User talk:Alansohn/Archive 37

Archive 30

←

Archive 35

Archive 36

Archive 37

Archive 38

Archive 39

Hiya.

Who are ya??? You should totally archieve this page. It's really long and takes an age to get down. 86.179.68.238 (talk) 18:32, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK on Howard Van Hyning

Hello! Your submission of Howard Van Hyning at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Miyagawa (talk) 21:27, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

bare assertion fallacy

Read my note before you remove my edit, jesus christ man I explained it right there and on the discussion page —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.231.217.26 (talk) 03:58, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

I am questioning your vitriolic attitude towards my constructive corrections of numerous NBA players. Though some of them might possess negative connotations, I believe revealing the truth takes priority over what is perceived to be politically correct. Oh yes, Fesenko is a fat lard. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.18.10.210 (talk) 04:06, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Paul K. Meyer

Sorry if I broke the rules. I was trying to blank as a request for Speedy Deletion, and left a note here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Paul_K._Meyer My rationale was that the sourcing, while good, may be more of an example of recentism. So I thought to delete, rather than invite an AfD. Can we delete--Coldplay3332 (talk) 18:13, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Donald S. Kellermann

The DYK project (nominate) 06:03, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Barber's pole

Alansohn, This article was substantially and recently updated. It is well-sourced, and has (I think) an interesting juxtaposition of concepts and material. I think it might merit a nomination for a WP:DYK, which is a process that I know very little about. I don't want to get off on the wrong foot. I was a heavy contributor to this article, and I don't want to be impermissibly conflicted. If you could provide suggestions or guidance, it would be appreciated. Best to you and happy editing. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 03:17, 16 November 2010 (UTC) Stan

There's no issue with conflict -- you are free and encouraged to submit your own articles for nomination -- but I will take a look at the article and see where I can help, or at least guide you through the process. Alansohn (talk) 18:24, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Alan. You are one of those editors whose success and impact is a real inspiration. Best to you. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 19:32, 16 November 2010 (UTC) Stan

We are coming up against the 5 day time limt, I think. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 11:44, 17 November 2010 (UTC) Stan

I tried to see what I could have done, but unfortunately the DYK rules specify that the five-day clock starts ticking once the article has been created or has been expanded, and this article dates back several months. You've done a tremendous amount of work on this article, and I'm still transfixed by the barber pole illusion, but the article is not eligible for DYK. One of the best ways to make sure that the clock doesn't run out is to create the article in userspace and then move it to mainspace once you've finished creating the article and it's ready for prime time. Thank you for reaching out to me and my sincerest apologies that this is an issue that can't be resolved for this article. Please keep on editing articles as you have already done and let me know if I can be of any help in the future with another article. Alansohn (talk) 20:19, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

I thought a significant expansion (it was either kilobytes or a %age, would qualify. We did a rather substantial expansion within the last week. In any event, you are but the messenger. I did not create the article, but only improved it. If you liked that one, you will surely like Three hares. Thanks for taking the time and putting forth the effort. I'm in Chicago to do a speech, so I can't be concerned with this further. Best to you. Happy editing. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 21:58, 18 November 2010 (UTC) Stan

DYK for Robert Lipshutz

The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Howard Van Hyning

Gatoclass (talk) 12:06, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

the truth is the truth

Everything i said about brett delaney was true! i work at rebel sport, you dont, therefore i think i would have more accurate information than you, wouldnt you agree?

why did you deleted my last edit? that one was a true one.. becouse i am a real harajuku subculturic guy. for the toher things before that i am sorry. but for now i want to edit somethings that are waayy to old and waayay out of time for that page.

Read. Alansohn (talk) 21:41, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't know where to write this, but Ultra Defragger is spyware/malware AND PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW, why do you think I would waste my time vandalising the page for no reason? The article must be changed it is misleading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.3.87.235 (talk) 01:24, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Richard Bing

The DYK project (nominate) 12:04, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Imbecile article

I felt this was a valid edit, and not an act of vandalism. Please revert the page and stop your persistent actions with this matter. If you have concerns with this edit please post them in the talk page for the article. Cheers. -R.T.D. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.243.176.41 (talk) 00:41, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Bob Dold

I'm sorry. What do you mean my edit to Bob Dold was unconstructive? All I did was move it to a new page called Robert Dold as that is his full name. Politics2012 —Preceding undated comment added 12:31, 12 November 2010 (UTC). Read Adriana Lima - Charity. The fix was reverted to this. Perhaps examination prior to action should be practiced by a certain someohn. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.7.220.127 (talk) 15:39, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

User:Politics2012

Howdy Alansohn. I'm a tad concerned with the editor. He seems either unable or unwilling to head advice on signing his posts & unable or unwilling to addreess/respond to posts at his talkpage. The latter likely has something to do with the former. As he's been editing for about a month, I'm assuming 'lack of knowledge' is the cause. PS: I noticed soemone has an SPI out on him. GoodDay (talk) 15:30, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

I will keep my eye out for any potential problems. Alansohn (talk) 17:18, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

We may have that now at John Boehner & Nancy Pelosi articles. GoodDay (talk) 00:16, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Theodore W. Kheel

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Careful...

