User talk:Cwobeel/Archives/2015/October

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Cwobeel. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Shaun King (activist). Legobot (talk) 00:00, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

See this.VictoriaGrayson^Talk 22:45, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Carly Fiorina. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

If I haven't already given you a barnstar earlier, I'd give you another one here for your great work at Ahmed Mohamed clock incident. -Darouet (talk) 00:14, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Well, I can help with that:

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Your efforts at Ahmed Mohamed clock incident clearly show that you're WP:Here to build an encyclopedia and are fighting the good fight to achieve it. Incidentally, thank you for fixing my bone-headed accidental revert of a couple of hours ago. —BarrelProof (talk) 03:23, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! - Cwobeel (talk) 03:46, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Seconded. — Cirt (talk) 17:09, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Halloween costume interesting indicator of entry into popular culture:

• Horton, Helena (October 6, 2015). "There is now a Halloween costume of Ahmed Mohamed, the 'clock bomb boy'". The Daily Telegraph. Archived from the original on October 6, 2015. Retrieved October 6, 2015.
• Lee, Laurel (October 6, 2015). "'Clock bomb boy' Ahmed Mohamed new controversial Halloween costume". WFXT. Archived from the original on October 6, 2015. Retrieved October 6, 2015.

— Cirt (talk) 17:13, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Unbelievable... - Cwobeel (talk) 17:17, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Noteworthy to mention somewhere in the article or somewhere else? Indicator of going past simply "one event"? What do you think? — Cirt (talk) 19:57, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

There are several content disputes ongoing, so maybe later when we have a more stable version? - Cwobeel (talk) 20:07, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Okay, good luck to you on that. :P Probably will be a significant amount more coverage in loads of secondary WP:RS sources, after the 19 October 2015 White House Astronomy Night. — Cirt (talk) 20:27, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

I've researched, wrote, and created an article on White House Astronomy Night.

Hopefully it will get more incoming links over time -- and I posted some neutrally-worded-notices to talk pages of WikiProjects related to science education.

How do you think it looks so far?

— Cirt (talk) 15:17, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Wow, you'r good! - Cwobeel (talk) 16:11, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, much appreciated ! (PROTIP: The trick is to memorize the few most important WP:CIT templates). :) — Cirt (talk) 16:12, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Conceptually, this is something of Obama's I could get behind, as a way to encourage youth STEM. but I gotta say, the white house lawn is a catastrophically bad place to do astronomy from, the light pollution (not to mention normal pollution) is as bad as one could possibly get except for perhaps Manhattan, or half time during the Superbowl with the lights on. Gaijin42 (talk) 16:30, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Never had the pleasure to visit the White House, so I am not familiar with the atmospheric conditions there. But in any case, I think having this event at the White House is merely symbolic and a good effort to attract attention to the subject and acknowledge innovators. - Cwobeel (talk) 16:36, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

It used to be more fun to visit the white house. You could go and just wait in line and see lots of it. I went several times as a kid, and passed major important people in the halls during the tour (including the VP). Since 9/11 you have to get a 6 month ahead ticket that you have to ask your senator for, get a very high end background check, and its a much more restricted tour that basically takes you past the lobby, and into a gift shop, not worth it anymore. (although you can get some good photo shots standing in front of the gates)Gaijin42 (talk) 16:44, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Since she speaks primarily of human right violations toward women and children from Islamic terrorists, I felt human rights is more of a NPOV. Eclpise the left (talk) 20:45, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

@Eclpise the left: NPOV is based on what sources say, not what you or I feel. - Cwobeel (talk) 21:09, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Velliscig. Legobot (talk) 00:00, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Why do you object to a level playing field for Christie and Clinton?CFredkin (talk) 17:30, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Leveling playing field? You added a single, cherry picked poll to add to Clinton's article, which was reverted. Then you made a WP:POINTY edit to remove than 5,000 characters about numerous polls from Christie's articles. That is silly, to say it kindly. - Cwobeel (talk)

