User talk:ScrapIronIV/Archive4

Ted Williams

A newspaper article[1] on Williams first game back also verifies baseballreference and baseball almanac that both say Williams didn't homer. If you aren't subscribed to newspapers.com, I can do screen captures for you....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 17:09, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

It's fine - I believed the original editor who removed it, but sources are sources. Thank you for finding one to support their position. Happy editing! Scr★pIron^IV 17:11, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Born and borne

I'm sorry, I'm a bl**dy idiot! Gah. And thanks for putting me straight. DBaK (talk) 17:11, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Not a problem at all. English is hard! I knew the right answer instinctively, but still had to look it up to be absolutely certain :-) Scr★pIron^IV 17:14, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Indeed ... and thanks. I am still furious with myself. More haste, less speed. Cheers DBaK (talk) 17:22, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Beauty and the Beast

the template was moved. the old one is a redirect. see the Requested move at Template talk:Beauty and the Beast (Disney) -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 15:01, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Not a problem; the initial result displayed on my screen was that no template existed at all; just red lettering of the new title. That was what I was reverting. Looks good now, probably a temporary glitch. Happy editing! Scr★pIron^IV 15:03, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

not a glitch. i used AWB to change the templates over before i made the move. anyhow, i'm mildly surprised that you're the only revert i got, considering that i changed about 80 or so transclusions between the two templates. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 15:06, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Ivan Asen I of Bulgaria‎ map

I revert your edit because my map is identical but more detailed. Kandi (talk) 14:25, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

You have violated the bright line of WP:3RR and are changing this map against a clear consensus, and multiple WP:3o responses. I recommend that you self revert, and abide by the consensus on the talk page. Scr★pIron^IV 14:27, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Take a look at the map itself. On it is painted what the other map ( ‎Borsoka ). My map is a copy of the map you insist on, but it more detailed. Kandi (talk) 14:36, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Take it to the Article Talk page. This is not about me; it's about what the other editors and those who have offered Third Opinions have determined, and I agree with them. Also, your personal attack shown here against one of the editors who offered a third opinion was uncalled for. Please do not post any more on this topic to my page, and keep it on the article talk page. Scr★pIron^IV 14:47, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

"Serial over-explainer who was indeffed a year or more ago"

Could you provide a link? Maybe reading that would help me understand. Endercase (talk) 02:45, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

I would if I could. Down side, I can't find it. It's why I didn't follow up in the conversation. If I do find it, I will post on the original conversation. Scr★pIron^IV 04:10, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Charlie Saxton

Hello,

My source for Charlie's birthday is Charlie himself. I've been friends with him for years. Themeltingpat (talk) 21:25, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not rely on the statements of friends and family, but rather on the use of reliable sources. For biographical infomation on living persons these must be cited from such a source. Without a citation, this information cannot be maintained on the page. Please read the links, to help direct you in your editing. Happy editing! Scr★pIron^IV 21:29, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

The "Turner Broadcasting System" article

Not to be rude but why did you revert it back to the previous one? Ted Turner didn't buy United Artists when he bought MGM/UA, he only bought MGM (although he did buy the a.a.p. library and Gilligan's Island and its animated spin-offs from United Artists). By removing information about Turner keeping the a.a.p. library and Gilligan's Island, it makes it sound like Turner only kept the pre-May 1986 MGM film and television library. Also, Time Warner was indeed founded in 1990, not 1989, on Time Warner's own Investors Relations Frequently Asked Questions page: "Time Inc. merged with Warner Communications Inc., on January 10, 1990, to form Time Warner Inc.". 71.95.63.155 (talk) 22:14, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

You did not cite a reliable source when you added that information. Sources are not optional; the information you add must be verifiable. Scr★pIron^IV 05:37, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

FAN:dom Con

Personally, I don't care to use Facebook as a source, ever. In the convention market, you cannot depend on the official website to even be updated in a situation like this. Please consider reading into the AM2 convention situation a few years ago, when an active convention just ended operations while still selling tickets, and did not inform people for months. How long do you care we wait if the website isn't updated? Month, year, website disappears? Esw01407 (talk) 16:41, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

WIkipedia is not a fan site, or a source for current events, or a schedule, or a directory, or... There is no deadline. Fans will need to get their news from their own fan site sources. Consider; what if Facebook is wrong? What if someone gained access to their account, and falsely stated that it was canceled? That would seriously hurt ticket sales, and Wikipedia would be perpetuating a lie. No, we need reliable sources in order to say anything at all on the topic. Scr★pIron^IV 16:49, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Considering the post was made in February, and they are refunding VIP members, and have replied on Facebook: "No plans are in place to resurrect the event in the near future", it looks like we'll be waiting for awhile. Again, I am a strong believer in reliable sources, but this is an instance where it fails. I'll make sure to post here in the days, or months, or years when we finally get an answer. Esw01407 (talk) 17:07, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Greater Albania

Hello, about your reverts of my edit, why you can't accept the inclusion of Serbia alongside Kosovo on the table? The Republic of Kosovo is a partially-recognized state, as for example, the State of Palestine (Arab League member) or the Sahrawi Republic (African Union member), only some states recognize its sovereignity, while it's not member of any important international organization (UN, EU, OIC, OSCE...). If you want, we can add something like "Disputed territory". Regards.--HCPUNXKID 15:19, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

It has been handled by subsequent edits. The issue of sovereignty is well covered in the article, and there is no need to add a disputed flag to the table. Further discussion should take place on the article talk page, so that other editors can provide their input. Happy editing! Scr★pIron^IV 15:29, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Gardner-Webb Page

The information about the Thomas Dixon collection does not warrant as much information as is on the page. It most certainly does not warrant a photograph and it is clear this has been added to cast the University in a negative light. Can you please tell me why you feel the need to keep putting it back up? Enh1905 (talk) 18:44, 16 June 2017 (UTC)enh1905

Per WP:BRD - you were Bold to remove, and were Reverted by multiple editors who disagree with you. Now is the time to Discuss it on the article talk page, so that all interested editors can contribute to the conversation. Scr★pIron^IV 19:14, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Victorian America

I am messaging to let you know that I have opened a discussion at Articles for Deletion (AfD) about the article Victorian America. As you revoked the original PROD, I thought you would wish to contribute to this discussion. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 20:16, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Sergei Korolev

Please could you explain your views on his nationality on the article talk page.-- Toddy1 (talk) 04:12, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Bonus Army and the scare quotes

Ah, actually they were "try to stop well-meaning future editors from restoring the previous mix-up" quotes. But okay, they didn't look great :) Equinox ◑ 21:34, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Eclipse Center