Be careful when using Huggle, as it does have a habit of bringing up false positives at times. In this edit you readded vandalism that an IP had removed! Alzarian16 (talk) 20:14, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for catching the error. I try to be as meticulously careful as possible when using Huggle to revert vandalism, but I have found that both Huggle and I make the occasional error amid thousands of reverts of genuine vandalism. My apologies for my error and my thanks for the heads up. I will continue to try to be as careful as possible when reverting vandalism. Alansohn (talk) 20:39, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

"Unincorporated areas"

I wanted to get your opinion on something. I happened to look at the article on Blackwood, New Jersey (prompted by the banner looking for Wikipedia campus ambassadors there) and I noticed that the intro described Blackwood as an "unincorporated area." I then checked the article on Unincorporated area, and as I suspected, it defines an unincorporated area as "a region of land that is not a part of any municipality." As our article on Blackwood says, it is part of Gloucester Township, therefore it is part of a municipality. In fact, all the land in New Jersey is part of a municipality. (With the possible exception of Sandy Hook, I once read somewhere that Sandy Hook was not part of any municipality, but the only sources I can find now (including Wikipedia) say it is entirely within Middletown Township.) So I took that out of the Blackwood article. Then, out of curiosity, I decided to look at some other places in New Jersey that I know are fairly sizable "communities" but not separate municipalities, specifically Somerset, New Jersey, Avenel, New Jersey and White Meadow Lake, New Jersey, and see whether their intros described them as unincorporated areas. Every one of them does. In fact it looks like the intros are following a particular pattern of words created by someone, so it may be that someone somewhere made an intentional decision to call these "unincorporated areas", even though they actually are not. The three I mentioned, for example, are part of Franklin (Somerset County), Woodbridge and Rockaway Townships, respectively. When I realized there was a pattern here, I decided not to change them, as there may very well be hundreds of articles about New Jersey communities that describe them as "unincorporated areas", and there is no way I can find and change them all. (I do realize that most (if not all) of them are mentioned in the various county templates as CDP's, "unincorporated communities" or sometimes just "communities", so finding them may be just a medium-sized job, but changing all of them would be a huge job.) What do you think? If you agree with me that this should be corrected, do you know of an automated way to do it so we're not manually editing hundreds of articles to take out these few words? Neutron (talk) 00:04, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm probably to blame for the whole "unincorporated" issue. I read somewhere that all of New Jersey is incorporated, meaning that every square inch is part of a municipality. What I was trying to do with places like Blackwood was to indicate that it was not a municipality in and of itself. Blackwood is not incorporated, which makes the category largely true, but one can come to the conclusion that unincorporated means that its not part of any municipality. It's not hard to find the articles for these places. The issue is what to call them and you've summarized the issues well. I will take another look at the issue and get back to you. Alansohn (talk) 02:15, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Shamu Shows

I do not believe that any edits I made to this page were "Vandalism". I was helping to fix the tables within the section, and removed and clarified that section on incidents. The incident mentioned did not occur in the shows which the article informs about and is referenced on many other pages, so I felt no need for it to be included here. I also helped clarify the seating statistic until I can reference it. I was trying to help make the page for user friendly with the table, and clean it up so it was to the point. 86.176.148.176 (talk) 15:48, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

The removal of content without an edit summary made some of your original edits appear to be vandalism. After review of your subsequent edits this conclusion appears to have been in error. I will remove the edit warnings from your talk page. Alansohn (talk) 15:50, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Madison Square Presbyterian Church, New York City (1906)

Hi, I just started to review this page for DYK. I did a quick copy edit, but in reading the piece, I find it very hard to figure out which property you're talking about and when it was demolished. Having one building on "24th Street" and one on "East 24th Street" is really confusing for us non-New Yorkers. Perhaps you could clearly detail the history of each church site in separate sections under a History banner? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 00:07, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

