User talk:Michael David/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Michael David. 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.

That's the m:SpamBlacklist extension. The list of blocked domains is at m:Spam blacklist. If you think the page you are trying to add is legit, the talk page for m:Spam blacklist has a section for adding domains to be removed. You can at least ask there. I had it block an ibm.com site once. They did fix that one. Hope that helps. -- JLaTondre 14:12, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, as always. I'll give it a shot. I hope you have a safe, happy and healthy holiday. -- Michael David 14:16, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

You too! -- JLaTondre 14:19, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello,

I am by no means an expert on the Civil War, but as regards Green's Birth Date & Place of Birth, should we not defer to his gravestone as the authority?

Well, typos can occur in marble as well as on paper. Interestingly, that find a grave website uses the January date on the same page as the photo that indicates June. Since there are disagreements between well-known secondary sources, it is worth reporting. You will notice that I gave the gravestone precedence over the alternatives. Hal Jespersen 23:30, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I did give a final warning and he/she stopped for now. Keep your eye on it and report it if you remain concerned. --Kukini 01:14, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Any time. Thanks for the vigilance. --Kukini 01:28, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

There is not, at present, any policy that duplicate categorization of that type is permitted. Nor is there any evidence, at present, any evidence that it's needed or wanted by anything more than a few people who vastly overestimate the research value of having an undifferentiated master list of writers, with no context given to their nationality, their cultural context or their literary genre, to scan through. That's simply a pointless thing for Wikipedia to have; it serves no useful purpose. You can put them back in the parent category all you want, but until such time as a policy has explicitly been implemented in favour of duplicate categorization, I'm not going to stop removing duplicately-filed articles from the parent...which would leave us in an unresolvable tug-of-war. I would suggest that until such time as a policy has explicitly been implemented permitting duplicate categorization, we have to respect the policy as it stands; any ambiguity that currently exists results from people specifically pushing against the existing policy, not from any inherent ambiguity in the policy itself. Bearcat 22:51, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categorization and subcategories spells out the specific circumstances where duplicate categorization is allowable; the situation at hand here fits none of them. Bearcat 23:22, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

If you'd like to initiate a formal policy discussion on the matter, go right ahead. But we can't simply ignore policy as it stands just because two or three people agreed on WikiEN that the change they personally favour should be made. Bearcat 23:27, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

For one, there just isn't any context where a researcher of any description would ever need to see an undifferentiated list of every person who ever wrote a book. There isn't any research value to be had in a single list that simultaneously includes a 21st-century Canadian novelist, a 15th-century Persian ghazal poet and a 19th-century British writer of ornithology guides. One might need a list of Canadian novelists, or a list of British ornithologists, or a list of ghazal poets, but there's no research value in having a list that includes all three, because there's no research topic on the planet to which all three could simultaneously be relevant. Literary scholars research a specific genre, a specific national literature, a specific era in literary history. No literary scholar on the planet is ever going to write any thesis for which he or she needs to access Margaret Atwood, Hafez, William Swainson, Alikhan Bokeikhanov, Juan Gossaín and Bobojon Ghafurov from within a single unified list, because useful research topics that would simultaneously cover all of those writers and their vastly differing cultural, genre and historical contexts simply do not exist.

For two, even if you're able to build a consensus that parent-subcat doublefiling is warranted, it needs to be consistent — until the Category:Writers category actually does include virtually everybody who ever wrote a book, it just makes us look sloppy to have only a small set of writers double-filed while a vastly larger set of writers isn't double-filed. So there would need to be a systematic project to add the duplicate parent category to every writer that's already on Wikipedia, or else we just look badly organized and thereby reduce our credibility as a research tool.

And finally, as I said before...if you'd like to initiate a formal policy discussion about it, then go right ahead. But until that has actually taken place, we have to respect policy as it stands. Bearcat 23:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and also, categories aren't meant to serve as lists. Lists are meant to serve as lists. If you want a one-stop list of all writers, why does it need to be created through the category system? Why can't you use or create or add to List of writers instead? Bearcat 00:05, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I just read your comments on Talk:Joan Finney, and I was wondering if that photo is acceptable for use in the article. If it is compliant with applicable Wikipedia policies and guidelines, could you add the photo to the actual article? --TommyBoy 01:42, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Per your suggestion, I have contacted User:JLaTondre regarding my question. --TommyBoy 07:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

User:JLaTondre responded to my question. Unfortunately, he is unable to provide assistance. However, he did post a rather detailed note regarding Wikipedia's policies and procedures for uploading images to my UserTalk page. --TommyBoy 21:26, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