Thanks for this edit. If it happens again, you should know that it's plagiarized from copyrighted text posted here. You can request a revdel with a template or ask an admin directly to revdel. The way to tell that the WP text was copied from DeadMalls.com and not the other way around is that the text at DeadMalls was submitted in 2003 and the text in the WP article was added in 2006. 32.218.46.94 (talk) 15:22, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. Happy editing! Scr★pIron^IV 15:27, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Tiina Lymi Finnish Esmeralda

And how am I supposed to put a source if I don't even know how? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aaimran (talk • contribs) 19:08, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps it would help if you start by reading WP:CITE. I will add a welcome mesage to your talk page with some helpful links to assist you in learning how to edit Wikipedia. Welcome, and happy editing! Scr★pIron^IV 19:21, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Reported at WP:AN3

Please see WP:AN3#User:ScrapIronIV reported by User:Qerinaceous (Result: ). You may respond there if you wish. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 00:05, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

RfA

Thanks for supporting my run for administrator. I am honored and grateful. ) Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:50, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Singing#Images for lead

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Singing#Images for lead. —usernamekiran(talk) 13:55, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

And you are invited to follow WP:BRD, and note that I have already responded there. Further removal of these images would be disruptive, and not in keeping with standard protocol. Please restrict further discussion on this topic to the article's talk page, so that other editors may join in the discussion. Scr★pIron^IV 14:06, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Stefan Frei nationality

Stefan Frei naturalized as a US Citizen earlier this year (see https://www.sounderatheart.com/2017/7/6/15930826/stefan-frei-national-anthem-new-us-citizen), so I believe his flag should be US now rather than Swiss in the Shutouts table. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.81.81.80 (talk) 02:38, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

A beer for you!

OK! Benniejets (talk) 21:20, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Well done) Benniejets (talk) 13:37, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

About Chipsy on the Lay's page.

I changed the reference to their (official) Facebook page because chipsyegypt.com is no longer online. They apparently closed the website and I'm thinking that their next most trusted source would be their *official* Facebook page. As you may well know, many businesses don't even have websites anymore and use their Facebook pages for announcements, ads, etc, instead. MatthewS. (talk) 22:21, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

While that may be true, that societal change does not yet affect Wikipedia's standards for sourcing. Reliable sources are not optional. Happy editing! Scr★pIron^IV 13:04, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Vickers Wellington

Hello ScrapironIV, I'm Samuraipizzakat, the source of the information is from my 93 year old Grandmother who served with the No. 15 Operational Training Unit with the Vickers Wellington among others. Samuraipizzakat (talk) 13:55, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Welcome! Unfortunately, personal experience does not qualify as a reliable source. I will leave a welcome message on your user talk page with some helpful links to get you started here. Happy editing! Scr★pIron^IV 14:15, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Murder of Catherine Cesnik

The edit you reverted seems to have been copied from here, That page has a copyright notice which includes "Reproduce freely with attribution". While not an explicit cc license, I'm struggling to figure out why it would not qualify as acceptable. Any thoughts?S Philbrick(Talk) 13:15, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

This article was initially published by Tom Nugent at the Baltimore City Paper. While the original 2005 article is no longer available on the City Paper website, they did reprint it within an updated story here. At the end of that article there is a clear copyright notice. The Bishop Accountability website that you reference is not be the original copyright holder of this material, and would not be free to give such permission. If you have information that invalidates my interpretation, I am happy to discuss. Happy editing! Scr★pIron^IV 13:33, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

I was about to post here asking why rev del was not requested, but seem to have found the conversation: the copyright notice on the bottom of the page explicitly only applies to original content and it doesn't represent that the content reproduced there was original (they acknowledge it was a reprint). Even without the 2017 text to compare to, the website's licensing terms would not be enough for inclusion, and the content should be revision deleted. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:36, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Spanish Air Force

• Wondered if you care to add anything to this discussion - Regards FOX 52 (talk) 19:41, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
  • To be honest, that looks like another sockpuppet of Fonte de regaz. If it were up to me, I would revert all contributions on sight. I am monitoring and waiting for the inevitable meltdown. Scr★pIron^IV 19:50, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up, I'll keep am eye his edits - cheers FOX 52 (talk) 06:07, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Have I got news for you

Heya,

I'm not wanting to get into an edit war on the UKIP-Police element of the Controversy section, so I've logged a note on the talk page with my reasoning. Can I get your input?

Thanks, Lkchild (talk) 22:52, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the note; I have responded on the article talk page. Scr★pIron^IV 23:19, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks...

... for reverting my talk page. Typically the IP thinks that because I protected the page I am also the one that removed the material as well. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 23:50, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Any time. Funny thing is, I have some sympathy for this individual's situation, and he may actually be correct in his assertions. Trouble is, he just doesn't know what reliable sources are for us as an encyclopedia, and is so involved emotionally that he does not hear what others tell him. This has been going on for years. Anyway - Happy editing! Scr★pIron^IV 12:32, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Read it First !!!

Read it first, then you will know. don't simply say that Im a Sockpuppet and not relible source. you a Insane !. Article = http://www.malaysiandefence.com/money-dont-grow-trees/ .Hawkeye Ridgesaw Summer (talk) 15:03, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

I did read that blog, which is purely speculative. You have crossed the bright line of WP:3RR, and have been reported to the SPI noticeboard. You and I have communicated enough that I know who I am talking to. Scr★pIron^IV 15:27, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

About Page IRC(WASH)

Hi, User:ScrapIronIV greetings and salutations! I am the first and main editor of the page IRC(WASH), (see history) after my edits I realized there are a lot of misleading and unverified information of my edits (TOO MUCH). And it still needs time for me to make some repair over this. So I think it is better option to take that page down first before it is shown to the general audiences. If you agree with that, I will continue to put the delete template on. I am pretty confident a more reliable page will be there in a couple of days.

Faithfully, --Dannyboi886 (talk) 12:49, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

If that is the case, then you should contact an administrator and have it moved into draft or user space while you work on it. The article appears well sourced, and is certainly notable as an organization. A PROD is overkill for a nearly 50 year old UN organization. Thank you for reaching out - Happy Editing! Scr★pIron^IV 12:57, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Dear User:ScrapIronIV, how can I contact an admin and how could I make such requests? Wish you can help! Yours, --Dannyboi886 (talk) 13:15, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

I used to have a few talk page stalkers here, who might volunteer; otherwise, I would go over to the tea house and ask for help there. I don't do page moves myself much, and the original page would have to be deleted, so I am not much help in this case. By the way - that article looks good, and it's obvious you have put some effort into it. Well done! Scr★pIron^IV

Spartan race and avoiding an edit war

User:ScrapIronIV, it seems like we are at a disagreement about parts of the history of Spartan race. You asked for references, I provided them. Then you said that those references were already disputed in the talk page, which is not the case. Obstacle Racing Media has been referenced several times in the page. If you wish to remove Obstacle Racing Media as a reputable source of citations, then we should remove all of them and any associated text.