I tried my darndest to try to clarify the locations of the two churches, but in retrospect I agree that confusion is possible for those unfamiliar with the Manhattan street grid. I will revisit the article and make the details clearer. Thanks for pointing out the issue. Alansohn (talk) 00:11, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Re Eddie Murphy vandalism

Why was my edit to eddie murphy considered vandalism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wizkid551 (talk • contribs) 03:40, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Murphy is a "a black transvestite donkey witch"?!?!?! Alansohn (talk) 03:42, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Clay Matthews III

FYI: You got to this bit of vandalism just over an hour after it was posted, however, it seems like it was up just long enough for the vandal to report his deed to ESPN. (See Talk page there.) I wonder if there might need to be some page protection there for a day or two. Location (talk) 06:35, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

I'll keep an extra close eye on the article. Requesting page protection may be appropriate if vandalism rates are high enough. Alansohn (talk) 15:12, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Re: . My recent edit to Exploitation Now

WP:GOODFAITH. It was a typo. - 71.75.35.33 (talk) 17:43, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

The change from "2" to "34", a type of change often characteristic of vandalism especially when no edit summary explaining the edit is provided, was reverted on that basis. Based on your subsequent edits the warning message on your take has been removed. Alansohn (talk) 17:50, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my talk page, two times now!

Wayne Olajuwon has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can Spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

WAYNEOLAJUWON 19:11, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the cookie and for all your anti-vandalism work! I will probably hold off on eating the cookie to leave more room for turkey and stuffing later this afternoon. Alansohn (talk) 19:44, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Your welcome and I wonder if Wikipedians can give each other turkeys. WAYNEOLAJUWON 20:02, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Rollback/vandalism

Hi there - it is not apparent to me why this is a reversion of vandalism justifying the use of rollback and a vandalism warning. Am I missing something? --Mkativerata (talk) 19:24, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

An unfortunately common vandalism practice is to arbitrarily remove characters from links creating broken links and a common means of attempting to demean members of the Democratic Party (United States) is to call them members of the "Democrat Party", and the use of the term as a derogatory epithet is a topic discussed at length at Democrat Party (phrase). As this was coming as the first and only edit from an IP address, concerns about vandalism only appeared more genuine. As can be seen from the edit history, I am not the only Wikipedia editor (see here and here for a second time) who believes the edit to have been inappropriate. I'm sure that there might well be other editors monitoring vandalism or looking at this single edit on an isolated basis who might have let this pass, but I believe after further review that my initial response was appropriate. Alansohn (talk) 19:35, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation - MikeRosoft has given me the same. In that context, I agree the use of rollback and the warning were completely justified. Thanks again. --Mkativerata (talk) 19:37, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

I always try to give myself an extra millisecond or two when reviewing vandalism using Huggle because very quickly everything starts to look like vandalism. I hesitated before making the initiAL revert in question and checked the user's history before deciding that a revert would be appropriate. After this IP user's second edit to the article provided a justification -- one that I disagree with -- as to why this person believed that the use of "Democrat Party" was appropriate based on the user's grammatical interpretation of proper usage, I held off on making another revert to avoid an edit war and to see how other editors might respond. I appreciate your taking the time to play devil's advocate because every once in a while an itchy trigger finger on my mouse can lead to inappropriate reverts for legitimate good faith edits. Alansohn (talk) 19:43, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

No worries - I'm sorry for assuming you got it wrong. I think I was lead into that inappropriate assumption because - as you say - it is so easy to make a mistake with Huggle. --Mkativerata (talk) 19:45, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

November 2010

Woops. Sorry. I was just reverting at the same time as you and gave you an accidental warning. Though please refrain from reverting vandalism to my page. I like to see it. Mr. R00t ^Talk 20:15, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for W. Howard Lester

Materialscientist (talk) 18:02, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for William Hohri

Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Join Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors

Why don't you join the Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors? WAYNEOLAJUWON 02:52, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Strange revert

Hello, I just edited Ricardo Teixeira (anonymously because I forgot to sign in) with the recent bribery allegations from the BBC, and you reverted without giving a reason. My edit was well sourced, so why exactly did you revert it? I'm puzzled :/ Malick78 (talk) 17:45, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

• Hi. There was a reference :) Linked to a BBC article. Isn't that ok? :/ Malick78 (talk) 17:51, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

• • All's forgiven :) Malick78 (talk) 17:58, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Danny McDevitt

