User talk:Nymf/Archive 5

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Nymf. 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.

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

Why did you undo my edit? 80.111.172.25 (talk) 21:46, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

I removed my post just in case it wasn't in anyway in line with any Wikipedia policies or guidelines. It's not worth the headache that can come of my suggestion that a section on Jolie's mental health should be written. --DendroNaja (talk) 22:29, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

With regard to the post in question, like I was going to state there: Nymf, if you don't know already know, DendroNaja has been warned more than once about WP:BLPTALK; see here. There is also this discussion he started on the Angelina talk page that was removed. And, DendroNaja, there are certain aspects that make BDSM a paraphilia; it is not automatically a paraphilia (see how I linked the actual BDSM article, not the Sadomasochism article, unlike you?). Flyer22 (talk) 22:42, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Maybe you'd like to comment at User talk:Lexein#Firefly navbox Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers#Template:Firefly. --Rob Sinden (talk) 21:33, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Discussion has been moved to Template talk:Firefly#Actors in navboxes if you'd like to participate. --Rob Sinden (talk) 15:58, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi Nymf. Sorry if I did a mistake. I didn't know how to change the name of this outdated Wiki. CELIA BLANCO abandoned her porn career several years ago, she has a continuous activity as a "normal" actress, and in diference with similar cases in the film business (for example, Sasha Grey) she changed her porn alias with her real name. All the changes I did in the text with new links are real, including she is girlfriend of actor Carlos Bardem. Please, you can delete the actual CECILIA GESSA entry, but the old CELIA BLANCO entry must be updated. Greetings.--Casette (talk) 16:23, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Your participation is required as this discussion. Thank you for your attention and look forward to your participation! livelikemusic ^{my talk page!} 17:22, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

So basically, he has to say the word atheist? Also, people complain about me edit warring. So consider this a warning for that. Rusted AutoParts 18:39, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Warning for what exactly? You are the one adding content, and I am merely following policy. Yes, he has to use the actual word "atheist". Nymf (talk) 18:44, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm giving you an edit warring warning. Tack on you've been following my edits alot today. So please stop. Rusted AutoParts 18:53, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

That looks like harassment, since I am not actually edit warring. Nor am I following your edits. Those are all pages on my watchlist. I have 1800 pages on there. Nymf (talk) 19:01, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Nope, not harassment. See, here's how it went down: I added the content, you removed it. I readded with a statement why I felt it was reliable, you reverted it. Normally when it's the other way round, I get scolded for not starting a discussion in the talk. It always just seems convenient I'm the one in the wrong in terms of edit warring. Also, 1800 pages? Rusted AutoParts 19:07, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

By all means, if you believe I am edit warring, feel free to bring this to WP:AN/EW. I'll remind you of WP:BRD, WP:BLPSOURCES, WP:CAT/R and WP:BLPCAT. Nymf (talk) 19:13, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Can you offer your opinion in this discussion regarding the better photo for an article Infobox? Thanks, and Happy Holidays. Nightscream (talk) 00:15, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello,

Thanks for your participation. However please don't erase my category. This actress is a Moroccan Jew, which is an ethnic group and not a citizenship (Moroccan Jews (Arabic: اليهود المغاربة, Hebrew : יהדות מרוקו) are the Jews who live, or whose recent ancestors lived in the area of North Africa known as Morocco). And since her parents immigrated from Morocco, maybe she also has the Moroccan citizenship, we don't know that. But what we know is that she is a Moroccan Jew. Please let this be.

Kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigdoul (talk • contribs) 19:18, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

No, please see our nationality guidelines at WP:Nationality. The WP:BURDEN is on you to provide sources if she actually has Moroccan citizenship. As of now, she is in Category:People of Moroccan-Jewish descent, which is more than sufficient to describe her ethnic heritage. Nymf (talk) 19:31, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

