preferred to code italics with two apostrophes, bold with three apostrophes, and bold italics with five apostrophes.

You are encouraged to change

--[[User:KNHaw|<font face="comic sans ms"><font color="SeaGreen"><i><b>KNHaw</b></i></font></font>]] <font color="SeaGreen">[[User talk:KNHaw|<sup>(talk)</sup>]]</font> → --KNHaw ^(talk)

to

--[[User:KNHaw|<span style="font-family: comic sans ms; color: SeaGreen;">'''''KNHaw'''''</span>]] [[User talk:KNHaw|<span style="color: SeaGreen;"><sup>(talk)</sup></span>]] → --KNHaw ^(talk)

Respectfully, Anomalocaris (talk) 04:36, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

OK. Here's the first test with your suggested modifications. I sure hope it works!

----KNHaw ^(talk) 20:37, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

It does! Thanks!

----KNHaw ^(talk) 20:37, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Great, thanks! (I took the liberty of changing question marks to right arrows in my original message here, I should have been paying better attention ...) —Anomalocaris (talk) 22:44, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, KNHaw. 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)

Thank you for your assistance and guidance.

I added the comics Red Mask appeared in to my Black Panther edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Immafan67 (talk • contribs) 19:35, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Reverted

Hi Knaw, I recently edited about Narayan Gopal’a death and you reverted it lack of ref. So being an beginner editor that was my mistake editing without providing ref so here i provide the ref link of the edit:- https://www.last.fm/music/Narayan+Gopal./+wiki So can you please revert it and remove the discussuon from my talk page? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CopX (talk • contribs) 19:16, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for reaching out to me about the Narayan Gopal edit. The problem with using https://www.last.fm/music/Narayan+Gopal./+wiki is that we can't use a wiki as a reference, as that could have been edited without any sources either. I know nothing of his music, but a quick check [her | https://thehimalayantimes.com/entertainment/25th-death-anniversary-of-narayan-gopal-being-celebrated/], [here | http://bossnepal.com/interesting-incidents-life-narayan-gopal/], and [here | http://www.weallnepali.com/sahitya-sumana/narayan-gopal-gurubacharya] don't mention drinking at all. [This | http://sangeetsansar.com/2010/05/narayan-gopal.html] appears to be the original source of the phrase "notorious drinking," but it too lacks sources.

The biggest problem, though, is the phrasing "said to have been caused." Please see WP:WEASEL on why this is an issue. Basically, it's a way of throwing out a claim like "notorious drinking" without having any accountability for saying those words.

I did find a [source | http://ecs.com.np/features/the-first-time-i-met-narayan-gopal] that discusses his drinking but doesn't directly say the author believes the drinking killed him (he also discusses smoking in the source). If you'd like I could add something to the effect of "Gopal was urged by friends to quit smoking and drinking in the interests of his health. He quit drinking a few months before he died, but was unable to quit cigarettes." Again, the reader is welcome to make their own conclusions about drinking and death, but it's not appropriate to make that conclusion in the article unless we have a source that is also willing to.

Would you like me to make the edit about his drinking?

--KNHaw ^(talk) 19:42, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi thanks for your kind info & I would love if you make edit about his drinking. CopX (talk) 19:56, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

It's done. See here. Please take a look and let me know what you think of it.

Also, thank you for helping out and contributing to Wikipedia. My apologies if I seemed rude or abrupt in my notes about your earlier edit. If you ever have any questions about editing please do not hesitate to contact me through my talk page. --KNHaw ^(talk) 21:16, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

I saw your edit and its good. Thankyou :) CopX (talk) 07:29, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

NEIL GORSUCH

NEIL GORSUCH religious freedom- hi, I saw your reason for removing my previous edit. I just made another edit with a source, that is credible, a bipartisan church-state advocacy group, for the benefit of readers who might mistake "broad" in the first line of GOrsuch's religious views to mean "inclusive" which it does not. This is important and I don't understand why my more recent edit (which had a citation and was more neutrally worded as "...that is controversial among church-state separation advocates" was removed this time without explanation. Not sure if this was you, or someone else, but it seems like someone (not accusing you, I'm asking for help here) has an agenda to keep details of Gorsuch's church-state separation record exceedingly vague and not informative to readers.108.2.150.37 (talk) 20:54, 20 January 2018 (UTC)BG