The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Ashton Kutcher

Hey Alansohn. You recently changed one of my recent edits where I called Ashton Kutcher a douche. Although I can not state a reference one of my buddies was roommates with Ashton. One Love. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.92.172.239 (talk) 02:32, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Calling someone a "douche" is not only unencyclopedic opinion, but one that is also unlikely to be backed by a reliable and verifiable source. Alansohn (talk) 03:09, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Madison Square Presbyterian Church building

Problem with this one at DYK. Gatoclass (talk) 04:51, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Please pay closer attention

I know many of you nerds just blindly revert, but maybe take a closer look at the Plasticine page. My edits aren't vandalism. 174.89.29.119 (talk) 17:59, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

The edit I reverted was one in which an opinion was added, not encyclopedic content. While I understand the point you are trying to make, other editors have expressed similar concerns with your change to the article. Alansohn (talk) 18:02, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

It wasn't opinion. Compare the image used to the professional models used in many stop-motion animated movies and TV shows. It's not my opinion, it's a statement of fact. It's equivalent to correcting an equation in a math article. 174.89.29.119 (talk) 18:07, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Steven Webb

Thanks for your revert on this article. I just wanted to let you know that I had opened a discussion here Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Steven Webb about the IP's additions a couple days ago. I don't know whether you want to add to the thread but I did want you to be aware of it. Thanks again and cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 20:13, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for reverting vandalism at my talk page :)

Pol430 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can Spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Thanks for the cookie! It'll have to tide me over until dinner time. The revert is the least I can do and the thanks is greatly appreciated. Alansohn (talk) 23:21, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Madison Square Presbyterian Church, New York City (1906)

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

GOCE elections

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors Elections are currently underway for our inaugural Guild coordinators. The voting period will run for 14 days: 00:01 UTC, Friday 1 December – 23:59 UTC, Tuesday 14 December. All GOCE members in good standing, as well as past participants of any of the Guild's Backlog elimination drives, are eligible to vote. There are six candidates vying for four positions. The candidate with the highest number of votes will become the Lead Coordinator, therefore, your vote really matters! Cast your vote today.

Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors via SMasters using AWB on 01:09, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Walt Disney Company

Please remove the stuff I removed. I only did it since only the big top officials make that decision to end a franchise. I have uploaded a talk page about why I removed it. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.6.162.200 (talk) 02:47, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

rock-paper-scissors

i'm sorry, but how was i vandalizing the rock-paper-scissors article? 67.187.34.35 (talk) 04:25, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not for stuff made up in school. This would need reliable and verifiable sources to be included in the article. Alansohn (talk) 04:27, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

AfDs

Hi. As you just participated in discussions on a closely related topic (also a current AfD re a Jewish list), which may raise some of the same issues, I'm simply mentioning that the following are currently ongoing: AfDs re lists of Jewish Nobel laureates, entertainers, inventors, actors, cartoonists, and heavy metal musicians. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 09:33, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Madison Square Presbyterian Church, New York City (1854)

Materialscientist (talk) 00:02, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Please stop, i'm renaming the article about swedish antisemitism.Shalalal (talk) 20:33, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

List of largest empires

Hi there. We're having a content dispute at the article above - the list of empires has a large 216 entries, and currently the article sees fit to repeat this list 6 times! Clearly a waste of storage and bandwidth. A better solution (saving at least 30% and making it much easier to read and use) would be a table with a column for each attribute, sortable, as used in many other articles (see the discussion). However, a silent editor keeps reverting attempts to clean up the article, without explanation. Please see the discussion (currently nobody disagrees). Your comments would be welcome. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.18.207 (talk) 21:18, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

November 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive Conclusion

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors Backlog Elimination Drive! We have reached the end of our fourth backlog elimination drive. Thanks to all who participated. Stats GOCE November 2010 backlog elimination drive graphs 58 people signed up for this drive. Of these, 48 people participated in the drive. Although we did not eliminate the months we planned to (January, February, and March 2009; and August, September, and October 2010), we did reduce the backlog by 627 articles (11.2%), which was over our goal of 10%. 49 awards will go out to 33 of 48 participants. Check out the complete list of barnstar winners here. Barnstars If you copy edited at least 4,000 words, you qualify for a barnstar. If you participated in the September 2010 backlog elimination drive, you may have earned roll-over words (more details can be found here). These roll-over words count as credit towards earning barnstars, except for leaderboard awards. We will be delivering these barnstars within the next couple of weeks. Our next drive is scheduled for January 2011. In the meantime, please consider helping out at the Wikification drive or any of the other places where help with backlogs is needed. Thank you for participating in the last 2010 backlog elimination drive! We look forward to seeing you in January! Your drive coordinators –The UtahraptorTalk to me/Contributions, S Masters (talk), and Diannaa (Talk)

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 23:23, 2 December 2010 (UTC).