As you know, I just thanked you via WP:Echo for this. Seeing that he was in the WP:Administrators category must have stopped me from looking further into his account after taking note of him here. Looking at his first contribution to now, I don't think that it would be far out to state that Grade X may be a WP:Sockpuppet. Flyer22 (talk) 18:57, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Yep, I first ignored the user too when I saw that. But then I noticed when the account was created, and knew it had to be BS. TheDude36 is a plausible sock (looking at the language in general and the fact that Grade X restored a problematic edit by the user), but that's obviously not the sockmaster as it is a rather new account. Nymf (talk) 19:22, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Excuse me please but I do plenty of administration, I am forever supervising recent changes to make sure vandals don't vandalize the pages and then I warn them if they do. If they carry on I report them and that leads to their ultimate ban. That's why I consider myself an administrator. Grade X (talk) 18:32, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

What did you mean in that last post? Grade X (talk) 19:23, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

It is a bog standard warning template. Do not add yourself to that category again. Nymf (talk) 19:27, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Don't template me then. I am an established editor. I explained to you why I feel I am an administrator, so what's your problem? Grade X (talk) 19:38, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

• 'Feeling like an administrator' is not a substitute for being one or assuming you have the rights and privileges that come with it. Please refrain from your disruptive behavior. You have been warned numerous times for your disruptive behavior. Keep it civil and work to better the encyclopedia, not impede it. --Slazenger (Contact Me) 19:43, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining it using plain English, I aim only to improve the site. Grade X (talk) 20:00, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Liz, how are you today? Um, I wanted to ask, did you delete Bonnie Sheila Bennett? Tyler Gracyne, Yours Truly :) (talk) 12:44, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

I assume it was due to WP:OVERLINK, but remember to be nice and at least provide a summary. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 21:28, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Nope. It was due to blanking. Nymf (talk) 08:05, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I think details like this, used sporadically, make article subjects more human. —ATinySliver/^ATalkPage 19:15, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

The Best Picture Oscar is an award for the film's overall merits and an actor will always affect a film's quality. It is clear that a film such as "Elizabeth" would not have gotten close to the nomination if it hadn't been for the acclaim for the central performance. Thusly, I believe placing under parenthesis what Best Picture nominees an actor/actress has been in a) helps a reader who is searching for films to watch from the Actor/Actress b) is an appropriate merit-based assessment of his/her work Simon824 (talk) 19:34, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Nymf,

    I recently made a change to the external links on "sex and the City". I added "http://www.endedtvseries.com/sex-and-the-city/"

You edited it on the basis that it didn't belong on an encyclopedia. I HIGHLY disagree. If you take a moment and look at the site it is filled with factual information. Much of which is NOT available on Wikipedia. Also we have found mistakes on both Wikipedia, and IMDB on many shows. We take the time to research the facts, and only post them if we are sure. endedtvseries.com is almost a database for old TV shows. Please take the time to look, read, and enjoy the many facts about the shows we have posted. I'll bet many of the facts you NEVER knew. Thank you for your consideration. Scott Oswald [email protected] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geezaboo (talk • contribs) 07:24, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Good job reverting all the dubious death data from IP 31.51.171.255! I'm not sure how aware you are of this, but this bot/person has hopped numerous IPs inserting the same stuff over months. Typical stuff he'll do is add "on the morning of" "on the afternoon of" "on the evening of" to sections that describe when a subject died. He'll also add causes of death, and things like that. Sometimes he's right, but often he's wrong. The prevailing attitude is to revert all of his stuff since it's impossible and unreasonable to double-check. Seems you did that. Anyhow, more info is at WT:SVT#Edit, remove, edit, remove. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:20, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "Wikipedia:WikiProject Ice Hockey". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot ^{operator / talk} 07:19, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Hard to tell if its hers or not, she's not an active user of Twitter. But she is on others such as instagram and Model Mayhem. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 08:38, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Scratch that, instagram doesn't work and tumblr is questionable too. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 08:41, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

I don't know about the image - why that one? But I didn't restore the misleading template as I couldn't find a recent discussion, but the OR one was mine and I don't think it's been resolved. If you think it is misleading could you say something on the talk page? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 06:16, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

If you hadn't been following, there was a bug that made images in infobox very small and the only counter was adding that parameter to the infoboxes, its temporarily under control now but won't be for long..--Stemoc (talk) 00:47, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I do know. Hardcoding is still a bad idea, though. This is a better temporary solution if the problem is introduced again. Nymf (talk) 04:29, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

