The following page is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.
As for referencing information if you want post the citation yourself. Rose Cassaniti Thomas is referenced as Tony Thomas' mother on IMDb. Seriously you could do more than go around and change things. Adding material is one thing. You're disruptive to say the least. Bleucheeses (talk) 11:24, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Why is a "retired" user somewhat stirring up controversy? I congratulate you if you have had a long career editing in a worthwhile or notable fashion on here. I intentionally took the plot notification down because it serves no purpose and probably was put up in error. Bleucheeses (talk) 11:03, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The edit I reverted was one that was made with no concensus
When editing the lgbt template I reverted the template to include the traditional 6 colored pride flag. It was changed to an 8 colored one unilaterally. If there had been a discussion on it I would have been fine with it, but there wasn't so I did what I felt was an appropriate thing to do and I changed it back. Tech12 (talk) 20:32, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@FlightTime: If I write an edit summary would I be okay to re-edit the template? I only edit wikipedia casually (and very rarely) and have never edited templates before. And thank you for labeling my edit as a good faith edit. Tech12 (talk) 21:03, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
My edit summaries were clear enough. Adding UK/United Kingdom after England/Scotland/Wales in an infobox is considered superfluous hence the majority of examples do not have it at the end of the location.
I don't remember the source but I do know that he said that he got the idea for the title of the song from Caroline Kennedy. He might even have said it in a concert.
65.93.70.88 (talk) 21:41, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Just curious as to why you are tagging it for G2 in draft space. They are clearly trying to create an article, and giving them someplace to work on it seems better than continuing to have it deleted and re created. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:07, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
All of the same subject (themselves unfortunately from the contested deletion in the main space). AfC would seem to be the best route under the COI guideline and be a better use of resources rather than just keeping tagging the main space contributions. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:12, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi I am Glen I am autism would like to make add Yellowstone National Park page they had recent earthquake in Yellowstone about this month, I would add new page on earthquake on yellowstone national park on Wiki page. GAJJR (talk) 03:37, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion/section is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion/section.
I need to know and SEE what I am accused of . How do I do that ? A person does need to be angry and heated to simply write or tell the truth about somebody . Lol .That whole thing about staying " chill " is laughable . Telling the truth is NOT an attack .Same as choosing to write a word in all caps is NOT yelling at someone . Lol . That's called putting extra emphasis on a word , like people do when speaking out loud . Those people are not yelling when they simple put extra emphasis on a word . So then why do certain Wikipedia people think that is yelling at someone ? Lol ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha . I am perfectly calm whenever I edit something on here . To think that if somebody writes something funny that they must be super angry , yelling and throwing stuff at their computers screens is laughable . Some of you Wikipedia people seem to immediately take offense to the littlest things , like some really uptight super sensitive grandmother . Lol . See the word I used ..... " like " . That was NOT an attack, simply my opinion and observation . Some seem to have some kind of God complex and any attempt to explain the logic behind something in seen as some type of attack .NONE of this was an attack nor was any of it rude . At times I think it's the mods here that need to " chill " . Lol . Some act like the talk page is same exact thing as the main page for something , like there will be millions of people reading it daily . Lol . I'm sure a very small percentage of Wikipedia users actually go the talk pages . I use as it is titled , for talk . But if someone writes something , anything one of you just doesn't like , you act like it's and I think even call it " vandalizing " . Which makes ZERO sense because it is a TALK page , NOT the official page that millions will see . So by using the Talk page to talk , we are seen as vandalizing . Some of the mods or whatever you call them seem way too sensitive .
96.233.52.166 (talk) 16:55, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@96.233.52.166: There are ways to add emphasis that do not involve using all capitals: you can write words with italics, or bold text, or if you really need emphasis, bold italics. Using all caps is universally construed among all online communities as yelling, and is discouraged at Wikipedia. That aside, although one can often not interpret mood from written text, your text does seem to imply a level of anger beyond the calmness that you claim. Remember, we're all working together here, and we're all volunteers here. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!!18:39, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.