Adam Bandt

what the hell do you know about him you live in new jersey stay out of Asutralian politics and stick to pounching women. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.108.102.101 (talk • contribs)

From the other side of the globe I can tell that Adam Bandt did not die already on May 19, 2014 somewhere in the Atlantic. Alansohn (talk) 03:29, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the quick revert on my talk page. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:17, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Worst Films List

Look, if people are going to add films to the list without justification, then they're going to be removed without justification. If not by me, it'll be someone else. All three of those films were added and removed before just recently, so don't think I'm the one trying to pull a fast one.130.49.131.171 (talk) 15:35, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

See user talk page for my reply. Alansohn (talk) 02:28, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

How is that vandalism?

I don't get why you guys call my edit vandalism. All I'm doing is allowing Wikipedia to generate lulz while keeping the articles accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.64.222.216 (talk) 17:06, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

NYC Meetup: Saturday, December 4

We meet outside by the trees at 5:00 PM.

Our next Wikipedia NYC Meetup is this weekend on Saturday Dec 4 at Brooklyn Museum during their awesome First Saturdays program, starting at 5 PM.

A particular highlight for the wiki crowd will be 'Seductive Subversion: Women Pop Artists, 1958–1968', and the accompanying "WikiPop" project, with specially-created Wikipedia articles on the artists displayed on iPads in the gallery.

This will be a museum touring and partying meetup, so no excuses about being a shy newbie this time. Bring a friend too!

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:11, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Alex (Chelsea Footballer)

How on Earth does removing a claim which is followed by a reference which in no way supports the claim constitute vandalism? Mattpassby (talk) 02:22, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

The second edit to the article explained the first and should not have been removed. See my reply on the user talk page for further details. Alansohn (talk) 02:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Sledge's nicknames

FWIW, your reversion of the recent inappropriate anonymous edit to Eugene Sledge reminded me of an earlier nickname that I never heard until I read his second book. Sledge's father called him Fritz growing up.

When I knew him later in his life he had such an air of quiet dignity that none of his students would have dared presume call him anything except Doctor Sledge or Sir. I think his Sledgehammer stage must have been very brief, limited to his military career.Trilobitealive (talk) 05:08, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Shared IP

74.32.231.99 Is a shared IP address for a school. If it's block a 100 people could be disappointed. Wikipedia is used for tons of projects. Lucky I got the message logged off before anyone else since I'm a user. I hope you understand. Same as User:74.94.183.204. Joseph507357 (talk) 14:26, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Blinkx Beat

This is malware, blindly reverting comments because they are asking that the powers that be to stop promoting malware is entirely unhelpful. So thanks for giving me this virus wikipedia. Show some editorial responsibility please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.246.62.145 (talk) 04:31, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

The edit in question inserted a statement that is purely opinion, not backed by the required reliable and verifiable sources. If the software is malware you will need to provide solid sources to support the claim. Alansohn (talk) 04:34, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Right so I go to wikipedia, I find out that blinkx is a legit company, I install their software and voila I start getting pop-ups and my browser is hijacked. All I'm doing is alerting the wikiverse to the potential hazard and a wikipedian demi-god slaps me down and says citation needed. It's malware. if you don't believe me install it yourself. I'm looking for an acceptable list of malware but I haven't been able to find one. Probably because everyone needs a citation. Again editorial responsibility should trump dogmatic reversions. Be responsible first. Correct second and dogmatic lastly.

Geordie1977 (talk) 04:51, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Again, this all assumes that there is any validity to your claim. If there is, it will be backed by reliable and verifiable sources to support the claim that this software is malware. Without those sources this claim cannot be included in the article. If you have sources in magazine or newspaper articles I will be happy to assist in putting the details in the proper format. Alansohn (talk) 04:55, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Sites which have content supporting my claim

http://download.cnet.com/Blinkx-Beat/3000-2257_4-10880018.html

http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080923231734AAGvH2y

http://www.bleepingcomputer.com/forums/topic179461.html

http://www.supportspace.com/support/solution/BlinkX_screensaver_makes_itself_default._5785543

http://www.malwareremoval.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=40964

The comments (not including my own) should lend credence to the veracity of my claim. Obviously this is still anecdotal, but supporting facts are that the software doesn't uninstall, hijacks web browsers, and installs ad-ware in addition, all verifiable by downloading the malware itself. I would suggest that putting a link to their site though would be irresponsible and probably counter to the terms of use.