If the photo is cleared for use on Wikipedia, do you think you can upload it, based upon the instructions that User:JLaTondre provided to me. If not, we will need to seek assistance from another user, as I am not well-versed in the highly-technical aspects of editing Wikipedia, such as uploading photos. --TommyBoy 23:40, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering if the person who uploaded the photo to Find-A-Grave has contacted you regarding the photo's copyright status. --TommyBoy 00:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

You can use the "edit this page" button at the top instead of the "+". The "+" is a shortcut for adding a new section. The "edit this page" will edit the whole page just like on the article page. -- JLaTondre 12:40, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

No problem. That's weird that it would be red. It shouldn't be & I cannot think of what would cause that. -- JLaTondre 13:36, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

This one I came across not to long ago. Defaultsort can be entered to replace having the person's name in each of the categories ie last name first, first name last. This entry will sort each the categories and stubs in the article. I have found that if the stub is entered ahead of the categories or entered on the next line right after Defaultsort it does not work. You have to move the stub below the category and also have a couple of lines between Defaultsort for it to work. Try it out it works well. I hope I explained it to your satisfaction. Bluetooth954 16:46, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Good to hear from you again Michael. Indeed things are well with me, likewise with you, I hope. Having a quick glance at your talk page and contributions, you certainly have come a long way since last year. Congratulations! I'm glad I made you feel welcome.

Thanks for the kind words and thanks for dropping by to say hi. - Akamad 12:47, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm able to edit it using the "edit this page" button so I'm not what is causing the problem you're having. However, you can add the Edit Top script to your monobook.js (instructions provided at that page). It will create an additional link called "edit top" at the top left of all article pages. It allows you to just edit the first section of an article. I have it installed and use it frequently. Let me know if you have any questions with it. -- JLaTondre 13:52, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem Exiledone 11:05, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Past tense; I suppose because her career is mostly in the past, but it can be fixed. Best wishes IXIA 22:12, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

You actually seem to be someone who makes constructive edits to articles. There are a depressing number of people around who just like go around removing tiny publicity photos or otherwise indulging the frustrated policeman inside them. 88888 13:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Michael,

There is an application in your name to join the unblock list. Could you please advise that it is you and we can consider your application?

Regards

Yes, it is me & I would very much like to join the list.

Keith Old Capitalistroadster 12:45, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Further to the above, your address is shown as michaeldavid86 @ comcast . net. (spaces added to confuse spammers. Could you please confirm this e-mail.

Yes, this is my email address.

Capitalistroadster 12:47, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

(I am going to post this on your Talk Page as well - just to be sure.)

Maybe the "what links here" option in the toolbox to the left can be useful in looking for people with cancer. See this. 4.250.168.34 05:50, 13 April 2007 (UTC) User talk:WAS 4.250

If you're not satisfied with the page I provided the last time you asked me the same question, that's not really my problem, as I don't particularly have a responsibility to be an apologist for Wikipedia policy. And I'm genuinely curious as to why you suddenly felt the need to raise the issue again out of the blue, as I see no evidence that you and I have been anywhere near the same pages as each other in weeks. Bearcat 06:17, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to barge in here. I also have a problem lately, correcting a very broad recategorization Bearcat undertook in Canadian films, which doesn't follow the categorization logic of other countries' films, plus it disregards our film specific categorization guidelines. Without letting WP Films know, he emptied category Canadian films in favor of genres cross categories. There is no policy about it and the term is being misused. Wikipedia:Categorization and subcategories is a guideline and reasonable exceptions from the rule are given. Section "Reasons for duplication" gives some very good reasons why doubling is preferable in some cases. In our case, the reason is that many users look in country-film categories as an alphabetical listing of the countrie's films and we even link to them as indexes from many lists and navigations. There is also another guideline Wikipedia:Overcategorization and if more categorizers follow his example in films we will soon face a huge overcategorization problem. Hoverfish Talk 07:56, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Michael. I know I am not alone in this, but it's better to discuss with more editors, as it is a very diverse issue in applications and side effects. For this reason I started Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Categorization and keep coordinating it as it picks momentum. We have also heard from the people working on the dynamic category technology, and although we can't go by a not-yet-applied system, a lot of what was said has been very helpul to our current problems. Bearcat is correct to want a usability-oriented categorization system. The only problem with doing it as-things-are, is that usability is also very diverse, as many needs have to be met, and overcategorization in films is already a huge problem. For geographical, biological or military issues categrization is straightforward and relatively easily arranged in an orderly and usable system. Books are also easier to categorize than films and we have good librarians helping us. Films are one of the most complicated issues I know, as they combine many high importance categorizing factors. I am not familiar with the WikiEN-L Mailing List. If you can drop me a link I would like to be informed and participate. Hoverfish Talk 14:56, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Since you and I haven't gotten into any debates about this lately, I'm really at a loss as to exactly what "behaviour" of mine you're presuming to criticize. And since I'm not particularly interested in being impolite, I won't actually articulate the response I initially had to your insinuation that I'm either an unclear thinker, which I'm emphatically not, or some kind of "rogue" admin who isn't established enough around Wikipedia to have my opinions taken seriously, when in fact I'm quite possibly one of the longest-serving administrators around Wikipedia at this point. Would you mind terribly explaining why you view my opinion as so muddled and dismissable? Bearcat 04:20, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Michael David! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule artfacts\.net, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links policy for more information. If the link was to an image, please read Wikipedia's image tutorial on how to use a more appropriate method to insert the image into an article. If your link was intended to promote a site you own, are affiliated with, or will make money from inclusion in Wikipedia, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 12:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Resolved. Lupo 21:45, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