I didn't violate any policy and my username is not being shared. Viktor is the name of my best friend. If you still think that I by any means violated the rule, please leave a note. Lucifer & Viktor (talk) 02:21, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hey man, sorry about the "Disruptive editting". Figured I'd try and make it easier for others who want to know how much the genres in question were expanded upon for certain albums, and Venom's Welcome to Hell isn't a thrash metal album; Metallica's Kill 'Em All is cited as the first thrash metal album by publications, whereas Welcome to Hell is cited as the first black metal album and a speed metal album, similar to it's successor, Black Metal.
Electron John (talk) 03:09, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
12:59 vs. 12:58
Thanx for your observations
The following discussion/section is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion/section.
About this and this: did you notice that the IP is correctly describing what it is doing? Please look at these three consecutive edits to the talk page; the third is from the IP address you've been reverting. [2][3][4]. Perhaps Widr should also take a look. --JBL (talk) 17:34, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Please spend the 60 seconds necessary to understand exactly what you have been doing. (There is no "article", there is no socking happening on this talk page, and the person guilty of over-activity is you!) --JBL (talk) 18:24, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.
Hi, you messaged me about my edit on the tracklisting for Queen (album). You said my edit "disturbs uniformity", which if you mean all of Wikipedia, then it probably does. But if your talking about the tracklistings for the remaining fourteen Queen albums, then I say you would be wrong. I checked the remaining albums, and the tracklist formatting was pretty much the same. Yes, I noticed it was removed earlier, but I added it for one simple reason. That reason is, new Queen fans. When I first started buying Queen's albums, I bought the 2 disc editions. It was great seeing they were on the article, since I could enter who composed what song. So when I went back to the article for their first album, only to find the bonus EP's tracklisting was missing, I felt I had to add it back. This is, again, mainly due to the fact that the other Queen albums are formatted this way. If you don't believe me, look at the other albums. I put links to the remaining fourteen albums in this message. I hope you understand why I did what I did.
@Jackman96: I suggest you start a discussion on the article's talk page to seek consensus for a significant change such as this. The Track listing section on this page has been established for many years and for someone to suddenly drop by and change it all up is not how it works around here. Please seek consensus if the community likes your changes then that's the way it will be, for you to continually insist on your version will only end up with a block. If you would like I can start the discussion for you. - FlightTime (open channel)11:12, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @Binksternet: I would be very interested (if you have the time to take a look, if not no problem) on your take of Jackman96 changes (referencing the collapsed links above) regarding the track listing changesand I think, the "Song information" sections (If I'm understanding Jackman96's point) Sorry, the "Song information" sections seem to have been around for some time, I just don't remember them :P. Thanx, - FlightTime (open channel)11:33, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have a huge problem with collapsed bonus tracks as a format choice, but they should be referenced. My bigger problem is the unreferenced analysis in prose, an assessment of Queen ditching EMI in 2011. Binksternet (talk) 12:42, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Adityavagarwal: Thank you. Not feeling kind, Pocketthis is a fantastic contributor, but it seems they're here to build a photo album, not an Encyclopedia and I suspect that discussion was nerve wracking for them, but I've made my point, time to move on for now. (Never thought in a million years I'd get this barnstar )
I noticed. He really does contribute a lot with images. That is why I did mention to him that I was just mentioning Wikipedia's guidelines, and tried to explain him why I was removing the images. Even though he does not seem to understand the point, everybody should keep their calm and help Wikipedia become better. I wrote a final note there, explaining why everything was not to be taken at heart and that, we should contribute to Wikipedia and chill out! I noticed that you might be knowing too, that Pocketthis is really a cool contributor, as you commented on his talk page, meaning that you had it in your watchlist. So you must be knowing him. Adityavagarwal (talk) 19:28, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Adityavagarwal: I never noticed the language of the Cottontail article, never had a reason to check it, but since your revert, I noticed that Pocketthis is using language for the students he has mentioned, which is best done at Simple Wikipedia. Now his gone into edit war mode, which I just warned him about. - FlightTime (open channel)19:53, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I never fell into such type of thing earlier, and to be honest, never even thought any reason for anybody to indulge in any type of edit-war. I still do not understand why he doesn't get the point. It is too clear from the citation, and he needs to atleast check it once. Adityavagarwal (talk) 19:55, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Me too buddy. Let it be whatever he wants. I am so tired that while asking for help I cited your talk page instead of his. (corrected it now). Also, you deserved the barnstar. Adityavagarwal (talk) 20:13, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion/section is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion/section.