What should we do to resolve this? I looked up this topic on several different websites to see what the public opinion was, even speaking with several Spartan Race employees, and they acknowledge that Joe Desena had cofounders. If you can come up with references that refute this information, I will gladly accept it. Jsslee (talk) 20:42, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Please take this to the article's talk page. You will find the refutation of these sources for that specific information there. Nobody needs sources to to exclude information; they need it to include information. This particular information has been dealt with before, as politely as possible, with an individual with a [[WP:COI|conflict of interest]. Please note that if you are making these edits at someone else's request, that is a violation of policy known as meatpuppetry. In the meantime, as there is a clear, longstanding consensus to exclude this information based on those sources, I will be removing it per the Bold, Revert, Discuss process. It is not to be included until a consensus to do so has been reached on the article's talk page. Scr★pIron^IV 20:50, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for accusing me of meatpuppetry with no evidence. Jsslee (talk) 21:00, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Melissa benoist' personal life

That's her verified instagram account!! how is that not reliable? Bonaniiiia (talk) 13:24, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

It is also a WP:PRIMARY source; one does not take celebrities at their word. Secondary sources are required. Scr★pIron^IV 13:26, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Scotland Rail image

Just a message to say thanks for the reverting of the rail image on Scotland - I had (stupidly) not realised it was a computer generated photograph. Goodreg3 (talk) 15:10, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

it happens to the best of us - it's a gorgeous picture. The computers are getting better every day! Happy editing! Scr★pIron^IV 15:12, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

ACICS Accreditation

Could you explain why Brookline College is not provisionally accredited? Since it is seeking a new accreditor, it is not fully accredited.

Bcf1291 (talk) 17:47, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

If you wish to include accreditation information, it must include a source. Please read WP:V and WP:RS. Scr★pIron^IV 17:49, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

The last post is retained in history - it was removed as a wall of text copied from an article talk page. This issue is now resolved, and the other editor's edits were correct. Scr★pIron^IV 18:26, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Brookline College Edits

Hello,

I noticed that a lot of the changes that were made to the Brookline College Wikipedia page were removed under your username. I am admittedly new to all of the formatting requirements with Wikipedia so I just want to make sure I understand what I am doing wrong there. The information that was posted is accurate, I am guessing I was incorrect in how I referenced the materials. I am not sure if this is your role, but any guidance on what I could do to make sure I am posting information in good standing would be greatly appreciated. Brookline College has programmatic accreditation that is very important to the school, in particular their nursing program, that was removed as well.

Jdon31 (talk) 00:35, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

The information I removed was a direct copy/paste from the school's website, and as such was a copyright violation. Wikipedia policy requires its removal. Please read WP:COPYVIO for the appropriate policy. Scr★pIron^IV 02:49, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Jaws: The Revenge

Why were my edits to Jaws: The Revenge reverted? The plot, as written, is inaccurate to the movie. My edits and contribution corrected this. Vampus (talk) 18:11, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

The plot changes that you made were not an improvement, the prior version was clearer, and it was not inaccurate. That is why I restored the earlier version. Scr★pIron^IV 21:05, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

@ScrapIronIV: Having made my edits straight after watching the film, and going back to the film as reference to confirm plot points and event ordering, I can assure you that there are inaccuracies in the plot as written that my edits corrected. For example, they don't start zapping the shark until the device is swallowed and Jake is taken at the same time (or a second later). Additionally, the device isn't a bomb, but a strobe light they rigged with a receiver that they slave to another strobe light to have it activate. Also, having re-read my version vs the original version, I would argue my edits make it clearer, in part as it removes superfluous information. Vampus (talk) 12:50, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Coventry Mall

Thank you for your help with the post. I am not sure what happened, there was much more that I had typed up and was trying to post but for some reason only part of it showed up. I am the Current Mall Manager for this location and am only trying to provide the public with the update to date information!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:301D:1F00:7100:E030:7439:4676:7856 (talk • contribs)

Please read WP:COI so that you can understand why - as the manager of the location - you should not be editing that article. Wikipedia is not a social media site or advertising platform; rather, it is an encyclopedia. As such, we rely on reliable, third party, and independent sources for information. I will be placing a template on your talk page, to help you navigate some of our more arcane methods. Scr★pIron^IV 21:00, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Tornado chaser (talk) 17:09, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you

Hey! I just wanted to take a second to thank you for your mea culpa over on 2017. I totally understand the feeling of frustration and the temptation to make a point-y edit. I certainly can't say I've never done that. And I feel like far too often, Wikipedia becomes a battleground, and that makes admitting any mistakes so hard. That's a part of the culture here that really bothers me, and that, unfortunately, I participate in far too often. Seeing someone take themselves out of that is so refreshing. And I really appreciate it. Seeing that helps me keep things in perspective, and I think it goes a long way in terms of creating a more congenial editing environment. So, again, thank you. And happy editing! Cheers, -- irn (talk) 20:14, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

I appreciate the kind words. There are many things that get frustrating, and I am usually wise enough to stay away from the more contentious areas. I don't mind apologizing when I am wrong, and I was wrong there. I just don't know why that particular area has to be a difficult one. I hope you have a wonderful day - and happy editing! Scr★pIron^IV 20:57, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Wikibreak

Enjoy! Thanks for all your work thus far. Cassianto^Talk 17:28, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you so much - need to concentrate on my career for a while. :-) Scr★pIron^IV 15:16, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Clifton park center

Hello, I thought I added sufficient references to this page. May I ask what you need to be sourced as I am confused. Thank you. Also, what seems to be the issue in the first place? What am I taking to the talk page? Hooplamoneu89 (talk) 17:55, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Please read WP:V and WP:RS which explain why references are required, and what constitutes a reliable source. Then read WP:BRD to explain what you need to do when your edits have been challenged. Then, before you reinstate your reverted edits, start a discussion on the article's talk page to gain consensus for for the changes. Also read WP:EW about edit warring, to help you understand the consequences of continually reverting your changes. Thank you. Scr★pIron^IV 18:07, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

About Menin' qazaqstanym

It is no copyright problem, and not a POV(no influence on the neutrality). So the lyrics should not be deleted by WP:LYRICS and WP:DUE. If you insist that the lyrics is an pov, you ought to create an article, and name it as Lyrics of Menin' Qazaqstanym or some other else. Please not begin the Wikipedia:Edit warring. Thanks.

Vandalism is prohibited. -- Wikipedia:Vandalism

p.s. I will revert your edition tomorrow unless you give more reason that is believable.Ulysses Faye Ohkiph (talk) 02:41, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for finding this.