Geordie1977 (talk) 06:17, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I just went to revert

an edit at Tecumseh‎ and when I checked it you had done it first. This means that you must be okay. Doesn't it. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 16:40, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

The vandalism was reverted and the article appears to be back where it should be. Alansohn (talk) 16:43, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Federico Vairo

I see you sent me some message saying my edit to Federico Vairo's article was unacceptable because I didn't cite a source. I can't cite a source that can be found on the internet because I heard it from my family being that Federico Vairo is my grand-uncle (my grandfather's brother). If you would please, set his death date to December 7, 2010 (age 80) and if you'd like, create the death section stating that he died from stomach cancer in a hospital in Argentina. I'm not sure which city, I'll ask later.

76.101.144.118 (talk) 17:16, 7 December 2010 (UTC)Erik Vairo

You Chung Hong

• Thank you for the edit on the article. The text "helping rebuild the community after it was relocated to accommodate the construction of Union Station in the 1930s" and "He designed a series of buildings on Gin Ling Way, one of which ultimately housed his legal office, and developed the main entrance gate on Broadway and its neon lighting" supports the picture of the east gate of Chinatown in the article. Anyone knows Chinatown will say that the gates are the most important structures there. The photo was posted by creator of the article. Similarily it should be included in the Chinatown, Los Angeles article. Ucla90024 (talk) 23:46, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Elizabeth Edwards#Facebook quote

Hi Alansohn

As someone who frequently writes and contributes to articles on the recently deceased, I was hoping you'd share your view at the above-captioned discussion.

Regards, ^Bongo_matic 05:27, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Steven Posner

Materialscientist (talk) 18:03, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert!

In fact I was demonstrating to some friends that vandalism cannot pass easilly. Your revert is a couple of seconds, proved it. :) --79.103.223.190 (talk) 18:53, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

"Unconstructive edits"

Thank you for informing me that my edit to Blues Brothers 2000 was unconstructive. Unfortunately, the problem is that I never edited that page. Maybe we could be a bit more careful in the future about reprimanding unregistered users based solely on their IP addresses? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.170.65.132 (talk) 20:45, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

It is always possible that you are sharing a dynamic IP address with whoever vandalized the article and was given a warning. If it's not you, please ignore the message. Alansohn (talk) 21:26, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Warning 59.101.8.179

Hello. Re your warning of IP 59.101.8.179, the edit in question wasn't vandalism. Whoever's using that IP today, they appear to be improving the article. (I did revert one edit they made earlier today that was clearly just a careless error, but they've made a bunch of perfectly constructive edits, including the one that prompted your warning.) Cheers, Rivertorch (talk) 04:50, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

I had realized that my warning was erroneous as soon as I did it, but my Huggle browser crashed when I tried to undo my own edit and I forgot to undo the edit manually after I was able to log back in. The user reapplied the edits to the article and I have removed my warning message and apologized for my error on the user's talk page. Thanks for catching my error. Alansohn (talk) 04:59, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Damn Huggle. I make all my mistakes manually ;-) Rivertorch (talk) 05:08, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Delete Wikipedia itself

Today it was put into a public forum that Wikipedia itself should be taken off the Internet due to violations of its terms concerning usage of hype on celebrity pages as a sufficient and factual "source" of information concerning the celebrity; and that in fact Wikileaks is a ruse created by Wikipedia itself in order to protect their so-called "right" to delete factual information about the celebrity posted by ominous persons such that they whereby have "proven" that divulgement of "certain information" can potentially be too damaging and/or dangerous to international security. Wikipedia's sponsors are allegedly thereby pleased with this ruse as it has successfully taken an extremely large chip out of the Americans' Freedom of Speech -- the founder of Wikileaks himself cutting a prior deal with his arrestors -- and they no longer need worry about "triffling information" that is begining to look a lot like associations with the American Mafia that had lost a lot of ground since its heydays. In other words, the founder of Wikileaks cut a deal with those who were going to arrest him anyway to divulge info that looks an awful lot like extremely sensative information, but in fact mostly is out of exigency and no longer secret or confidential.