My edit is not claiming that they were decapitated. Their heads went through the windshield of the plane the same as one's head would do in an automobile accident. You are misinterpreting the words. They went though the glass; they were not decapitated. This is what the source says. Now if you'd kindly stop edit warring, that would be great. Caper454 (talk) 17:19, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Headfirst would be the appropriate wording. They way you word it does imply that they were decapitated, which is obviously false. Nymf (talk) 17:24, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

That's merely your interpretation. At any rate, it's been reworded for added clarity. Hopefully it meets with your approval now. Caper454 (talk) 17:28, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

It is my interpretation, but nonetheless a valid complaint as it may confuse the reader. Yes, your new wording is better. Nymf (talk) 17:32, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Re William AAAAA: what do you reckon to Romainee and Auberjonois? --Redrose64 (talk) 22:46, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Yep, 100% ducks both of them. I caught Romainee, but was too lazy to file the SPI. Another for CU to check for sleepers is probably due. Nymf (talk) 05:21, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello Nymf, you've been very vigilant in reverting the image insertions by Mildtrash, however I do think in such cases a new editor is owed a brief explanation, rather than let them keep on making the same mistakes and being reverted. In this case I've now added a note at User_talk:Mildtrash: Noyster (talk), 10:30, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Hey, I see you took off joy from her filmography, you said there were no sources. There are sources, but I'm not sure how to cite them correctly. If I give you the source, or you can simply look up joy film and find several places saying she has signed on, would you help me by adding it with proper citations? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mussobrennon (talk • contribs) 22:55, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Nymf, could you nominate those pages please, ("Bete Noire (album)", ""Phil Collins", and "Press to Play"). Many thanks, all the best wishes and kind regards. Joe Vitale 5 (talk) 12:45, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Hey Joe (thought that was funny!). It is better if you nominate them, as I am not a regular contributor to either (except for reverting vandals at Phil Collins). Check out Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Instructions#Nominating, and you can follow the steps. Cheers and good job on the articles. Nymf (talk) 14:38, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed that. Nightscream (talk) 17:56, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Nymf, I do not consider it an edit war, I was reverting the vandalism of an unregistered IP address.

regards Unibond (talk) 20:38, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Are you going to respond to this ? I searched through both German and French news sites last week and the only mentions of Panettiere I could find were in connection with her pregnancy and how this might affect Klitschko's mind in his upcoming bout with Pulev on the 15th, it seems the only thing she is known for is being Klitschko's girlfriend with the sole exception of the USA where she is also known for being an actor Unibond (talk) 19:52, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

No, I was not going to respond do this, as it is silly. What news sites are talking about now, 20 years into her career, means nothing at all, and is no indication of what she is notable for. I am not American and I have known her as "the cheerleader" (i.e. actress) for the past 8 years. Television is not as U.S. centric as you make it out to be. Nymf (talk) 06:43, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Please read what I had written. I did not claim she had no celebrity previously but that she she has been promoted to a more general recognition worldwide by her relationship with the World Heavyweight Champion. I think this really is an indisputable fact. Unibond (talk) 09:45, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

No. What you are saying is that she is only known as an actress in the United States and as the girlfriend of Klitschko in the rest of the world. That is false, and, if anything, original research. Feel free to bring it to WP:RfC, as you obviously feel strong about this, for some reason, but I am positive your version is never going to stick. Nymf (talk) 13:15, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

next time include the WP:Filmography in the first change. Newyorker32 (talk) 11:52, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello there! I'd like to apologize for my edit to Isla Fisher, as I didn't realize the issue had been discussed already. While I'm wondering why this has become more frequent (to me, the country of one's birth deserves to be in the lead sentence, but I guess that isn't agreed upon), I'm happy to abide by the previous discussions. I'm wondering something, though. In your opinion, should people like Bruce Willis and Daniel Tosh not include "German-born" in their articles, seeing as that is where they were born despite being Americans? I guess I'm just wondering about the origin behind this idea that a person's birthplace shouldn't be included in a lead sentence. Thank you! Sock (tock talk) 16:48, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Please read our WP:BLP core policy. You have no right to add the names of these ppl without a reliable cited source for each and every one of them. BLP does not say if the page format is broken that BLP can be ignored. Indeed editors should never have created such complex formatting knowing that they were inserting material that was going top be deleted. The responsibility to source these names is 100% on you as the adding editor. If you have concerns about formating you need to fix them as well. The edit summary made it clear that BLP violations were being removed. Reverting your BLP violations is not subject to WP:3RR and this is not a battle you will win UNLESS you change the BLP policy first. You have clearly been editing here long enough to know better so take this as a warning. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 17:34, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

How about some good faith? Who says that I am going to edit war? As far as I know, I am not under some ArbCom sanction that restricts me from reverting edits. If I am, please let me know. I would love to, and obviously need, to know.