About your undo edit to the VICE column on the Zeena Schreck article - I didn't know there was mention of the column earlier in the article. (Correction: I just found where that was. Maybe it should be moved over to the bibliography section to make more sense.) Thanks! :) Got2Bthere (talk) 23:12, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

New Section

Dear ScrapIronIV,

I am writing to inform you that I am eligible person to make changes in Yerevan State Medical University page as I am working in the development department. Please, do not make any changes.

Best regards, Diana2198 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diana2198 (talk • contribs) 14:00, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

It is precisely because you work in the development department of the University that you may not make such edits. You have a conflict of interest, and Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a social media or advertising site. If you find there is incorrect material on the school's page, feel free to discuss those changes on the article's talk page, and let others make those edits for you. Thank you - Scr★pIron^IV 14:05, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Higgins the Dog

Thanks. I'd been wondering how anyone knew a pound dog's exact DOB. Anmccaff (talk) 20:47, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

New Section, or a continuation of the old...

Dear ScrapIronIV,

Can I know the reason of deleting my edits to this page?

Thank you in advance.

Best regards,

Anaid34 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anaid34 (talk • contribs) 14:16, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

It is precisely because you work in the development department of the University that you may not make such edits. You have a conflict of interest, and Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a social media or advertising site. If you find there is incorrect material on the school's page, feel free to discuss those changes on the article's talk page, and let others make those edits for you. Thank you - Scr★pIron^IV 14:39, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Dear ScrapIronIV,

So, if I saw that the information on the page is not full, I should discuss it in the talk page of YSMU wiki page?

Can I send some additional information to some not interested person, so that they can make changes?

Best Anaid34 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anaid34 (talk • contribs) 10:06, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, ScrapIronIV. 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)

League of gentlemen

Dear ScrapIron,

Wishing to resolve this league of gentlemen dispute - the source for the edit restoration which keeps reverting is outdated, and not useful - it claims that in April 2017 Gatiss confirmed an anniversary special, yet the referenced article (http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2017-02-13/the-league-of-gentlemen-eyeing-20th-anniversary-reunion/) is from February 2017. I think perhaps some confusion has arisen because of this dubious sourcing - Gatiss did state in early 2017 that they were meeting for a 20th anniversary special - although the 20th anniverary of the tv show would be in 2019, this 20th anniversary is to celebrate the show on the BBC (on radio in 1997), hence the 2017 specials ARE the 20th anniversary specials. Similarly this article only suggests they'll try and make something happen, and is lacking in specificity; as sourced content goes, it is a weak secondary source, I would say.

There is no commissioned content for 2019, 2020; these remarks in Feb/April merely announces intent to reform, and came before the BBC commissioned three specials in August 2017 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-41024660), and reece shearsmith has since announced on twitter (https://twitter.com/ReeceShearsmith/status/935181066314375169?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.digitalspy.com%2Ftv%2Fnews%2Fa844054%2Fthe-league-of-gentlemen-specials-airdate-confirmed-by-reece-shearsmith%2F) the air dates of these three specials as December 2017. Unless you can find more evidence for specials in 2019 and 2020, sourced after August 2017 (I can't find any such article), I'd like to revert to my edit.

(and apologies for the bloody hell comment - that was probably partly responsible for this edit war, should've just started the talk page then instead - don't edit wiki that often, so protocol for discussing went slightly over my head, just in this case I wanted to edit it, as the information is outdated and slightly misleading, and a topic I know a lot about)

Best,

Ratto

My issue here is that the statements in the first source were not contradicted in the second source, so I believe that the content referenced by the first source should not be removed in favor of the second; rather, that they should both be included. Having a series of three annual special episodes for this year does not mean that the specials planned for 2018 and 2019 have been canceled. Before we remove the sourced statement, I believe a notice of cancellation is in order.

As for the comment... I responded snarkily, and should have been more patient. We are all human beings on the other side of the keyboard, and occasionally our emotions intervene. Water under the bridge now, as they say! :-) Happy editing! Scr★pIron^IV 17:16, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

I guess I'm bringing the veracity of that source - I guess you can sum up the point I'm trying to make in 4 main points;

1) The written wiki content says "April 2017", yet the source was written on Monday, 13th February 2017; so what is currently written in the article is incorrectly sourced.

2) The written wiki content says "Gatiss confirmed", yet the source seems to have quotes from 3/4 of the members of the league of gentlemen. Similarly, Gatiss doesn't confirm anything more than "We’re hoping to [do it again].", since this was before they had been commissioned.

3) No expected air date is really touted in the source - 2019 is mentioned as a year, but 2020 is nowhere in that RT article, so phrasing in the wiki "expected to air in 2019 or 2020" corresponds with nothing in the source.

4) This radio times source is a weak second hand source; it features a number of selective quotes, but it doesn't really give much idea of the context of conversation. Similarly all the comments are vague and non-committal, since they don't have a commission in february - and I think the point stands that as much as they say they might like to do something in 2019, that this would take the form of an annual special is pure speculation, as they do not have a commission from the BBC to do so.

Overall, I think to make the strong claim "Gatiss confirmed that the show would return for an anniversary special which was expected to air between 2019 and 2020" is not a fair representation of that source states, both given the context of its timing, and the quality of the source. Some weak claim along the lines of "Gatiss suggested that the group might do something in 2019 to celebrate 20 years since the series" would be better, but is too weak a claim for wikipedia, I'd expect.

So although it is true the new specials aren't mutually exclusive with a 2019 special, my point is that the source isn't strong enough to make the claim that there will be annual specials; and then asking about cancellation brings us into a rather Kafkaesque realm of whether you can cancel something which hasn't been commissioned? I think the further specials claim therefore either needs resourcing with a more credible source which states there will be annual specials hereafter, or else that claim be removed.