Is Wikipedia prepared to shut down?207.151.38.178 (talk) 02:34, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

What the fuck is this guy talking about? Blue Danube (talk) 12:36, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

wikipedia sucks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.229.94.152 (talk) 03:18, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

New York-New York Hotel & Casino

Hi Alan! With this edit, you reverted vandalism. However, you did not revert to a clean version. You needed to go all the way back to revision 395686769 dated 2010-11-09 05:21:48 by 72.215.110.191 to find a clean version. I reverted to that version with this edit. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 16:08, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the catch. I'm using WP:HUGGLE and sometimes the browser doesn't let me go back far enough in the edit history to let me catch all of the vandalism and restore to the cleanest available version. Thanks for the catch and for taking the time to remove the vandalism in the article. Alansohn (talk) 16:11, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

I’m using Huggle too, which is where I saw that there was still vandalism in the article. I find that when that happens, it’s best to open the history in a browser and search for the clean version manually, since, as you say, HG will often not let one go back far enough. Then, I use Popups to revert to that version. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 16:21, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

I do the same in opening history, which can often be the only way to find a clean version of a heavily vandalized article. Alansohn (talk) 16:23, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for reverting vandalism on my user page. ialsoagree (talk) 02:32, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again for reverting vandalism on my user page. ialsoagree (talk) 16:39, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Would you be interested in being an advisor about a documentary on the Panama Canal?

Hello, I noticed that you have more than ten edits on the Panama Canal article. First of all I would like to say thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Secondly, I am writing to ask you if you would consider participating as an advisor to a group producing a documentary about the canal and its history. If this is of interest to you please drop me a note on my talk page. Thank you for your time. Psingleton (talk) 16:09, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

December 11 2010 4:02pm

Why didn't you just ban me? seriously. My edit was clear and blatant vandalism and a warning was not nessessary. 98.255.129.76 (talk) 00:03, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

hello

what i vandalized??? that templates are crap. has been granted by that user. 16:24, 13 December 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.25.214.187 (talk)

See reply on user talk page. Alansohn (talk) 16:30, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Rollback redux

This [1] is not appropriate use of the rollback tool. The editor was making clear use of edit summaries, and your revert ended up pushing one side in a content dispute. Please please please slow down. At the risk of creating a confrontation, you may have the rollback feature flag removed from you! Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:32, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

I continue to use Huggle as carefully as possible, but in the midst of the hundreds of thousands of vandalism reverts that I have done there are bound to be a few edits that might appear to be questionable. After reviewing the editing that was going at the article it is clear that there is a rather foolish edit war going on regarding the details of the article subject's ancestry. In this case, I saw an IP editor remove extensive portions of an established article, excising several thousand characters of reliably sourced content. If I had seen all of the other edits in this edit war I would have carefully stepped aside and warned both editors, but the one edit I saw in this chain was an edit that had all of the hallmarks of vandalism. While I understand that someone looking at the article might interpret my edit as pushing one side of an edit war, based on the lone edit that I saw entirely out of context I had no good faith reason to believe that there was any legitimate purpose to removing sourced content and gave what I deemed to be an appropriate warning under the circumstances. I hope that you can appreciate the limitations of Huggle in providing mitigating justification for such edits, but I am confident that my actions were appropriate in reverting this one edit using the information that was available to me at the time. I have been extremely careful in using Huggle and will continue to exercise that care in all my future edits. Alansohn (talk) 23:06, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

P.S. I went to User talk:90.221.144.212 expecting to remove a warning message and issue a correction to my revert, but it seems that the user in question has far more extensive editing issues relating to this edit war that resulted in multiple warnings and ultimately a block. Alansohn (talk) 23:17, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

As someone who's done vandalism fighting, my recommendation is that you don't take blanking as vandalism should the editor in question a) be engaging on the talk page or b) provide an edit summary. A case where the editor is making other edits to the article in question, I might (or might not) treat it as vandalism, but I would most certainly make sure to provide an appropriate edit summary. In this case, the IP clearly provided an adequate edit summary explaining the blanking and had other edits. In Huggle, you can clearly see the edit summary; I would suggest always checking that if it's not traditional penis/boobz vandalism. I do realize Huggle doesn't make checking other contributions by an editor particularly easy, but that still doesn't resolve you of the responsibility to do so anyway - otherwise you might end up being ridiculously WP:BITEy (something I see happen far far far too frequently). Personally I've learned to crawl Huggle or, more rarely, to pull up the editor in my browser, in order to view other contributions. Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:16, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

While the edit I reverted here did not have an edit summary, it might have been possible to avoid reverting the edit as vandalism if I had spent more time looking through the edit history of the article. I have been extremely careful in deciding when to treat edits as vandalism when using Huggle, and I will continue to exercise care while monitoring recent edits to take your suggestions into account. Alansohn (talk) 20:59, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Maidana