• thanks for telling me that a heart attack is a type of heart disease. anyway, regarding categorisation, i disagree: since Category:Deaths by myocardial infarction is already nested inside Category:Deaths from cardiovascular disease, having the vaguer one (the latter) as well as the more specific seems to be needless duplication. tomasz. 12:06, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

I've just responded to you post on the en listserv, and in more detail on the Librarians page here. The pioneering medical librarian was a physician, John Shaw Billings (nobody wrote an article on him yet, oddly. I do not think we have any medical librarians here--I may be the closest (biological sciences bibliographer at Princeton). Among the things he did was develop the first classification for medical literature. Maintaining a classification is an unbelievably difficult project, I've given some extremely sanguine estimates on that page. Developing one to cover he whole span of human affairs, or adapting an existing one, is a life's work at least.

What might be possible , and would fit the way people here like to work, is improving the categories piecemeal. I've been working on and off or a year to get good categories for journals. You might want to try diseases, or some part of medicine. But the way it works here is, as you noticed, one of the messiest parts of the system, as is any add-on function to a large data base. You might study the archives of WP:CFD and hang around there , to see what's involved. I'm there from time to time, but I'm not one of the regulars. DGG 01:47, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that priceless piece of advise. I'll keep it at hand for those times when one needs it. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:32, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

You're very welcome, my friend. I was glad I could help.

Be healthy,

Michael David 11:23, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

There are actually several tools. Take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject edit counters. I tried this one. It took some time, but worked for me. I didn't try the others. -- JLaTondre 00:17, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

You too. -- JLaTondre 00:38, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Please check out Wikipedia:Debate camp. Thank you very much. WAS 4.250 17:26, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

My response is on my talk page. My future responses will also almost always be on whatever page your message is on (eg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Debate_camp or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:WAS_4.250 ). WAS 4.250 14:34, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Michael - I just saw your note on my SIMONATL talk page and wanted to thank you for your kind words. I've learned a great deal more about Theodore Roosevelt in the last couple years, have visted the Badlands where he went out to ranch and recover from the deaths of his mother and wife and attended two symposia on him at Dickinson State University. I've also joined the Theodore Roosevelt Association (TRA) where I've had the privilege of getting to know some of his descendants. I'll be traveling to the Annual Meeting of the TRA in a couple weeks in Boston, MA. Also, I contribute a lot to a Yahoo Club on TR called http://clubs.yahoo.com/tr-m and there's a lot of good info and some great photos and links there as well. Take care, SimonATL - SimonATL 03:02, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Marc,

I wanted to drop you a note offering apologies if my comments here distracted from the intended purpose of the thread - re-reading them, I think I may have misread the atmosphere at the forum, and what was intended as a light hearted peace keeping post might come across as more inane nonsense - I've been banned from wikback for a week as a result, which I contend is somewhat of an overreaction, but I hope to be allowed to return in due course, and wanted to make sure everything was good between us - cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 05:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome - sad it didn't become active, it sounded a good idea. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 22:33, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, you can edit the talkpage by clicking the "edit this page" button at the top, to the right of the "format" button. (No "edit this section" because there's not much on the talkpage & no sections). You'll see {{WPBiography|class=Stub|priority=|a&e-work-group=yes|living=yes|listas=Holt, Will}}. Remove the bit that says |living=yes. That should do it. You'll also need to remove Category:Living people from the bottom of the article page, and add Category:1929 births and Category:1989 deaths. Hope this helps, --BelovedFreak 18:11, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm... I can't imagine why this is. Have you changed your preferences at all? Although, I can't see anything in my preferences that would have that effect. I suggest you post a message at the help desk. Queries there usually get a quick response and someone there may have more technical know-how than me. In the meantime, I'll edit the article and talkpage for you.--BelovedFreak 21:13, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Michael,

Thanks for the note, and for finding the exact birth date. That one had eluded me in research for my site. Kevin Forsyth (talk) 12:13, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind my revisiting this, because I've been disturbed by the AA/Jung story for some time but found your comment confusing. You say that it is a part of Jungian literature and seem to have no problem with that. But you also criticize the person who wrote the section for supporting a version incompatible with what is known about Jung--specifically, the likelihood that he would say he could not help someone.