I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt in not pointing out the irony (to put it politely) of the fact that you've reverted Quinnipiac polling data from Hillary's bio after arguing so strenuously for its inclusion at Christie. My reason for mentioning Hillary at Christie's Talk page was to try to avoid argument from other editors.CFredkin (talk) 18:37, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

I have no issues in including polling data in politician's articles, but the edit at Clinton was undue. I have commented in that talk page; I invite you to discuss your edit there. - Cwobeel (talk) 18:42, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, Cwobeel, but I'm latching onto the brief discussion that was here previously: this edit isn't OK. For starters, it says he "offered" legislation, and that's kind of a key word; more importantly, though, that source is not an acceptable source for the blanket statement "he is widely recognized etc.". I mean, it's clearly a bit of promotional writing, not something from a reliable news source which can make those generalizations. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 19:45, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

• I see you changed it to "supported", and that's better, but since that source is not acceptable I have removed it. If it's true, no doubt a better source can be found. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 19:47, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

OK. I am sure that there are sources. If only editors would add a {{cn}} for not controversial material, or better, do the work and source it. - Cwobeel (talk) 20:34, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for hatting that section. I was about to ask someone to end it. It started out as an actual discussion about whether the McCarthy-Ellmers story is valid to include, and then devolved from there. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:48, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Carly Fiorina. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Johann Sebastian Bach. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello Cwobeel. I'm a newbie so be kind.

It seems you undid all the Cruz edits I made for the reason that the page has been stable for a while. I don't understand stability as a goal in an autobiography so perhaps you can refer me to the relevant Wikipedia article. If it doesn't turn out to be a policy I violated, perhaps you can list your objections to each edit for future discussion.

Thanks, OutPutter — Preceding unsigned comment added by OutPutter (talk • contribs) 03:33, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

@OutPutter: Welcome to Wikipedia. I posted some useful links on your talk page for you to follow. Note that Wikipedia works by WP:CONSENSUS, and major changes or removal or material, requires that consensus is achieved. Best is to follow the process as indicated at WP:BRD. Happy editing! - Cwobeel (talk) 03:38, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Also useful is the five WP:PILLARS - Cwobeel (talk) 03:39, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

I fail to see why we need a consensus when the reference after a quote takes you to an article that doesn't have the quote. That kind of error shouldn't require a consensus should it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by OutPutter (talk • contribs) 03:48, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Roger Waters. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

You don't know me, but I just wanted to thank you for your bold edit at Raven-Symoné. Frankly, I was shocked by all of that content being included in the article and was very tempted to remove all of it myself. But I wanted to get some feedback first on the talk page, which I was confident would support my concerns. Aside from the one editor, who I see was just blocked, it looks like the rest of us are in full agreement. Once again, thanks. Czoal (talk) 05:24, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Deaths in 2015. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Cwobeel,

Perhaps these free-use-licensed photos might be of interest ?

Hope you're doing well,

— Cirt (talk) 08:02, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

This is confusing. The edit summary might explain some content removal, but not those images ? Maybe it was a mistake ? — Cirt (talk) 22:17, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Probably a mistake. To another subject: Cirt. where can we get a few good screenshots of Clinton and the panel of the CSPAN feed of the Clinton testimony to the House Committee on Benghazi? - Cwobeel (talk) 22:52, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

http://www.c-span.org/ -- but specifically see their copyright notice -- http://www.c-span.org/about/copyrightsAndLicensing/ -- Federal government events include: Congressional committee hearings = so any screenshot from their site from any particular "Congressional committee hearing" would be public domain. — Cirt (talk) 22:54, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

As for technically, I'd recommend the tool "FireShot" for taking screenshots, it's quite handy dandy, more about it at link. Hope that's helpful, — Cirt (talk) 04:36, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! I am using a Mac, and I use Command+Shift+4 for similar results... - Cwobeel (talk) 04:41, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Ah, yeah, quite, Macs are much better at that sort of thing. I use one sometimes in life, not at this particular moment, and I miss it, heheh. — Cirt (talk) 04:48, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Franjo Tuđman. Legobot (talk) 00:01, 28 October 2015 (UTC)