Either way, I take it you have already seen the links used in the external links section (e.g. this, courtesy of the largest and oldest pornography database on the Internet, which is good enough to be used in research studies), so let's hear what crazed standard you have set for pornography awards or pornography in general.

Merry Christmas, SqueakBox (talk · contribs). Nymf (talk) 21:41, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

By reverting me you committed multiple BLP violations. Each person included needs a citation from a reliable source, that is what BLP says, and porn worker is a contentious area under the BLP usage of this word. I did do my absolute best to try to preserve the formatting and other content. And, yes, have a Happy Christams and great new year. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 22:21, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

That did not really answer my question, though. Nymf (talk) 09:01, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Please stop reverting my changes on the Layne Staley article, my edits were not WP:COPYVIO. I keep restoring information about his death and the final years of his life that way people who visit the page can understand what Layne had been up to over the last five years of his life. Please don't do that again. 76.191.214.150 (talk) 16:46, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

I see that there is some WP:CIRCULAR going on in what I linked, so I apologize. You were only restoring what a vandal had removed a day earlier. Happy Holidays, 76.191.214.150 (talk · contribs). Nymf (talk) 17:02, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Listen to her range in Frozen. Her voice sounds pretty obvious. --Geekboy6 (talk) 01:24, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

That's WP:OR. "Obvious" should not ever be used as a reference. Nymf (talk) 08:31, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Can you explain why the content reverted with this edit is inappropriate? Or at the very least, how is it appropriate use of rollback? — MusikAnimal ^talk 16:16, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

@MusikAnimal: because the user have been IP jumping, spamming that website in various articles. Highly inappropriate. Nymf (talk) 18:16, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Gotcha. Just to be clear, I'm not outright accusing you of wrongdoing, and sorry if I made it sound that way. I probably would still use an edit summary, but if this is a bigger, ongoing issue than that's a different story. I've semi-protected Diljit Dosanjh but I wonder about the extent of the disruption. Do you know of other articles the string of IPs have been targeting? Thank you — MusikAnimal ^talk 18:32, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

You shouldn't have renamed this page without consensus. Not so long back there was a discussion in which it was decided to move the page from Adele (singer) to Adele, and a similar discussion would be needed to move it back. This is Paul (talk) 14:42, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

See this edit by me (which was at Adele before you moved it). Nymf (talk) 14:43, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Oh dear, I owe you an apology in that case. I thought moving the Adele redirect to something else (I chose Adele Konecki as it's probably a plausible search term) would facilitate a revert by freeing up the Adele page title, but no such luck, and now it's a complete mess. Hopefully someone can sort it out, but I'll restore your original delete page. This is Paul (talk) 14:53, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Actually, he was governor of California, I still don't think he holds Austrian citizenship thus not adequate to have "Austrian-born" in the article. (N0n3up (talk) 19:03, 14 April 2015 (UTC))

See the talk page of the article. The reasoning behind it was already discussed, and a consensus was reached. Nymf (talk) 19:04, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Oh, and according to the citizenship section, he did retain his Austrian citizenship. It was even criticized in 2005, long after he became governor. Nymf (talk) 19:07, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the detail. By the way, is that you in your user page image? (N0n3up (talk) 19:11, 14 April 2015 (UTC))

Nope, not me. I just like the image :-) Nymf (talk) 19:12, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Nymf, I see that it might be fine according to Wikipedia to add "Austrian-born", but wouldn't it generally be incorrect to mix the place of birth with their citizenship? Hitler although born an Austrian, considered himself German and constantly disassociated himself from his Austrian roots. This can also be seen in various factors and details during his invasion of Austria. I did the same thing with the article of Arnold Schwarzenegger since I thought he didn't have Austrian citizenship, something I was wrong about. And besides there is the case where people often have strong sentiments in regards to nationality to the point that it becomes a personal issue to many individuals (which I think is stupid in my opinion). This might be the case of many, but Benedict Arnold is one example (in regards to the sentiment, not the citizenship since the US didn't exist during his time). (N0n3up (talk) 20:23, 25 April 2015 (UTC))