Hi,

Im not sure what going on, but I never did the edit about the 3 happy meals, or the other 2 boxers. I have been cleaning the page up.When you reverted, you replaced those happy meal comments, was this your intention? Ill be sure to fill out edit summaries in future. Iamanexpertjah (talk) 17:38, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I have replied on the user talk page. Alansohn (talk) 21:00, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

...for this. A Macedonian, a Greek. (talk) 23:00, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

You reverted some vandalism to Dick James. Six minutes earlier, this new user vandalized Harry Yount, an article I expanded which is featured on DYK today, promptly reverted by ClueBot. I dropped by your user page, read "Dumping poop" which I agree with, and now want to thank you for what you do. Cullen328 (talk) 04:51, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome for the vandalism revert, which is the least I could do for another editor, and thanks for your comments on my user page poop removal comments. I still plan to one day expand it into a full-fledged essay. Alansohn (talk) 13:42, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Rebecca Heineman

Why the revert? I think the name under which she was born is notable enough to go to the article text itself, and not just the infobox - it's how it's done in most other such articles. "Bill Heineman" is the name under which she was credited for many video games. Ausir (talk) 23:59, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I looked at the article and the fact that it was the IP's only edit and the presence of the picture that didn't match the gender of the name added to the infobox made me certain that the edit was incorrect. The warning message has been removed and you have already reverted my edit to the article. Thank you for catching my error, one that reminds me that one can never assume and to read the article that much more carefully. Alansohn (talk) 01:21, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

why?

i dont understand why my edit to daniel bryan was unconstruvtive daniel bryan is his in-ring name —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.100.146.210 (talk) 01:42, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Locust Manor, Queens

The article Locust Manor, Queens has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Neighborhoods generally don't meet WP:N, no indication of notability fails WP:V

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jeepday (talk) 12:14, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Hey

I appreciate your quick reaction to my vandalism Want to smoke some pot with me ? We can meet each other at the Hash museum

Cannabis Museum in Amsterdam.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.132.39.176 (talk) 04:08, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation. Next time I'm in Amsterdam I'll add it to my itinerary. Alansohn (talk) 14:11, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand

My last edit to santa claws was truthful and unbiased, why was it removed??? In some cultures he is said to be known as Mr. Claws, and Saint Nicolas can be shortened to St Nick, why was my edit removed? I believe that it was constructive and informative. Please help meTheFutureGood (talk) 05:08, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

"Mrs. Claws"?!?!?! Is she a lobster? Alansohn (talk) 14:00, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Happy Holidays!

Dear Alansohn, Best wishes to you and your family this holiday season, whether you are celebrating Christmas or a different holiday. It's a special time of the year for almost everyone, and there's always a reason to spread the holiday spirit! ;) Love, --Meaghan [talk] ≈ 15:21, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the best wishes. All the best to you and looking forward to a wonderful new year! Alansohn (talk) 16:07, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Check this out

[2] NHRHS2010 |  Happy Holidays!  17:05, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the recognition! Though reverting vandalism on the user talk pages of fellow Wikipedia editors is the least I can do. Alansohn (talk) 17:08, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. There were group of IP addresses that suddenly stormed my userpage and talk page. This all started on YouTube when the vandal harassed me there and then moved onto Wikipedia. NHRHS2010 |  Happy Holidays!  17:15, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Merry, merry

Bzuk (talk) 20:32, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

WAYNESLAM has given you a Christmas tree! Christmas trees promote WikiLove and are a great way to spread holiday cheer. Merry Christmas!

Spread the WikiLove by adding {{subst:User:The Utahraptor/Christmas tree}} to any editor's talk page with a friendly message.

WAYNESLAM 23:46, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

British Slave Labor

Hi Have just found you on Wikipedia and have put in a first attempt at an edit on the British Slave Labor page. If you get the chance can you please have a look at it and advise what to do to fix it, put it in the right place, link to relevant religious organisations and keep the ball rolling. Regards Helen Dawson [email protected] will get a wikipedia log in shortly and let you know what it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.2.2.42 (talk) 05:36, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Eric Schmertz

Orlady (talk) 20:16, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the Schmertz. I guess this means I'm officially back in the saddle at DYK. Alansohn (talk) 20:19, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, when I approved the hook, I was thinking how nice it was to see one of your nominations again. DYK seemed very odd without your frequent contributions. Welcome back! MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 20:58, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome. Alansohn (talk) 21:34, 27 December 2010 (UTC)