(as for the hellfire and bloody damnation comment, it made me chuckle, and was a damn sight wittier than my bloody hell! but yeah [holy] water under the bridge!) Best, Ratto

John Boyega

Hello there. I know YouTube isn't a reliable source, but how about when the person the article is about says it themselves? I can't get the link to work, but the title is The Last Jedi's John Boyega Goes Undercover on Reddit, Twitter & Wikipedia | Actually Me | GQ. It should show up as first search result on YouTube. Best regards, DisgustingFish (talk) 20:50, 15 December 2017 (UTC) :)

(talk page stalker)...See WP:RS. I think you answered your own question. Cassianto^Talk 21:29, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

I still don't get it. That has to do with age... DisgustingFish (talk) 22:32, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Big Brother India 11

Sorry We're not satisfied by your edits, as you're making wikipedia unauthentic by yourself that could result you to got temporarily blocked from editing for short period or could be long. let the edits remain as you're saying that it's not entertaining thing. yes it is entertaining thing and informative that you made it nonsense by making your slum edits that could result in vandalisms. Thank You

You may be temporarily blocked or i can report against you for your edits you made for Bigg Boss 11. so please let them as it is as it's currently mode as I done and stop making these articles inaccurate. CK (talk) 15:09, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

I am uncertain who the "we" you are referring to are. If you are editing on behalf of an organization, I would recommend that you disclose the Conflict of Interest, per WP:COI. Wikipedia is not a fansite, nor a place to tally scores and fill with silly fanboy nonsense. For those purposes, fee free to start a fan site and edit there. Please read what Wikipedia is not. Scr★pIron^IV 15:17, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Bigg_Boss_11 --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:22, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

If you think that wikipedia is not that please so simply visit various other wikipedia articles that relates to these shows like bigg boss 11, big brother and other reality shows related pages, and do the same as you did at Bigg Boss 11, without any harrasements apology for previous behaviour that could cause to got block from editing article for short time, so please leave the topic and if you think that the edits are wrong or accurate then it's your own intention, as there are several wikipedia pages relating shows of nominations, eliminations and votings(repeating again), where the votings, nominations and elimination summaries are still as it is as previous season of Bigg Boss 10 and furtherly have still as it is. so leave it alone. Thank You and Calm Down and once again Apology for vandalizing. CHEERS!. CK (talk) 17:03, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

@Broken nutshell: What's this "apology for vandalizing" about? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:26, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Bigg boss 11

Hi, thing you're trying to remove is not making any fan site as this is not only the encyclopedia, you people make encyclopedia unauthentic by removing and declaring it nonsense which is not, please let those things re added as you're trying to do on Bigg Boss 11, then do with all articles relating to Bigg Boss 10 Bigg boss 9 and so on.

   Things you're trying to remove is not making it fan site as you're trying to explain. 'What wikipedia is not' is not explaining such thing you're trying to do and explain. So please let the things remain as it is and step back from this article, It's not Broken Nutshell as I know the user I've ignored Broken nutshell but I cite the things and I better know what wikipedia is, and the things you're trying to remove has to be re added as it is not making any sought of fan page. Oasis Gravel (talk) 19:06, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Indeed, if you "cite the things" and "better know what Wikipedia is" then why is this edit to my talk page your only edit...? Scr★pIron^IV 19:09, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Cf. General Ization ^Talk 19:12, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

ScrapIronIV or Scorpion?

Hi, as a habit enforced by dyslexia, I referred to you as "Scorpion" in an edit summary in regards to the above article mentioned. I'm sure you don't care, but since I can't find a way to edit edit summaries (and I'm too neurotic to just leave it wrong) I wanted to say sorry for any confusion. Valeince (talk) 00:40, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the concern - it is ScrapIronIV, although I'll answer to anything that is inoffensive. Replacing the "A" with a star does tend to break it up a bit, and can be confusing. Happy editing! Scr★pIron^IV 13:10, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

January 2018

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Carter Page. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 05:55, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

ScrapIronIV (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Mea culpa; mea maxima culpa This block is absolutely correct in its application. Generally, I know better. There is no good excuse; I miscounted, and broke the bright line of WP:3RR. I should not have been editing tired, in the middle of the night, and in a bad mood. I ask for leniency, despite my two previous blocks, which were both in my first six months of editing. I apologize. I know better, and I will - as I have in the past 3 years - try not to let this happen again. Scr★pIronIV 13:53, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Unblocked on this basis, and after discussion with the blocking admin. Yamla (talk) 16:15, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

@Coffee: Coffee, as blocking administrator, I'd like to ask your opinion on lifting this block. Had I placed the block, this unblock request contains everything I'd want to see in order to lift it. If that's not convincing, perhaps an agreement to abide by 1RR for the remaining duration of the block? Anyway, you are the blocking admin and I defer to your better judgment. --Yamla (talk) 14:46, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Firstly, why was the block for 72 hours? That seems like a long time. @Yamla: Coffee is not readily available and I don't think this block should be enforced waiting for a response by Coffee, as you said, this unblock request has all the required groveling and ScrapironIV should be unblocked. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 15:28, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

@Sir Joseph: It's at 72 hours, as an escalation from the last block, which was 48. Thing is... that was over two and a half years ago... >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 15:38, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Right, I don't consider that block to be acceptable to use in calculating current block times.

Coffee edited earlier this morning, so I think it's worth waiting for a response. And I strongly claim there's no required grovelling. What convinced me to raise the issue up is that ScrapIronIV demonstrated a clear understanding of WP:3RR, an understanding of the violation, and a commitment to avoid 3RR violations in the future. :) --Yamla (talk) 15:34, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Right, so why wait for Coffee? He put in an unblock request, followed the rules and you, as an uninvolved admin reading the unblock request can make the decision to unblock. Isn't that the whole point of the request, to get another admin's opinion in a way? Sir Joseph ^(talk) 15:48, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

• Thank you for the courtesy @Yamla:. The blocks are always preventative, and as it appears this user truly understand they had faults here, and has promised to not repeat them... I am okay with going forward on the unblock. But a stronger block need be applied if they continue the behavior again. Hopefully that won't be necessary. I wouldn't usually give the go ahead for someone on their third edit warring block, but I'm willing to make an exception here due to the window of time they went between these issues. Thank you for your prompt handling of this issue and thanks go to ScrapIronIV for their quick response in this matter. I had to handle some pressing legal matters, so apologies for the seemingly late reply, but I just got a chance to check my notifications. Happy editing all! — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 16:12, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Coffee. ScrapIronIV, your block has been lifted. I look forward to many more productive edits from you. :) --Yamla (talk) 16:15, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Yana Dementyeva

I am a rower at rowamerica rye and she is one of our assistant coaches. To find a source for that will be hard because she is part time. The disqualifications were sourced by another user. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Metro north (talk • contribs) 20:50, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Your unsourced edit was a violation of Wikipedia's Biographies of Living Persons policy. Additionally, as you are connected to this individual, you have a conflict of interest and should not be editing this article at all. The IP's edits that you reverted were, in fact, correct edits. Scr★pIron^IV 20:56, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Sorry about that and thank you for giving me the outline via my talk page. I am sorry if i wasted your time. Thank you. Metro north (talk) 21:38, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

It is certainly not a waste of my time; I really do hope the information helps, and that you enjoy your time here. Happy editing! Scr★pIron^IV 21:39, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

