User talk:MelanieN/Archive 58

Archive 55

Archive 56

Archive 57

Archive 58

Archive 59

Archive 60

→

Archive 65

WP:AFD

An article you created or have contributed to has been nominated for deletion
Click the image for an important message. Like, it's April Fools' Day today, you know? North America1000 09:48, 1 April 2019 (UTC) So...   Keep   on   keepin'   on!    North America1000 09:48, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

User:Northamerica1000: A message you may have contributed to has been nominated for hatting. Reason: Too clever. (AFD = April Fools Day = Articles For Deletion; OK, that is cute, and you got me.) -- MelanieN (talk) 17:17, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Wow, several people have stated that I got them after sending my fun. Nice! North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:14, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Guideline question

Hey there... long time no speak. I need some direction. I use the "ALL dates to dmy" and "ALL dates to mdy" tool from time to time. In addition to standardizing date formats, it also does several other things, one of which is delinking years from "xxxx in yyyy" pages (like 1975). I didn't think anything of this since on several of the film articles I had created a couple of years ago, I had also linked them to "xxxx in film", and had had those edits reverted. However, another editor has reverted my changes, and simply said "consensus in favor of Year in Radio links being left as is in radio station and television station pages. Radio and TV station pages operate in a special "realm" in many rules and consensus discussions (see BURDEN) for all their odds and ends". The issue I have is they have provided no evidence of consensus for that position. You can see the discussion on my talk page at User talk:Onel5969#Year in Radio. Personally, I really don't care, except for the reasons I stated on my talk page. This is an experienced editor who I have never (to the best of my recollection) interacted with. They seem to have a special interest in this field. So, and I apologize for my long-windedness, what is the best forum in which to bring this forth? Should there be an RfC? And if so, where? It seems untenable, as suggested by the other editor, to start discussions on thousands of talk pages. Any direction would be greatly appreciated. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:42, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, OneL! Thanks for the note and sorry for the late reply; I’ve been offline. I’m not at all familiar with that issue, but I note that the other user makes it sound as if he is speaking for a Project - “That’s not the way we do things” for example - so I would suggest you post the question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Radio. I see there was a somewhat related discussion about dates there in January. Or if you want an admin opinion, you could ask at Bearcat’s talk page. -- MelanieN (talk) 00:28, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

No worries... sometimes real life gets in the way. . By the time I asked you this question, the other editor had taken this to ANI, which is frustrating, but whatever. But thanks for getting back to me. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 04:01, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

List of most-liked YouTube videos

Hi, many different IP and registered users are vandalizing this page continuously (you can also watch this), I think the pending changes settings isn't enough, can you change the actual protection to a "normal" protection please? I think it is better--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 19:57, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Luke. I certainly agree. PC works does not work well when a page gets this much editing activity. I have semi-protected it for two weeks. I left the PC protection in place, and it will persist when the semi-protection expires. -- MelanieN (talk) 00:13, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Of course, removing the article altogether would solve the problem quite efficiently -- except we can't do that. Never mind. O3000 (talk) 00:20, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, vandalism began again, what should we do?--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 07:47, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Luke Stark 96: Reviewing the history: this has needed semi-protection almost continuously, and PC has never worked. I have eliminated PC and semi-protected the article for a year. -- MelanieN (talk) 15:21, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very very much :)--Luke Stark 96 (talk) 15:36, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

for your info

Good morning, I just copied and pasted to another editor User talk:Escape Orbit an edit made to User talk:Factfindingmission for the same reasons ~ concerning Kirstjen Nielsen ~ I'm not experienced enough to warn someone so I noted to him/her that 'Below is a copy of what I think your doing' and pasted exactly what is on Factfindingmission's talk page, if it was not appropriate please let me know ~Mitch ~ hope you had a good vacation ~ Mitchellhobbs (talk) 17:13, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Mitch, but you should revert that. Those warnings were specific to Factfindingmission and the details refer to that person's editing. Escape Orbit has not reached the 3RR level. At the article page, I have reverted their second insertion saying that the material is disputed and needs to be discussed at the talk page. -- MelanieN (talk) 17:19, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

thanks ~ I undid but how do I revert ~ I'm sorry to take your vacation time away from you ): Mitchellhobbs (talk) 17:27, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

That's all you need to do. Undoing is the same as reverting. It's still in the history but you have withdrawn the comment. -- MelanieN (talk) 18:13, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Vacation

I hope you'll have a great vacation! --bonadea contributions talk 19:53, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

I'm back! -- MelanieN (talk) 20:35, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the warning! ―Mandruss ☎ 20:45, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

LOL! Look out, world, she's back - is that what you are saying? -- MelanieN (talk) 21:22, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Something like that. The opposite of what I mean, obviously. ―Mandruss ☎ 21:25, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Jeff Berry (mixologist)

On 19 April 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jeff Berry (mixologist), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Jeff "Beachbum" Berry has been described as "the Indiana Jones of tiki drinks"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jeff Berry (mixologist). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Jeff Berry (mixologist)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Draft:GPS Hospitality

Good morning MelanieN Hope you had your coffee,

I sent this draft for review, If you are the reviewer please let me know what I have to do to improve in order to be accepted, also there is a section in Burger King franchises (at the bottom) and GPS Hospitality for ref of why I started this article ~ thanks ~ mitch ~ Mitchellhobbs (talk) 16:35, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Good morning, Mitch. No, I will not be the reviewer. I am not generally a new page patroller. As the notice says, someone will review this, but it won't be immediate since there is quite a queue waiting to be reviewed. In the meantime, you can keep tweaking it or you can just wait for a response. My only suggestion would be to try to find more references from mainstream or general-interest sources. You currently have only one such source, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution; the rest of the sources are trade papers which may not be enough to make the company meet our guideline for notability. -- MelanieN (talk) 16:46, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Cool thanks MelanieN ~ mitch ~ Mitchellhobbs (talk) 16:47, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