Thank you for reaching out to me on this. I really appreciate it. The reason I reverted your first change is that it seemed to me that the language was overly broad and made assumptions about Conservative Christians. I have no problem with your rewording on the second edit (in fact, I didn't even realize you revisited the topic until just now). From user_talk:Marquardtika's comments in reverting that second edit, it appears they believed your source was an advocacy website rather than a reliable source per wp:rs. I don't think there's an explicit agenda there, but a reflexive discounting of an advocacy site.

On viewing https://www.au.org, I agree that it's an advocacy site, but I actually think it was valid for you to use it for your second edit. You were making a point about the opinion of "church state separation advocates" by citing those opinions. You're not claiming that au.org has reliability or notability in any other way than that it accurately reflects those opinions.

I *do* think your case can be made stronger by bringing in other sources - your NPR citation in the talk page is a great start to this and I will also add here and here.

I applaud you for bringing this up on the talk page and will be chiming in on the topic there as well. I think that's the place this can be best hashed out. We can continue the discussion over there if you like or feel free to reach out to me on my or your talk page.

Thanks! KNHaw ^(talk) 07:36, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Hey there! Sorry if this is poorly formatted, I'm not up to speed on my wiki markup language. Thanks for the response/clarification and helping me get the process started to reach a consensus. I don't think most readers would have a problem with the way it's phrased and cited now unless it's because they strongly agree with Gorsuch's views ;) I appreciate the way you handled this. You are correct that my citing AU.org was merely to offer a reliable source regarding "the opinions of church-state separation advocates" not an "objective" or "unbiased" assessment of Gorsuch's politics. I think it now clearly communicates that there is concern among voters and advocates about whether his rulings will be consistent with religious freedom or with privileging religious speech over non-religious speech.

I haven't created an account because I have too many accounts and don't want to deal with yet another username/password right now, and it's my final semester of a grad program and I really don't need to be distracted online with wikipedia! LOL. I just edited Gorsuch because the details and context in that section were minimal and church-state separation is a passion of mine.

Thanks again! 108.2.150.37 (talk) 14:44, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Edits to the page for Dr. Devi Shetty

The current reference to the Dr. Shetty, #16, https://www.freedoctorhelpline.com/doctor/dr-devi-prasad-shetty/ actually the exact phrase that Dr. Shetty is viewed as a Saint who grants bypasses, i.e. the Bypasswale Baba and no one leaves his Ashram without a bypass. That is unique and noteworthy, because there are unlikely to be other cardiac surgeons elsewhere on this planet who are viewed by their patients as saints. It is a unique combination of both the individual and the Indian culture that creates a demi-deification of a doctor. Bhojpuribhaia (talk) 15:30, 21 January 2018 (UTC) From Bhojpuribhaia@protonmail.com

CVN newbie

Hi there! How did you make the text for User_talk:37.76.112.168 ? Is it a subst template? Cheers Extarys (talk) 05:31, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

It's one of the vandalism templates, which I got via pulldowns using wp:twinkle. The page has all the install stuff you need. I *highly* recommend Twinkle for anti-vandal use. Feel free to ask me any questions, of course. --KNHaw ^(talk) 05:34, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

SPI report

Quick follow up on your report of Yzzzqj (talk · contribs) as a sockpuppet, WP:SPI is definitely the correct venue for this sort of report. However, you put your report in the case archive, where usually no one would have seen it. I came across it mostly by accident. The correct place would have been Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gyzqzy, but the guys been blocked, so it all worked out. Cheers. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:39, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the block and the instructions. I will know where to go next time! --KNHaw ^(talk) 00:46, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Reply to The Vanguard School Edits

My apologies, KNHaw, on the first edit, I wish to add on the new section in a constructive way, in order to make this part of the Vanguard School publicly known. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.163.141.2 (talk) 02:47, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Patriarch Kirill

Mr. Haw, there is nothing "opinionated" in the factual comments about Kirill blasting off about the "heresy" of human rights. I have therefore reinstated it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prelatecrusher (talk • contribs) 17:31, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

First, thanks for reaching out to me about the edits to Patriarch Kirill. It's good that you're helping update and impove Wikipedia.