I think the traditional version of the story, as found in AA and reproduced unquestioningly in many Jung sources, has been repeated fairly accurately in the Wiki article. The inconsistencies, and they are very real, are in the original story. It does not speak well for Jung researchers that they have adopted such an odd claim about Jung with no evidence at all except for Jung's apparent agreement (I have some doubts about the authorship of that letter Jung sent to Bill Wilson--I'm sure it reflects Jung's own thoughts to some extent but my guess is that his secretary helped a bit with the composition of it) with a letter about it, very late in his life.

So I am curious as to how you understand what happened. By the way, I don't contribute anything to Wiki on this topic as I have done some original research (I wrote it up as a web article, Stellar Fire, a few years ago) and it would be too hard for me to stick to Wiki-acceptable sources. I am uncomfortable with the section as written but will have to leave it be.Rose bartram (talk) 13:00, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I’m not exactly certain where your confusion is, Rose. Carl Jung had real problems with the growing popularity of the Alcoholics Anonymous movement. He was a consummate professional, and had no doubts about his competency as a therapist. He did, however, have real problems with a “faith-based”, guilt-based, blame-the-patient approach to the treatment of a disease. -- Michael David (talk) 14:07, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Please come help me build SAY. Foil the deletionists. TCO (talk) 19:35, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm doing well. Hope you are also. By "change the main heading title", do you mean the page name? If so, you would use the Move button at the top of the page and it will allow you to enter a new name for it. If I misunderstood your question, please let me know. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:00, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Glad to help. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:21, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I had to revert your edit here, as it did big damage to the article. Debresser (talk) 21:27, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

No idea. I would attempt a copy and paste. LilHelpa (talk) 23:49, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

In 2006 you left a message about the "spirituality" section, another editor encouraged you to make whatever changes you felt were needed in that section, and as far a I can tell you never did. I'm still intrigued by your observation that it would have been uncharacteristic of Jung to say he could not help a patient. I'm inclined to agree, although I think Jung certainly was capable of becoming tired of, or bored with, a patient and sending him/her elsewhere. The story has Jung saying a lot more than that.

But you also said that the "Rowland" story was a part of Jungian literature, implying (I think) that there was a more accurate version of it somewhere in the Jungian (as opposed to AA) literature. I always had the impression that Jungian sources just slavishly repeated the AA version in spite of its improbable features. Have I missed something? The references to an unnamed alcoholic Oxford Group member( from 1939 and 1941, in The Symbolic Life) do sound like they could be "Rowland" and if so the story is a bit different. But those remarks do not appear in any published Jungian secondary source. No biographer or other writer has attempted to use them to correct the story, or even connected that person with Rowland H. So what part of the Jungian literature were you thinking of, in the ense of an independent source?Rose bartram (talk) 23:22, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

So sorry, I forgot that I had tried to clear up my confusion once before and the attempt did not work. I don't mean to nag, just wondering where the specific references are (in the Jungian literature) which correct the story. It would be helpful to be able to point tho them.Rose bartram (talk) 23:38, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Rose, I don't know who you are, and your User & Talk Pages tell me nothing about you. What, exactly, is your main interest in all of this? -- Michael David (talk)

Hi Mr. David - I came across the page on Sándor Ferenczi. Would you be interested in making some effort to improve it with me? (i.e. inline citations, more detail). It looks like your background is in psychology, maybe you could point out some sources to me anyway. Thanks, TheFireTones 00:52, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

I would very much like to help you with the Ferenczi article as he is a favorite of mine. However, my schedule is such these days that I could not devote the time I would wish to put in on it. Perhaps at a later time. My apologies. -- Michael David (talk) 16:22, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Sure thing, maybe at a later date. TheFireTones 22:41, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry if I'm bothering you and this is probably a little late but you were asking about Yavorov's date of birth and it's January 1st, 1878. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hellonx (talk • contribs) 18:29, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

In Wikipedia we use 1 January 1978 or January 1, 1978. No "1st". See Wikipedia:Mos#Dates. Debresser (talk) 23:34, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Done. Feel free to ask any time.