@FlightTime:, up to my perception your (and others') view on vandalism at the mentioned page as regards User_talk:2A03:B0C0:1:A1:0:0:A74:3001 is not correct. I think it's him who re-established the original timestamp, vandalized by another IP. Please, check, but maybe I am unaware of other misbehavings. Purgy (talk) 08:15, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.
@Adityavagarwal: I am the wrong editor to ask anything about GA, FA issues, I'm a patroller, more into maintenance then content. I did a quick page look and nothing caught my eye, I might be able to help with specific questions - FlightTime (open channel)18:28, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yup. Thanks for a check though. Yeah, I saw your contributions on xtools and felt too that you did maintenance work more than content creation (70000+, really cool). Adityavagarwal (talk) 18:36, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Adityavagarwal: Regarding edit count, I've been around for awhile and still serew up about once a day :P
Belated ANI
Hi FT. This notice was lost in the shuffle, but here it is for historical purposes. I have opened a discussion at ANI regarding harassment by Govindaharihari. Please see this report. I consider it resolved thanks to swift admin action. Best regards. Dr.K.01:43, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, 3000+ reverted vandalisms, and whenever I see your contributions, I find lots of reverted edit summaries. Not a surprise that you should be having one of these barnstars awarded! Adityavagarwal (talk) 18:29, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello FT. I'm not going to monitor this page, nor expect a reply. I just wanted to make a suggestion. I went to the Barstow article looking for photos to remind me of the town, The cupboard was bare. I suggest that you drive downtown, and take a shot of the main drag, and put it up as the opener, or at least in the body of the article. I have never seen such a photo sparse article. You like taking photos. Here is a chance to really contribute to a vacume. Take care. Pocketthis (talk) 18:52, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Pocketthis (talk) 18:52, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Pocketthis: You know what, I will. The infobox image is from Desert Discovery Center on Barstow Rd. looking mostly North, which really doesn't show much and I just thought from where to take it, from on top of Souters hill looking East which would be looking down an historic part (historic, at least for Barstow) of Rt. 66 and the old part of town. I'll give you a ping in a few days (it's going to be a few days before I can do this). Thanx for the idea. Happy editing, - FlightTime (open channel)19:08, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@FlightTime: Amitabh Bachchan was never associated with Big Boss so I removed the category. Please restore bthis change. Instead Its Salman Khan who is associated with Big Boss.
Hemant (talk) 20:40, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
IPv6 range has a bad reputation
I've blocked this range for two years. That user has been giving you and many other editors such as Binksternet trouble for quite some time. I wasn't sure if this belongs to a specific sockmaster but there are many of their various IP talk pages littered with warnings and they never respond. They give IPv6's a bad reputation. — Berean Hunter(talk)19:59, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Berean Hunter: Thank you for your help and for this poke, it's rare to get an out of the blue "Hey, I've done this, hope it helps your vandal fighting". This is very refreshing and I think Binksternet feels the same. Thank you for what you do and Phil is always a good choice . - FlightTime (open channel)22:33, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You recently reverted an edit I made to the Metallica page regarding associated acts. In your revert you asked "how are these acts related?" That is clearly answered on the section I added to the Metallica talk page, showing the common members each of those bands have with Metallica. The associations are not in dispute, as each members individual article lists the bands, and the body of the Metallica article itself also talks about the associations. I feel you were rash in your revert, but I wanted to open a dialogue here with you to avoid any problems or edit warring.Natt the Hatt (talk) 01:01, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Natt the Hatt: I am not saying anything you added is incorrect, my concern is community consensus, if you want to add all those to the infobox, consensus of the page watchers would be best before adding then to the infobox, again, please look through all my recent edits to that page, nothing says the information is incorrect. Also, any further comments should be made on the article talk page, not here. Cheers, - FlightTime (open channel)01:25, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The page above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.