January 2018

A suggestion: Don't revert people who have done extensive work on an article over many months with Not an improvement. Especially when they are restoring the page to a version closer to what it had been before you put in your version. - Gothicfilm (talk) 21:47, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Adding lesser known works to the lede, which is already a WP:SEAOFBLUE does not improve the article. Suggestion: Take it to the article talk page. Another suggestion: Read WP:OWN. Scr★pIron^IV 21:50, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Not an improvement was what you choose. Your opinion. Mine is the final book published before his death is not needed in the lead when no other works follow it, as was previously the case. Looker is not lesser known than Runaway. Follow WP:BRD - Gothicfilm (talk) 22:07, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Could you please re-insert the changes I made in order to bring my page up to date. I provided the references you asked for. Thank you Edit0695 (talk) 23:46, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Williams College

Can you explain to me why the alumni section is considered "soapboxing" on the Williams College page but not on the Dartmouth College, Princeton University, Brown University, Harvard University, etc. pages? Every major university / college page has a section where they summarize alumni achievements. Why shouldn't Williams have one of these? All of the information is verifiable on the List of Williams College people page. I am very confused why we can't include one for Williams. GreylockFoW (talk) 18:07, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

First and foremost, you need to explain who the "we" is that you represent. Full disclosure is a requirement for any conflict of interest you may have. Scr★pIron^IV 18:17, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

By "we" I mean the Wikipedia community. My only interest is that I am an alum who is knowledgeable about the College; I don't want to soapbox or promote the College unfairly. But it seems as if other pages have more information, and I just want to provide analogous info for the Williams page. Everything is citable as well. GreylockFoW (talk) 18:30, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

I believe the response that you were given by @Seraphimblade: already answers your question. Further discussion should go on the article's talk page, so that other editors to the page can be included. Also, please feel free to read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS which will help you understand the discrepancy between pages. I agree with Seraphimblade, that if you find similar content in other articles, you may feel free to delete it. Scr★pIron^IV 18:41, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Sealand 50th anniversary coins

You just reverted my recent edits to Principality of Sealand on account of notability. I recognize you have been editing much longer than I have, and thus I defer to your judgement here. However, I don't quite understand how that action was necessitated by WP:NNC and WP:UNDUE, if you wanted to drop me a line of additional explanation, that'd be appreciated, but no pressue. So you know, I had reverted your edit because you said the bit about the coin was not referenced, and I found a reference; I didn't realize notability was also an issue. Anyway, thank you for cleaning up Wikipedia, and helping junior editors such as myself. Mr.1032 (talk) 02:18, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for responding so politely here. Basically, Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia, and not a random collection of trivial facts. Sealand's minting of a commemorative coin is a purely commercial enterprise, and is purely a promotional exercise; selling a $25 commemorative coin for $75. If it were a genuine government issue coin of a new type or style, or new denomination, it may be permissible - but Wikipedia does not exist to promote commercial ventures. I trust you understand that position. Sealand is an interesting topic. I wish you well in your future here - I have seen you make some very good edits. Happy editing! Scr★pIron^IV 21:43, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

List of United States bomber aircraft

So, apparently WP:BRD does not apply to you and you may edit war whenever you like? If you are at all familiar with those policies, then you know you should self-revert until a discussion on the matter takes place. You have only cited WP:AVIMOS, a guideline that while does state images shouldn't be included in lists, there are exceptions and they should be reviewed and discussed. You have done neither. I'm sure you're aware that alot of work went into finding and and adding those images, which only serve to greatly enhance that list. Yet, without so much as a simple attempt at a discussion on that talk page, or the Project Aviation talk, you would gleefully wipe out all that hard work. Your actions do nothing to improve this project, but at the very least, your actions should follow the policies here. You can begin by self-reverting (unless you think those images being there even a short while longer is causing some kind of significant harm?), then go and start the discussion you should have in the first place. - ^theWOLFchild 19:37, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

To quote the agreed upon Style guide: "No images should be included in lists of aircraft, this is not what lists are for." No mention of exceptions, additional reviews, etc. The formatting is not in keeping with other aviation lists, and was brought into line with existing standards. Feel free to bring up a discussion to have the Aviation Manual of Style changed, if you think it is warranted. The hard work you have mentioned went into creating the style guide by the very Project you have cited. If others have chosen to add content that is in violation of Aviation Project standards, then it is unfortunate that they have spent their time incorrectly. Scr★pIron^IV 19:51, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

You still haven't self-reverted..So you admit that think BRD does not apply to you. Got it. - ^theWOLFchild 20:31, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Carter Page

Coffee, Yamla, sorry I'm late to the party on this, but I believe ScrapIron's edit warring was justified as an enforcement of BLP? They were removing unsourced BLP content, even if they didn't invoke the policy. (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 18:06, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

I didn't investigate on that basis, so I take no position. --Yamla (talk) 18:12, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

@DrFleischman: I'm not sure I understand where the BLP violation is. They may or may not have gone to a certain school (I personally have not checked to see if any sources back up the use of the category) but how do you see that as a severe enough violation of BLP to constitute justified edit-warring? — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 18:13, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Not a snark--I understand the sentiment, but is WP:3RRNO only limited to removing severe BLP violations? (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 18:18, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, de facto. And I'm sure most administrators would agree. As if we gave clearance to just "BLP violations" to mean "erroneous information", well edit-wars could happen all day long on BLPs without a discussion ever having to happen. That doesn't seem optimal to me. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 19:13, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Steve Whitmire

Please stop undoing my edits there. What I put in there IS true. I even provided a link to a source that reaffirms everything.

By undoing my edits, you are only further perpetuating lies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.97.210.48 (talk) 03:13, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

The information you have been adding is in violation of Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy. An administrator has undone your edits, and the page has been protected. Scr★pIron^IV 12:59, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Note for your information

crime family vandal 96.19.148.120 is doing exactly the same edits as previously performed by now blocked user 96.19.159.1 Hmains (talk) 18:48, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know - I try to keep an eye out for this one, as they are quite persistent. I would love to see a range block... Scr★pIron^IV 18:56, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

I was Right

I know for a fact I was right, he is a McCarthy, on highly reliable websites, and i share the same last name and i am related to him, I hope you change it back to the truth

-T7TEEN03

Ferdinand Marcos

Hi there,

I've started a dedicated section in the talk page. —Jerome Potts (talk) 23:27, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Kelli Ward

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Germanic umlaut

Freddie Prinze Jr. original surname is spelled Pruetzel which is spelled in Prützel! Germans have vowels called umlaut. "ue" is spelled "ü". Please search some essentials in 101 German spelling before editing. Chem-is-try7 (talk) 21:32, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Season's Greetings!

File:Xmas Ornament.jpg

To You and Yours!
FWiW Bzuk (talk) 22:21, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Reviewing

OK, so it's not too much to get excited about, but the sub-pages certainly help to clear my shiny new user page of all the clutter. Have a great new year! Cassianto^Talk 23:38, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Terrific collection of pictures Wishing you all the best for a happy and prosperous new year! Scr★pIron^IV 23:41, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your support

	Peacemaker67 RfA Appreciation award
	Thank you for participating and supporting at my RfA. It was very much appreciated, and I am humbled that the community saw fit to trust me with the tools. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:04, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Merry, merry!