Could this be uploaded at Commons? The Drake Bell page has an photo from 2007, I think it needed to be updated, but 2007 is all we have. -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 17:57, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I see that you deleted the black and white photo from Commons. Can you tell me why it's a copyvio, and if so, shouldn't it be deleted from Commons? Perhaps you could explain on the article's Talk page, so everyone can understand. Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:41, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello. I flagged it on Commons and it has already been deleted now. Nymf (talk) 17:33, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

That's fine, but I was wondering what is the nature of the copyright violation? The image said that it had the 2.0 generic cc license. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:47, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

It was taken from a Universal Music press release, and passed off as their own. See COM:LL. Nymf (talk) 10:02, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:11, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

I included information about Charmane Star that primarily came from IMDb but you removed my edits. Please explain to me why IMDb is not a reliable source. 76.110.0.95 (talk) 18:36, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

See WP:RS/IMDB. In short, IMDb is user-submitted content, which means that anyone can edit it to fit their own POV. That makes it inherently unreliable. Nymf (talk) 18:53, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi. You seem to be good at finding free images. Do you mind taking a look to see if you can find any free images of dancer Maddie Ziegler? Thanks for any help! -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:59, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Before adding back the wikilink to the word expropriation in the article Leviathan (2014 film), I wanted to understand the reason for your reversal. Can you please offer one?--Gciriani (talk) 13:23, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

It was added by a block evading IP. I reverted it per WP:BANREVERT. No other reason than that. Nymf (talk) 13:34, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. Unless I'm missing something, it doesn't seem WP:BANREVERT supports your reversal, because it specifically says: "This does not mean that edits must be reverted just because they were made by a banned editor (obviously helpful changes, such as fixing typos or undoing vandalism, can be allowed to stand)".— Preceding unsigned comment added by Gciriani (talk • contribs)

@Gciriani: First sentence "Anyone is free to revert any edits made in violation of a ban, without giving any further reason and without regard to the three-revert rule" as well as "the presumption in ambiguous cases should be to revert". In short, unless you would be restoring a typo or vandalism, any and all edits should and can be reverted without any reason given (this is just a courtesy reply). Nymf (talk) 15:14, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Indeed - the ip was blocked for block evasion. Any such reverted edits may be re-instated (as you have done) if a user sees them as valid. The block evader typically edits at a rapid rate (~ 1 edit/minute) mostly just adding trivial wikilinks. Vsmith (talk) 15:45, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

David says he's still in the band, but both Trey and Steven have said Steven is back in the band, and I'll take the words of the guy who owns the band's name and rights (Trey) over a guy who's been known to be rather, well, whiny (Dave). Just my 2 cents though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soldiers of Filth (talk • contribs) 10:41, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

There is an RfC that you may be interested in at Template talk:Infobox country#RfC: Religion in infoboxes of nations. Please join us and help us to determine consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 14:11, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

The contents of Fox animated shared universe are nothing like those of the deleted FOX animated universe; both use File:Simpsorama.jpg and File:Simpsons-Guy.jpg, but the text is completely new. Feel free to restore the prod if you want to go that way; it would be ridiculous for someone to say that it was ineligible because you'd removed the prod. Nyttend (talk) 14:09, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi , blocked for ? you don't even know when she was born and you don't have any proof of that exept a joke between 2 actors on twitter. You're too much angry and close to yourself that you don't even see that you're wrong. I checked with a moderator the real birthday of Marie Avgeropoulous and it's 1986. If you don't trust me then go to the French page see the link, in the others languages it's also 1986. I can add more link if you don't believe me. Open your eyes and don't judge people. Good luck in real life — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nemith (talk • contribs) 06:44, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

First of all, WP:PERSONAL. Comment on content, not on the contributor. Content is added with the principles of verifiability, not truth. That means even if you know something to be true, you will still need to properly source it. As for using other Wikipedia pages as sourcing, see WP:CIRCULAR. You should never source Wikipedia content with Wikipedia sources. Finally, an administrator is also subject to the WP:BLPSOURCES policy.