BTW, the way to sign your comments on talkpages is by simply adding ~~~~ at the end. That works perfect, try it. Debresser (talk) 23:31, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

In December 2006, you added some relevant biographical to the article about John Thompson (poet). That material was deleted some time ago. I would like to add it back in but you gave no references. Would you kindly do so? There is now a refimprove tag on the page.Verne Equinox (talk) 06:29, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. Considering the amount of scholarship on that site (youngpoets), it's a shame there is no easy way to search it.Verne Equinox (talk) 13:26, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

		The Epic Barnstar
		For a commitment to improve history-related articles, particularly List of Presidential Medal of Freedom recipients. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 23:05, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Mr. David: Thanks for the corrections you initiated in the talk/contributions information, however if you look at the page you will notice that where you trailed off almost half of the entire content of the page is missing. Would you mind correcting this, please. Many thanks for your consideration in this matter and all professional courtesies. Best regards, Brennanaliac. KDS —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brennanaliac (talk • contribs) 18:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm very sorry about this. I tried to undo my screw-up, but it didn't seem to work. Please feel free to correct my error if you can. -- Michael David (talk) 18:36, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi Michael, In response to my addition and your subsequent deletion of my Grandfather, Colin Davidson as a Medal of Freedom recipient, I do have supporting evidence to substantiate his award. I hold a copy of the entry into the Commonwealth Gazette No: 61 April 15th 1948 p1899 Postion 15, (there are a total of 23 MoF recipients listed in this edition of the Gazette), A copy of a Memorandum from the Australian Army Military Board dated 4 August 1948, to Capt CB Davidson advising him of the award and his unrestricted wearing of the medal. I also have a copy of the typewritten citation which describes the reason/s for his nomination to be awarded the medal. ( As my Grandfather is deceased, my uncle now holds the original Memo, citation copy and actual Medal of Freedom, Red ribbon, white vertical stripes, Liberty bell on reverse and liberty? head on front). As well as this there is the recognition on the Australian War Memorial website of his MoF award. You can research and pay for an extract from the Commonwealth Gazette if you wish or there may be some record in the US presidential archives you can access.

As we wish to have him recognised on the webpage, I would advise that I will be re-entering him on the webpage in coming days, however, I would like to hear from you in regard to this, prior to resubmitting his details.Donaz01 (talk) 05:26, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

To User:Donaz01 - I have no reason to doubt your statement about your grandfather's Medal of Freedom. I removed Colin Davidson's name from the Medal List after an extensive Google search, and inquiries to the New York Public Library's Research service, found no references to the Medal's award to him. If you do re-enter his name, please place some specific data as a reference at the bottom of the Medal List's Page. Or, better still, create a new Article Page for Mr. Davidson and place the Medal of Freedom data there plus its references. Thank you for writing to me about this. -- Michael David (talk) 13:38, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Michael, Thank you for your response, I have setup a wiki page for Colin Davidson and am currently adding and updating some biographical info on him, so once I get the full gist of this wiki setup I will add scans of the letters, extracts etc. I will then add him to the list, so there will be adequate back-up information to support the entry. My family is getting on in years now, so I am trying to capture some history before it is no longer available, I am sure you understand. Donaz01 (talk) 06:16, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good, Donaz. I look forward to reading the article about your grandfather. And, yes, I do understand how family histories can fade if they are not written down. Nice work. -- Michael David (talk) 13:27, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Hey Michael David, he does it all the time, with no reference to the author, or gets a buddy of his to do it to avoid the 3 revert rule 7 make it look as if YOU are the vandal, even on your own page! Amhunt84 (talk) 23:33, 2 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amhunt84 (talk • contribs)

Clarín newspaper, probably Argentina's most important one, only talks about a "cancer": "Tomás Eloy Martínez: entre la crónica y la invención de la historia"]. It took me a while to find an original source of the brain tumor in Spanish: "Dolor por la muerte de Tomás Eloy Martínez". I don't know why. I'm fixing the reference and removing the lungs (I mean, the word). Thanks for the note!

Good wiking, Mariano(t/c) 08:00, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello Michael David. Thank you for your email. I will certainly look for the Beethoven piece that you brought to my attention. Your mention of it was interesting to me. I grew up playing the piano. I never practiced enough to be anything more than a middling player. At one point I had the piano score for all nine of his symphonies. I am pretty sure that it was the Liszt versions. The only one that I was proficient enough to play all four movements of was the 6th!!. This was all a long time ago but I sure appreciate both your note and the memories that have been flooding back since I read it. Thanks again. Cheers and happy editing here at WikiP. MarnetteD | Talk 02:35, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello Michael David, thank you for your message. Yes, it would a nightmare to reference every Birth and Death. One of the few instances where I would reference a DoB or DoD is when I notice an edit war brewing and then I'll post a reliable verifiable source. But, I think that in the six years that I have been in Wikipedia, I have only done that once. Hey, on the other hand I noticed from the message above that I am not the only one that still enjoys classical music. Take care. Tony the Marine (talk) 08:41, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Reply is here: User_talk:Visor#Maria_Kaczynska_DoB. Greets. Visor (talk) 16:06, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi Michael, Yes I'm rearranging everything to be by year. I do those changes mainly by year. When people come to navigate, and search or read those List, they don't always know the name they are looking for. For Example, if you are looking at Nobel Peace Prize winner, you don't necessarily know what you are looking for. You sometimes just want to look at say year 2010 or 1985 and know who received it or got the award. And sometimes it's two people receiving the award at same year. (that is even the case with some Medal of Freedom List. Abdowiki (talk)