GPS Hospitality ~ Thanks for your help MelanieN sorry didn't know Mitchellhobbs (talk) 20:36, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Mitch: Wow, that was fast! Congrats on the article. Just in general, it isn't a good idea to post the same question/request to multiple people at the same time. It's not against any rule, just a courtesy. People reply thinking they are the only one you asked, and then when they see you asked a dozen people they can get a little frosted. But not a biggie. -- MelanieN (talk) 22:23, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Mel ~ can I call you Mel if not that's cool. I was just reaching out to the ones I trusted including you!~ I don't know if you have been to my main page but if you verify my first ref ~ that's me ~ thanks Mitchellhobbs (talk) 23:31, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Userspace protection

Hi,

I'm intrigued by your claim that user talk pages are only briefly protected, and that user pages are seldom protected at all. Both my user page and user talk page are indefinitely protected, the former because I asked for it (even if it was just after some vandalism), and if memory serves, the protecting admin said he believes it should be a default for user pages. I do think the fact they're both indefinitely semi-protected has caused vandalism to shift to other pages in my userspace (indeed, only yesterday this happened), but I daresay most new users will not know to go to those pages instead so I guess it's still a good thing. I never knew that user pages had a filter on them, though even semi-protection hasn't completely prevented my user page from being vandalised. If other pages in my userspace continue to get vandalised, I can see them needing protection too, so I'm wondering if you reckon indefinite protection for my user talk page has (in the long term) done more harm than good? Cheers. Adam9007 (talk) 01:20, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Adam! Well, let’s see. Your user page was created in April 2015. It was vandalized by two different new users in June 2015 and was then semi-protected indefinitely per your request. [1] As far as I can tell, the only filter that has ever been activated on your page is 630 when someone tried to move the page. There are many earlier filters - filter 279, 466, 397, 633, and others - that limit edits to someone else’s userpage, and they have been triggered on my page numerous times, but not on yours. The specific filter that prevents new users from editing someone else’s user page, filter 803, was instituted in October 2016. Your page was semi-protected before that time, so that is why that filter has never been triggered on your page. It and many others have been activated on my page, which is not semi-protected but has not been vandalized by IPs or new users in recent memory - although it has been vandalized a few times by autoconfirmed users.

No, I don't think the filter/protection causes vandalism to shift to other userspace pages. Although you can ask for specific userspace pages to be protected if they become targets. -- MelanieN (talk) 03:58, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Well, let's hope they don't become targets :). My talk page certainly will if it was to be unprotected. By the way, do these filters also protect user subpages, or just the main user page? Adam9007 (talk) 21:32, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Filter #803 protects only a user's main page from all editing by new/unregistered users (in effect, semi-protection). There are other filters that block certain things from user talk or other subpages; see this page's filter log for examples. I think the idea is that new/unregistered users have a right and possible need to comment on user talk pages - certainly an admin's talk page - but there is no legitimate reason for them to comment or edit on someone else's user page. -- MelanieN (talk) 21:47, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

It's not quite "And proved the Philistines were almost certainly Canadian"...

But it's still pretty damn good:[2] Enjoy! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 23:34, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Poway synagogue shooting

Hi, I rolled back your edits on my new New York Times source. This source was based on an interview that the synagogue rabbi gave on The Today Show Sunday morning. The San Diego Union Tribune source, and others, were written on Saturday when the facts weren't all known. Yoninah (talk) 23:37, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Yoninah: Yes, I know, but I have trouble accepting the rabbi's version. All earlier reports, based on multiple reports from multiple people who were actually there, said that the attack occurred during the service, and in fact during his sermon. But he says he was walking into a banquet hall? At 11:20 am? when there was a service going on that had started at 11? What was he doing in a banquet hall? And then there's this: "As they were waiting for the authorities to arrive, Rabbi Goldstein continued the sermon he had started inside the synagogue." Huh? Had he interrupted his sermon to take a stroll through the banquet hall? I just really have a problem with his version. Let's give it a little time, but I have a feeling the eventual weight of testimony is going to support the version that the shooting began in the synagogue itself, while the service was underway. I know we all love the New York Times and regard it as the newspaper of record, but let's consider the possibility that the rabbi's recollections are a little scrambled - not unreasonable considering what he's been through. -- MelanieN (talk) 00:06, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for considering it, though. An Orthodox Jewish Shabbat service in America starts around 9:00, not 11:30, so being in the banquet hall, possibly for a Kiddush, makes more sense than being in the sanctuary. And the source said he continued his sermon that he had begun in the synagogue. Yoninah (talk) 00:15, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

That synagogue had announced a service beginning at 11 am.[3] -- MelanieN (talk) 00:25, 29 April 2019 (UTC) and "Chabad of Poway was hosting its Passover Holiday Celebration which was scheduled to begin at 11 a.m., according to an event announcement. The celebration was to end at 7 p.m. with a final Passover meal."[4] -- MelanieN (talk) 00:28, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

And in this report [5] he says he was PREPARING for his sermon, and walked into the banquet hall to wash his hands. This at 11:20 when the service was supposed to start at 11. And in his version he heard a loud bang and turned around to see Lori Kaye lying on the floor. Most other versions have said she put herself between him and the gunman AFTER he began firing. We may never sort this out, but I want to give some weight to other versions besides just his. -- MelanieN (talk) 04:08, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

I just thought I should tell you...

FEAR THE TREE! -- MelanieN (talk) 00:48, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

...something once said to me for exactly the same reason, your mascot is a tree. :) Springee (talk) 00:43, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Archive 55

Archive 56

Archive 57

Archive 58

Archive 59

Archive 60

→

Archive 65