With all that said, if the birthday source is indeed weak, you should use the talk page of the article. If it is deemed unreliable, the birthdate should be blanked until a reliable source can be produced. Nymf (talk) 08:17, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing up the Tara Strong filmography headers. Can you apply that to the ones on Nancy Cartwright? That's where I originally got the color scheme and font adjustments. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:22, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

If you nominate an article for speedy deletion because it is alleged to have been created by a banned or blocked user, please include in your block message the name of the blocked/banned user. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 20:49, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

If they click the name of the person who created the article, though, there is a block summary of the whole thing. If it speeds things up I'll add it in the future. Nymf (talk) 20:59, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Per your reversion on the Gwyneth Paltrow article, I must say I disagree with your assessment. Per Template:Infobox person which you noted, there is nothing in it that states it "...should not be included unless they graduated". Per Template:Infobox person, it actually says "It is usually not relevant to include either parameter for non-graduates, but article talk page consensus may conclude otherwise, as at Bill Gates. [bolding mine]" The article states that Paltrow left UC Santa Barbara to pursue her acting career, in which this career has resulted in her notability. The logic I follow would seem that her schooling and subsequent dropping out should be worth a mention as if she didn't drop out, she may not have become notable at all. This, as shown above, is probably a discussion for the talk page, but wanted to get your take first. GauchoDude (talk) 16:30, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey, Nymf, are you aware that Kaveri Krishnan Kukku (talk · contribs) is the older account? Because of that, I think that Bbb23 or someone else should retitle that page to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kaveri Krishnan Kukku. This editor's latest WP:Sock is Kukkucupcake18 (talk · contribs). Flyer22 (talk) 11:10, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Judging by Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Foraboy92/Archive#19 July 2015, I see that you are. The history of the Foraboy92 (talk · contribs) and Alisa shaposhnikova (talk · contribs) accounts are not the same as the history of the Kaveri Krishnan Kukku and DisneyCarToys (talk · contribs) accounts, though. Flyer22 (talk) 11:19, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Yea, I think I may actually have messed up that SPI. Foraboy92 (talk · contribs) and Alisa shaposhnikova (talk · contribs) are not related to this sockmaster at all, so that last report should be split off into a new one with Kaveri Krishnan Kukku (talk · contribs) as the sockmaster. I think seeing "Shaposhnikova ‎" and "Sharapova" just made me assume it was the sockmaster that I dealt with a few weeks earlier. Nymf (talk) 11:25, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

[ WP:Edit conflict ]: Looking at Talk:Maria Sharapova, two more of Kaveri Krishnan Kukku's WP:Socks are Skipper Roberts (talk · contribs) and Collin Fluffles (talk · contribs); this user probably has a lot more WP:Socks. Flyer22 (talk) 11:26, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Pinging Bbb23 and hopefully he can help us out. Nymf (talk) 13:37, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

@Nymf, I've reverted your placement of the tag at Kaveri etc. There was no basis for your adding it. Generally, only administrators or members of the SPI team should be adding sock tags. As for the discussion above, my suggestion is that if you think there is one master but it isn't Forayboy92, then you should reopen the Forayboy92 naming the new master and any socks along with evidence supporting your allegations. If you think that these accounts are unrelated to Forayboy92, then just open a new SPI with the oldest account.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:22, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Actually, Nymf, Kukkuisthebest (talk · contribs) is the oldest account that I see so far. With this edit, you can see that NeilN immediately recognized Kukkuisthebest as Kaveri Krishnan Kukku. Kukkuisthebest wasn't blocked for WP:Socking, though; the account was blocked by Kww for for WP:Vandalism. These Kukkuisthebest WP:Socks keep getting blocked for different reasons; it would be better if they were all identified as WP:Socks in an official WP:Sockpuppet investigation for that official record and to uncover any additional accounts (including WP:Sleepers). The Rambling Man did block Fiona DollyStuff (talk · contribs) as a WP:Sock, though; this is probably because I named that account as a Kaveri Krishnan Kukku WP:Sock on the Fiona DollyStuff talk page. The Kukkuisthebest WP:Sock is very easy to identify. Flyer22 (talk) 02:45, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Nymf. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 02:45, 31 July 2015 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Snuggums (talk / edits) 02:45, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Interestingly, I'm not seeing the message in my list of "sent" items even though Wikipedia's messaging system told me it was sent. Did you receive anything from me in your inbox? Snuggums (talk / edits) 14:47, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