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 13:47, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

	Seasons Greetings
	Christmas! Christmas, everywhere, on every talk page, I do dispair Seasons being greeted and Wikibreaks told, but still time for a little more editing, for being WP:BOLD! So go on, go forth and enjoy beyond concern Your Wiki will be waiting for when you return.

Merry Christmas ScrapIronIV -- samtar ^whisper 21:40, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

@Samtar: Many happy returns! May you have a warm and blessed holiday, with all the people you care most about at your side Scr★pIron^IV 21:42, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Muse India

Sir I am affiliated with Muse India and ask kindly why you continue to remove our award winner notice for Priya Sarukkai Chanri and Ravi Shankar for translation of Andal? She is respected as goddess in our country and just because book was published in India means not it is noteworthy. This is widely covered in our country sir.

http://cms.newindianexpress.com/cities/hyderabad/2018/jan/10/three-new-attractions-at-hlf-2018-1749288.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.234.194 (talk) 13:31, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Thus far, the citations that have been supplied have not supported the article text that you have inserted. Unsourced biographical information will be removed by policy. As you have a conflict of interest, take it to the article talk page and request that it be added there. Scr★pIron^IV 13:42, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Natalie Wood

Did you intend for the article to have "her then-husband" in the 2018 investigation of her death, when her husband is mentioned many times?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:48, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Heartland Baptist Bible College page

Hello!

Back a year ago at this time, I made some edits to the Heartland Baptist Bible College page that were ill-advised (due to being new to editing on Wikipedia). You reverted those and talked me through why they were wrong. I appreciated the guidance! This time, I simply removed some information that was out-of-date and tied to a dead link and replaced it with information that can be easily found on the college's website. However, my edits were still reverted...

Could you please help me? I'm not trying to do anything wrong. I'm just trying to update information.

R495364r (talk) 23:04, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

By the way, at first I "un-reverted" my edits that you reverted. But I didn't realize it was you. I'm not trying to be argumentative. R495364r (talk) 23:06, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

One more thing... I saw that some others are making edits on the page due to "reputation." That is not the purpose of the edits I have done. I am just trying to update information. R495364r (talk) 23:08, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Your edits were reverted because you removed cited data and replaced it with unsourced data. It is better that data be out of date, than unverifiable. Please read WP:V. Unsourcd claims are likely to be challenged and removed. Also, if a source is no longer available at a website, feel free to tag the source or find a new one. Happy editing! Scr★pIron^IV 19:43, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Misunderstanding

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tilikum_(orca)&diff=824691754&oldid=824691638 This edit summary would suggest a most extraordinary misunderstanding of the core policies that we present verifiable facts neutrally. I trust that you do not genuinely believe that describing something as "notorious" is a verifiable fact, and that this was some kind of mistake. Mermaid99 (talk) 08:35, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

It was no mistake at all. Wikipedia presents information as described in reliable sources. Tilikum is headlined as notorious in National Geographic, NBC News, Today, ABC and even whales.org. Leaving that out would actually be a misrepresentation of sources, and a special bias all its own. Scr★pIron^IV 13:31, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

That's a major misunderstanding then. Mermaid99 (talk) 22:42, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Silver Chair‎

Ok The Silver Chair film was on Wikipedia but then there was an isheu with will poulter's age but his age was not Joe's only reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.40.71.152 (talk) 20:40, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

The article was removed because it has not commenced primary filming. It is meant to stay a redirect until filming has begun. Please stop erasing the redirect in live Wikipedia space, and making unsourced edits. Scr★pIron^IV 20:50, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

John Byron (died 1450)

Hiya, the fact that South Kesteven did not exist in his lifetime does not matter as per Wikipedia_talk:Categorization_of_people/Archive_10#Categorization_of_people_by_place...GrahamHardy (talk) 19:49, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi, and thank you. :) OK, if the the choice is the current district for categories, I can live with it - even if I personally disagree. Why was the estate in South Stoke chosen as his birthplace? The article does not say; rather, it lists two locations where he had estates - South stoke, Lincolnshire, and Clayton, Manchester. Why did you pick the one over the other as his birthplace? Scr★pIron^IV 20:11, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Do not remove my comments.

Do not leave me warnings about refactoring other people's talk page comments, when they had just deleted my talk page comment. You restored their deletion of my comment. Why? Mermaid99 (talk) 20:48, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

I manually reinserted your comment; I did not remove it. Your comment is there. I did not "restore their deletion" - I restored both your comment, and the other user's. Please examine edits more carefully. Scr★pIron^IV 20:51, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Goodluck Jonathan Assumption of Acting President

The resolution making Goodluck Jonathan Acting President was passed by both Chambers of The National Assembly of Nigeria and not only The Senate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samson at AcademicJournals (talk • contribs) 15:02, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

True or not, it still needs to be sourced. Please read WP:CITE for instructions. Scr★pIron^IV 15:04, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

ParisClementine

In case I've reverted you somewhere - ParisClementine was a sock of DonkeyGoatFace so I've reverted some stuff to the status quo before both of them started in... I think. It kind of gets confusing when the sock and the master are arguing different sides of the edits. Cabayi (talk) 23:24, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Not a problem at all :-) Happy editing! Scr★pIron^IV 13:36, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

WP:LYRICS discussion

Hello, I've recently spotted your edits to the articles National anthem of Mongolia and Meniń Qazaqstanym. You seem to insist removing the lyrics sections in these articles with the claim that these articles somehow violate the guidelines as presented on WP:LYRICS. I've read this through several times, and I am unable to find any condition that the given articles would violate:

• The articles contain substantial other content beyond the lyrics, and therefore WP:NOLYRICS isn't broken.
• "National anthems are generally considered to be a special case of fair use" as per WP:LYRICS, so copyright should not be an issue.
• Your edit reason states to "feel free to link to them on WP:COMMONS", yet WP:LYRICS advises moving the lyrics over to Wikisource instead (yet you don't do this and instead shift the burden to whoever catches your edit message)

Could you please clarify your stance and explain, how you see the lyrics sections of the given articles violate the contents of WP:LYRICS? SURJECTION _{·talk·contr·log·} 18:30, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

WP:NOTLYRICS, not WP:NOLYRICS, got that wrong. SURJECTION _{·talk·contr·log·} 18:32, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Please read section 2 of WP:NOTLYRICS and WP:NOFULLTEXT. Including the full lyrics - and in multiple languages, I might add - is not in keeping with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. A relevant portion of WP:NOTLYRICS is:

• "Quotations from a song should be kept to a reasonable length relative to the rest of the article, and used to facilitate discussion, or to illustrate the style; the full text can be put on Wikisource and linked to from the article."