Second, please check the revision log on the page here. You'll notice that I did not call refer to the comment as "opinionated" but it was instead done by an anonymous user at IP address 86.188.87.107. In fact, my edit was previous to that, restoring an unexplained deletion by that same anonymous IP editor (if they had given a strong case for deleting the section in the talk page, it might have been allowed, but instead I restored the edit).

I understand your frustration with people making snide comments in revision logs, but please try to assume wp:good faith on peoples' edits in the future. If you disagree with an edit and think it was done poorly, please ask the person why. In at least half the cases I've seen it turns out to be an honest error by the editor. If it was malicious, then a polite, civil tone on your part while they're being jerks will help make the case to an administrator in getting the editor blocked or banned.

In any case, please feel free to contact me on my talk page if you have any more questions. Happy editing!

--KNHaw ^(talk) 19:50, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Chevron Corp. CEO

Hi, my name is Olivia Harting and I am the Social Media Manager at Chevron.

The name of the CEO went back-and-forth in the infobox and you were the last one to touch it, so I thought I’d come here. Michael Wirth is indeed the current chairman and CEO. John Watson retired from the company and stepped down from the board on Feb. 1, 2018.

For verification: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/28/chevron-names-michael-wirth-chairman-and-ceo.html

Possible you can revert it back?

Thank you OHarting (talk) 22:25, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

I just checked and it seems like user:TaerkastUA fixed it. My apologies that I made the error. Thanks for providing a source and bringing it to my attention. It's great to see that you know your way around Wikipedia and asked me to look at it, thus avoiding wp:Conflict on your part.

Please let me know if you have any other concerns or questions!

--KNHaw ^(talk) 22:45, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Nickelodeon reruns

I found out that User:Grapesoda22 made a recent edit on the Nickelodeon shows list saying "Reruns are irrelevant".

see revision

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.56.30.65 (talk) 00:29, 17 February 2018 (UTC) 

You have been making mass deletions of broadcast histories of TV shows without discussing it on the talk page of those articles. Claiming a table modification by user:grapesoda22 as justification is not acceptable. Make any more mods like this without wp:consensus and you will be blocked. --KNHaw ^(talk) 00:37, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Recent Goldhuber additions-

I added my name to those sites in anticipation of my new page being published, thought that not using brackets made it ok ...my page will have references to those others. Sorry if I jumped the gun... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.68.59.237 (talk) 06:01, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

It's OK, although that is why I thought it was a vandal edit. Vandals often insert there names in articles as false achievements.

You might have another problem, though. Editing articles about yourself is a fine line regarding conflict of interest. See wp:conflict for details. Creating the actual article about yourself might be a problem. You might be able to get away with just putting in a stub and then asking here for others to do the work of writing the article.

In any case, I suggest creating an account so you have more tractability to your edits. It'll also help you contribute to other parts of Wikipedia in your area of expertise (and, I'm pretty sure we're always short on theater experts).

Happy editing! --KNHaw ^(talk) 18:22, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

I created an account, but will wait until published. I didn't create the article about myself, but just assisted in facts and references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guy595 (talk • contribs) 20:35, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

revdel

Hi. In case if you find some threat, or grossly insulting stuff, it is suggested that it should be reverted quicly, and revdel'ed without much people seeing it. Generally, it is suggested to go through CAT:REVDEL, but it is generally time consuming, and mostly useless if it is urgent.
I find this tool. very helpful in many different scenarios. See you around :) —usernamekiran(talk) 18:47, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the tip! I've added it to my toolbox in case I need it in the future. --KNHaw ^(talk) 22:19, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reporting 2601:19A:8201:1753:CC78:2F93:6706:A04C Thegooduser Let's Chat 02:23, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

No sweat! Glad I could be of help! --KNHaw ^(talk) 06:03, 21 February 2018 (UTC)