@SNUGGUMS: Got it. Quite certain you're on to something. Replying in a bit. Cheers. Nymf (talk) 18:49, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

I mean, I get you're trying to be snarky, but that's pretty much the very definition of being atheistic. Rusted AutoParts 17:43, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

@Rusted AutoParts: No, it's not and I am not trying to be snarky. Atheism is the rejection of belief; not believing is just irreligion. WP:BLPCAT is also pretty clear about it: "Categories regarding religious beliefs or sexual orientation should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief or orientation in question", meaning that unless the subject identifies specifically with the term "Atheist", you cannot use it. Nymf (talk) 19:18, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

"I don't believe in god. I don't believe in an afterlife. I don't believe in soul. I don't believe in anything. I think it's totally right for people to have their own beliefs if it makes them happy, but to me it's a pretty preposterous idea" is a fairly firm statement. Plus, i'm also going by the list of atheists, on which Phoenix appears. Rusted AutoParts 19:28, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

I don't believe in any of those things either, but that does not make me an Atheist. Again, if in doubt, refer to WP:BLPCAT. Nymf (talk) 19:30, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Just wondering?

P.s maybe a description would help. Iamiyouareyou (talk) 15:33, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Why did you remove the category "People with cancer?" Numerous sources have verified Carter's revelation, and he was a president of the United States. He still is notable. Thebuck093 (talk) 18:29, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

He is notable, but notable for having cancer. The rationale is: "Cancer is a relatively common disease. Generally, this category should include only people who are notable for having cancer, especially those who have voluntarily participated in public advocacy of issues related to cancer, rather than a complete catalog of every single person who has ever experienced a cancer-related medical condition.". Perhaps if it has the same effect Angelina Jolie had on public awareness, we should reconsider. Nymf (talk) 20:06, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. It's my observation that "talking" to him slows him down. (It's not my experience, because I block as soon as I identify him.) — Arthur Rubin (talk) 14:03, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Just in case you forgot. w^{L<speak·check>} 06:19, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Not cool. Unless you have evidence to back it up, please don't publicly accuse other editors of policy violations. Scaleshombre (talk) 21:00, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

…at the Gilsig article, assist us on preventing the continued addition of material without sources. Le Prof [Leprof_7272] 73.210.154.39 (talk) 17:48, 29 October 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) 13:37, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Why do you keep deleting my mothers photo off wiki ? It's her page and everyone else has a photo why can't she have it on there ? Westwing33 (talk) 12:01, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

So ? What is your problem? Westwing33 (talk) 12:08, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

@Westwing33: WP:IUP. In short, you cannot upload images that has not been released under a free license. The images at countryragepage.com has not been released under a compatible license for either Commons or Wikipedia. BTW, it is a block-worthy offense to keep uploading copyrighted material. Nymf (talk) 15:55, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Ok, so can you update her profile for me and put a photo on there? Her website is jeanstafford.com.au. Would be appreciated! Thank you. Westwing33 (talk) 16:41, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi Nymf. I'm just talking with this new user, It's More Fun to Compute, about some categories they've created, and I noticed your ANI notice on their talkpage, which directs to this discussion. I understand your concern, though it appears you didn't discuss the matter with the user first. Sometimes battle-hardened vandal fighters forget that a friendly note pointing out their concerns can be more helpful and productive in the long run. The guideline Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers gives useful advice on how to deal with this sort of situation, and the rationale for why we try to be helpful to new users. It's worth all of us considering using a more direct, personal, and friendly approach to new users, as research indicates that many users are put off by the, at times, unhelpful, indeed even hostile, attitude and behaviour of some veteran users. Many users make mistakes when they join - if they are warned, rather than guided, they tend to be wary of wanting to get involved further, and we may lose a useful contributor. Worth thinking about! Regards SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 11:20, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello, SilkTork. I didn't try discussing the issue with the user because I was sure it was a sockpuppet (a new user just doesn't edit at that scale). Turns out I was probably right. Thanks for the advice, anyway. Nymf (talk) 16:34, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