Thank you, I always try to help, WIKI style :D Abdowiki —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdowiki (talk • contribs) 11:12, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

nice catch, i have the tendency to accept a printed ref at face value. i would not be adverse to deleting the pulitzer in prizes, and leaving the verbiage in bio about Connelly. Pohick2 (talk) 18:18, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

The easiest thing is to let a bot do the archiving for you. I've set it up (see template I added at the top) for that to happen. With that, a bot will automatically archive anything older than 14 days. You can change the duration if you wish. It will also make new archive pages as needed.

By the way, I check email irregularly. If you leave me a message on my talk page, I'm likelier to see it sooner. If you have any questions, let me know. -- JLaTondre (talk) 11:43, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Nope, you don't need to do anything other than wait a bit. The archiving bot runs at least daily at a minimum and I think it might be more often than that. On the next run, it should start processing this page. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

By the way, the bot will only archive timestamped discussions (as it needs the timestamp to calculate the age). If you have a discussion that is not timestamped (like the "RE: Medal of Freedom List" one above), you will either need to manually archive it or add the {{subst:unsigned|<name here>|<timestamp here>}} template (see Template:Unsigned) to the person's comment and fill in the timestamp manually. -- JLaTondre (talk) 15:57, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Looks like someone else cleaned up that section. Thanks for the heads up though. I obviously missed it. dstumme (talk) 22:36, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

The simple answer for why GoodReads cannot be used as a source for this particular fact is that it does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for "reliable sources". In short, a "reliable source" is any significant publication with an editorial review process. GoodReads appears to be "user based" content like Wikipedia (there is a button to click which says "edit data", showing that anyone can add false information to the site). Also, GoodReads does not supply a date to the article or a source for the information. In particular when it comes to birth dates in biographies of living persons, we would need a particularly reliable source such as a newspaper article based on an interview with Eckhart etc.

The most specific problem with the GoodReads source is that the "about this author" is word for word identical to the lead in this revision of the Wikipedia article on Tolle. It would be impossible to determine who copied from who, because the GoodReads article is not dated, if it were not for the fact that I wrote the Wikipedia lead myself, so the GoodReads article must have been copied from Wikipedia. If you would like to argue that this is a reliable source for Eckhart's exact birth date, you can post a contention at Wikipedia's reliable sources noticeboard

Regards, Gregcaletta (talk) 02:48, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry. Gregcaletta (talk) 06:19, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Michael, great work. The alphabetizing of the categories already makes the page look better. I also agree that the names would probably look better listed alphabetically within each category and that the awarding President is unnecessary. The year the medal was awarded should be sufficient. --Flyguy33 (talk) 18:35, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

The common trend on other list pages seems to be that the lead begins with This is an alphabetical list of... Once this list is alphabetized, I suggest that the lead sentence be rewritten as This is an alphabetical, partial list of recipients of the Presidential Medal of Freedom --Flyguy33 (talk) 19:17, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good. Do you think we can possibly get this page to featured list status? --Flyguy33 (talk) 19:40, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

I nominated the list for peer review. See where it goes from there. --Flyguy33 (talk) 01:00, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Those are copyrighted images, they can't be used on Wikipedia unless the copyright holder places them here. This might help some...

Tip of the day... How to find legal photographs and graphics A good photograph, map, or other graphic in an article really dresses it up. If you want one but are stumped, or totally lost about copyright rules, one really good way to find graphics is to type "public domain" into the Google image search window, along with an appropriate key word. An extra benefit is that you have a high probability of finding photographs that are legal under the Wikipedia rules. (Remember to copy down the artist's name and URL for recent photographs labelled "public domain", because you will need the information when you upload the graphic.) Read more: Wikipedia:Image copyright tags Prior tip - Next tip

--Flyguy33 (talk) 00:24, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

---

Request reason:

After 4+ years, and 8,000+ edits my IP was blocked this morning, and I don't have any idea why I've been blocked

Decline reason:

I can't unblock this IP address, but it looks like this may be a temporary problem. See below. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:44, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Michael David (talk) 16:40, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

What is the specific message you're receiving when you try to edit? Kuru (talk) 16:44, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

This is the full message I get: "You are currently unable to edit pages on Wikipedia.