As for who should put it over to Wikisource, that's up to those interested in keeping this nationalistic cruft in the project. That would not include me. Scr★pIron^IV 18:44, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

I have read section 2 of WP:NOTLYRICS: that is where I got the material for my first bullet point. I agree that the national anthem should not be provided in multiple languages, unless there is a well-sourced, widely used or otherwise reputable translation (instead I support having the anthem in the language it's written in using the standard orthography and possible romanization). WP:NOFULLTEXT on the other hand makes a particular argument to keep national anthems: "If out of copyright, shorter texts – such as [...] short songs (most national anthems) – are usually included in their article.". I also maintain that you should migrate the content to Wikisource, seeing you're making the decision to remove it from the main article. SURJECTION _{·talk·contr·log·} 18:52, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Apparently we disagree about the definition of short text - These national anthems are not "short" in my view, and thus are not covered by the exemption described in WP:NOFULLTEXT. You are free to believe whatever you wish about whose responsibility it is, but I can guarantee you that I will not be the one to do it. Scr★pIron^IV 19:29, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

The definition of a **short text** is not mine - in either case, a couple of stanzas is still a "short text" in my eyes. In either case, "[Y]ou are free to believe whatever you wish about whose responsibility it is", as I am, but I can justify my viewpoint: by removing the lyrics from the pages, you make it considerably more difficult for anyone else to do the actual job, since they won't have easy access to the lyrics anymore! (They have to go digging into the history and older revisions to find it). This is why I'm asking you to do the moving part. Calling the anthems "nationalistic cruft" really smells of a subjective viewpoint in the topic, anyway. (See WP:TALK: "Stay objective"). Again, I request that you either reverse the changes of removing the lyrics or move them to Wikisource yourself. If you fail to do this, I will consider my full responsibility to restore the lyrics, possibly with a note that the content in question could be moved over, leaving the responsibility to someone else. SURJECTION _{·talk·contr·log·} 19:37, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Such a note could, for example, be the template Copy section to Wikisource. SURJECTION _{·talk·contr·log·} 19:41, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Prince edits

Hello ScrapIronIV. Thanks for the message. I took your comments on board and re-added the edit in a different version incl. a citation, which i had missed before. I hope this is Ok now. I am not sure what you meant by highly editorialised. The original edit was not expressing an opinion, our at least I didn't mean it to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saintandrewz (talk • contribs) 20:54, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

@Saintandrewz: Thanks for adding a citation, but that link is promotional. You will need to find another source. It was the "international publishing giant" comment that was excessive, but I see you rewrote it without that. I will give you some time to find a new source, but will remove it if you do not replace it. Happy editing! Scr★pIron^IV 21:09, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi. Yes, there is a fine line between explanation and promotion. On the citation, I thought quoting the ISBN would do it. Anyway, I'll find something else to back it up. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saintandrewz (talk • contribs) 21:14, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

done. hope that works. thanks, SZaintandrewz — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saintandrewz (talk • contribs) 21:26, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Article about Nitin Rai Son of the Legendary Raghu Rai

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Nitin23000#Speedy_deletion_nomination_of_Draft%3ANitin_Rai

If your saying that the content which i use is copied from other website for this article, so i wanna make this clear that nitinrai.com is website of Nitin Rai a photographer for which i written this article and he is a professional photographer of our fashion and media industry. Please kindly approve this article or if you want to write about Nitin Rai on wikipedia you can write, Please its a humble request for you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nitin23000 (talk • contribs) 05:15, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

I was not the one to nominate it for deletion. The message I left you was for this nonsense edit. You may contact the nominator about the deletion of the article, but it has already been deleted. Scr★pIron^IV 13:11, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Steve Whitmire

I do not know how to support my changes to the article with a citation to a reliable source, even though I shared something from a reliable source.

I hope we can somehow work together to make the edit correctly because I do not like it when inaccuracies get spread. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Duke Remington (talk • contribs) 05:17, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Artificial Intelligence

Could you please provide a little more context with regard to the reverting of my addition of business uses of artificial intelligence? All your comments states is "promotional". I am not sure what you feel was promotional about it. Thanks. OrdinaryArtery (talk) 21:34, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

• Just following up to my question above. If you could share additional details, I'd appreciate it. I'd rather not simply undo your edit without hearing from you first. Thanks. OrdinaryArtery (talk) 21:00, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Please read WP:PROMO. The "reference" that was cited for that addition is nothing more than a sales pitch from Wolfram, and I see you are editing multiple Wolfram related articles. Please read WP:COI as well, and be aware that if you do have a conflict of interest, then it must be disclosed. Scr★pIron^IV 21:09, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Yanklowitz

Hey Scrap. Saw your revert on the Shmuly Yanklowitz page (I'm sure you took a peek at the talk page discussion too). Would like to hear more of your thoughts here, and your reasoning for the revert. Thank you! Dtj16 (talk) 18:27, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Edit War (?)

Hi Scrap. Can you please respond to my inquiry? Thanks. Dtj16 (talk) 21:01, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Change of Jasmin Walia Image

hi , recently you have undid my change of pic of a person. i have uploaded the pic of jasmin walia coz she dont want that current pic appear to the result so she has given me authority to change the pic on her behalf (she is an celebrity) thats why i am trying to change the pic but everytime you people give different different reason, earlier with other pic they said it cant be used coz it has been used before on other website, and now when i uploade fresh pic which has never been used then you saying its conflicting, i want this new pic in infobox please understand and do the changes, coz is affecting the person. thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pushpeshpandey09 (talk • contribs) 16:34, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Article subjects do not control the content on pages about them. As you are personally acquainted with this individual, you have a conflict of interest. This means you should make no edits directly to the article. You need to go to the article's talk page and discuss the changes you would like to see made, and get consensus there. Scr★pIron^IV 16:38, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

I've flagged the potential conflict of interest on the talk page. @Pushpeshpandey09: have a look at Image dos and don'ts for some helpful tips on how to get the image updated. Tayste (edits) 19:43, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

New section

omg keep it stands — Preceding unsigned comment added by Btreadaway23 (talk • contribs) 22:09, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

It Looks Good Today Don't Reverse — Preceding unsigned comment added by Btreadaway23 (talk • contribs) 00:52, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

While I have no idea what prompted this, I will say that none of your edits stand at this point. You have not provided any sources for your changes, and the edit where you removed disability notices is quite worrisome. Someone has left a welcome message on your talk page - I suggest you go read it, follow the links, and get familiar with the way things are done here. Thank you. Scr★pIron^IV 11:32, 24 February 2018 (UTC)