You can still read pages, but you cannot edit or create them. Editing from 69.142.253.88 has been disabled by ProcseeBot for the following reason(s): This IP address has been blocked because it is believed to be an open proxy or zombie computer. To prevent abuse, these proxies may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. If your ISP has misconfigured its proxy, you can try bypassing it by logging into Wikimedia's secure gateway at https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/. For more information about open proxies and what you can do, please see Wikipedia:Open proxies and the WikiProject on open proxies. (Multi-RBL lookup • Sandbox test edit) This block has been set to expire: 18:23, December 27, 2010. Even if blocked, you will usually still be able to edit your user talk page and contact other editors and administrators by e-mail. Note: Please use the [show] links across from each header to show more information."

Block log shows 18:23, 27 October 2010 ProcseeBot blocked 69.142.253.88 (talk) (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 2 months ‎ (

Why you are seeing this message: Your current IP address is blocked from editing Wikipedia because it appears to belong to a VPN or proxy service.

)

Can you confirm that your are not using a proxy to edit?  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 17:27, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Conceded that you have been editing here since January 2006, have you changed your location (don't tell me where) or your ISP? --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 17:35, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Anthony, nothing has changed. Everything is the same as it was last evening when I last edited. -- Michael David (talk) 17:47, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Your IP address (69.142.253.88) has almost every port open, meaning if someone wanted to they could easily connect through your IP address and get to the internet. I've done a google search and confirmed that this is listed as a proxy server. From what I can see using checkuser, your ISP assigned you a new IP address, which someone has misconfigured in some way. If you reset your modem or router, you should be assigned a new IP address and will then be able to edit again. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:44, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Ok, here's what I did. I called and spoke with a Comcast technician. They did whatever they do to confirm the status of my account, and they verified that my modem is receiving a signal and reset it. While still on the phone with them I quit out of everything and re-started my computer. I opened WP and tried to edit a page and still got the message that I was blocked. They then said that the problem must be at the WP end of things. This is the very first time in 6 years of editing WP that I've had any problems. As you may have guessed, I'm not the most computer-smart person on earth :-). Please help me to edit again. -- Michael David (talk) 19:33, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Everything's OK now :-). An Administrator on the Unblock List helped clear it up. I can edit again! Thanks to all of you for your input. -- Michael David (talk) 19:54, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I undid your last edit on List of Presidential Medal of Freedom recipients because you deleted the end of the page, go back and take a look at the revision history. --Flyguy33 (talk) 03:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi. Just to let you know, Lillie was born Beatrice Gladys Lillie. Find-a-Grave is not a reliable source in general, unless you see a gravestone. [email protected] (talk) 18:30, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I did, but perhaps you should review these, which show her birthname as Beatrice Gladys Lillie, especially the last one:

• http://thepeerage.com/p21866.htm#i218653
• http://www.dictionary-quotes.com/ill-simply-say-here-that-i-was-born-beatrice-gladys-lillie-at-an-extremely-tender-age-because-my-mother-needed-a-fourth-at-meals-beatrice-lillie/
• http://www.laynelittlepage.com/pages/the_real_beatrice_lillie.html

Yours, [email protected] (talk) 20:11, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Also just to mention a lot of sites are mirror sites which cannibalize information from each other, such as Answers.com, NNDb, IMDb, FilmReference.com, et al. [email protected] (talk) 20:13, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree that the reflink you brought to my attention is respectable enough, but I think this one is more expansive and reliable. I also used to think the Munston name was her real name until I decided based on the totality of evidence that it wasn't. Unfortunately some sources still indicate this I guess and it gets picked up as fact. This is a stalemate at best. I recommend leaving the text as it is and if you wish you can add a refnote to the effect, if I may suggest the wording: "Some sources indicate she was born Constance Sylvia Gladys Munston", or something like that. You could also open a discussion on the talk page. Yours, [email protected] (talk) 00:49, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

I found a reflink from the England & Wales GRO (Findmypast.co.uk) which has births, marriages and deaths info. from 1761 to 2006, with exceptions of course. This should ease all your concerns. It is a subscription site, but fortunately I am a subscriber and was able to print out the extract at Lillie's article. I didn't think of it earlier. [email protected] (talk) 02:03, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Mon Homme, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Channing Pollock (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:49, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited María Grever, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Guanajuato, Mexico (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:11, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I reverted your reformatting of dates at Donald Gramm per WP:DATERET. I would also like to point out that the day-month-year format is not particularly un-American. For instance, the very American books The Harvard Biographical Dictionary of Music, The Encyclopedia of the Musical Theatre, and D. Kern Holoman's Berlioz all use the day-month-year format, as do numerous other American books. --Robert.Allen (talk) 19:55, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Americans may use either format. It is writer's choice. I prefer day-month-year, so that is what I use. Sorry. --Robert.Allen (talk) 03:07, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Sorry I used "undo". I did not realize it is reserved just for vandalism. BTW, another editor has restored your changes and also done a partial job of converting the dates. If we are going to change them, then it should be done throughout the article. --Robert.Allen (talk) 03:45, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the list you sent. Wonderful memories reading through it. Not only did the TV take 5 minutes to warm up but it was a regal piece of furniture. After the era of phone operators our family was on a party line and we had to pay attention to the way the phone rang to know if the call was for us. Thanks again and enjoy your weekend. MarnetteD | Talk 17:03, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi again. You won't remember this but you recommended this set of Beethoven CDs to me back in Feb of 2010 (I still have your email of that time in a folder holding emails from nice Wikipedians) and I have them in my collection now because of you! I agree with your assessment of the 6th. I also like them because I grew playing the piano and I still have the sheet music for those Liszt transcriptions in storage somewhere. I remember taking a stab at all of them and I got to where I could play the 5th, 6th and 2nd movement of the 7th passably - maybe not well but passably. It is great having them played by professionals. Thanks again for your message both then and now :) MarnetteD | Talk 18:20, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Absolutely no problem at all. So much has happened in the last 2+ years there is no reason for you to have remembered it. The only reason I did is that the set is an arms length away from where I sit while editing. Have a fun July on wiki and off!! MarnetteD | Talk 18:44, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I know those lines well. They are from "The Monsters Are Due on Maple Street". I am lucky enough to have the whole series on DVD so I won't need to take you up on your much appreciated offer of emailing it to me. As to including it in an article I know next to nothing about copyright here at WikiP. You might try asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television to see if it can go in the article for The Twilight Zone or for the episode itself. You might also try the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography for input on inclusion in Serling's article. This page Wikipedia:Media copyright questions might be able to fill you in on whether it can be posted anywhere at all. I hope this is of some help. Cheers and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 23:05, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know that both the TV project doesn't seem to be as active as it used to be so you might not get a response right away. If you wind up not getting any input one other place to try would be the Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)‎ there are a batch of editors there who know how to get things done. MarnetteD | Talk 00:21, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

When editing Richard Cragun, I left the dates in DMY format because he spent most of his life in places (Europe and Brazil) with that format – he was just born in California. It's not something I would revert, but don't be surprised if someone else does. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:51, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Michael David. You have new messages at MarnetteD's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Eli Siegel article

Thank you for asking. I was going to write on your talk page to explain this. The website you used and linked to is self-published. Wikipedia admin editors have reviewed the site several times and have deemed it an unreliable source. Nathan43 (talk) 03:18, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kunihiko Hashida, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tottori (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. Glad to be of help! — Richardguk (talk) 05:16, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

It's not a big deal, but I think you don't understand what Disease-related deaths category means. As far as I know it refers to not only particular diseases or illnesses, but to any death not attributible to "unnatural causes", i.e. road accidents, plane crashes, murders/assassinations/executions, etc. -- all of which have their own categories, naturally. What are "natural causes", after all? -- they are the consequence of ageing and everyone dies when their heart stops beating (cardiovascular) and they stop breathing (respiratory failure). If you want to create a category, i.e. Category:Deaths from natural causes, you can do so, but I don't know if it is worth it. Yours, Quis separabit? 18:57, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree. I think it is only useful when the place of death is part of the category, i.e. Category:Disease-related deaths in California, Category:Disease-related deaths in Belgium, Category:Disease-related deaths in South Africa, etc. These are the only times I use it so that the place of death is clear. Yours, Quis separabit? 19:25, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tom Mees, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Springfield, Pennsylvania (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:25, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

You edited the article to ask how he committed suicide. The articles on his death, including the NY Times one[1] used as a reference, don't mention so I removed the tag. It's unknown and a not particularly important fact.

The article does have a big problem. It is heavily copied from the New Times article. So much so I csd it....William 00:15, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Are you the Michael David who was at the Brooklyn Academy of Music (BAM) in the 1970s? I saw the history of the Harvey Lichtenstein article and wondered. Nick Levinson (talk) 21:10, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi,

I see that in 2006 you created Category:Drug-related suicides. Your comment indicates that you intended to create a "Category for Suicides by Drug overdose", unfortunately the name you actually created has negative connotations (drug addicts who die of an overdoze). I would value your views at: Category talk:Drug-related suicides#Category name should be changed?. XOttawahitech (talk) 15:31, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Dear Michael, I was reading your biographical entry on our ancestor and I was curious to what made you write it. The German version is so short and the English one so much longer, so my curiosity was wakened... 84.158.170.27 (talk) 17:10, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Category:Deaths from diabetes has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:23, 19 July 2024 (UTC)