I didnt mean to change several things, i made mistake. The only thing i wanted is to put My life as a doormat in TV section. Now we have official refrence. http://www.hallmarkchannel.com/my-life-as-a-doormat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alex Visekruna (talk • contribs) 21:50, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Fyunck(click). I am considering reporting you for wikipedia "gaming the system." It is against policy to purposely rig a redirect after a move so that an article cannot be moved back. This was an easy move since she herself uses Akerman (easily sourced) in her personal life. But that's a minor concern since you broke wikipedia's rules with the system gaming. Please correct this with a page deletion request of Malin Akerman so I don't have to do it. It's better if it comes from you.Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:10, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

It is not an easy move at all. See the talk page where a lengthy discussion has taken place. I suggest you stop forcing these moves. Nymf (talk) 10:10, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Forcing these moves? I'm not sure what other moves I forced? I read the talk page completely. Nothing's been done since 2010. She uses "Akerman" personally, she lives in Canada her whole life. Her signature is also "Akerman." It's a no brainer. But none of that matters... You purposely gamed the system by blocking a page move. That's vandalism. I figured I would give you the chance to correct it yourself because if I have to do it I would also have to report the vandalism instead of keeping it here. That's why I asked here first. Fyunck(click) (talk) 10:21, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I did it so you wouldn't edit war (which, gathering from this discussion, you were planning to do). Use the talk page. Nymf (talk) 10:22, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

As I said, vandalism. I figured I would try to reach out before reporting it since I've seen many blocked for using this tactic. I wanted to make sure you understood. But you're leaving me no choice. Later. Fyunck(click) (talk) 10:35, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Go ahead. God forbid Fyunck having to follow proper procedure. Nymf (talk) 10:40, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

You seem very testy towards me. Have we interacted before? I certainly don't recall it. Fyunck(click) (talk) 10:45, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:52, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Nymf(and Fyunck), please be a bit more friendly next time.This isn't as friendly as it could be. It only heatened the discussion up.--Müdigkeit (talk) 20:23, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

And the move blocking edit was, of course, not a good idea. It looks like a clear assumption of bad faith, and undermines your position. You could have simply waited for the RM/the move war to start. Please don't do things like that again.--Müdigkeit (talk) 20:42, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

There is an RfC at Template talk:Infobox#RfC: Religion in infoboxes concerning what What should be allowed in the religion entry in infoboxes. Please join the discussion and help us to arrive at a consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 21:39, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Please check the edits that were done by me and another editor a few minutes ago: Saturday, April 23, 2016. How can the excerpt from the ABC News / GMA source be a copyright violation? The article has two references that attribute the excerpt to its source. If you insist that it's a copyright violation, then the long excerpt from Robert Wagner's memoir would have to be a copyright violation, too. Remove it, too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.183.42.50 (talk) 19:38, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Hullaballoo Wolfowitz explained why in his edit summary already. Nymf (talk) 06:06, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Nymf, I'm responding to your PRODDing of this article. While obviously being Nicole Kidman's father is going to be the first thing many sources mention about him, that is not the reason for creating the article nor the main claim for notability it makes. He already has an article at simple:Antony Kidman and I was responding to a request at Wikipedia:Requested articles - see this dif. The article probably has a long way to go, I haven't put in any of his journal articles for example, but in terms of establishing notability, I would suggest he meets WP:PROF as well as possibly some other notability criteria (receiving the Order of Australia for his contributions is not nothing). I haven't removed the PROD as I don't have time to improve the article right now, but I'm wondering whether you would be willing to take another look and consider adding some maintenance tags (e.g. refimrpove, notability) instead? Thanks, Melcous (talk) 11:15, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi,

Just FYI, in light of what you said on Atomic's SPI, I have semi-protected this article for a week. If it continues after that I'll review it again :)--5 albert square (talk) 19:18, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello. I have commented and asked User talk:Pahlevun to please comment as well. Govindaharihari (talk) 20:09, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Nymf. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

This is to inform you that an attempt is being made to overturn an RfC that you voted on (2 RfCs, actually, one less than six months ago and another a year ago). The new RfC is at:

Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RfC: Allow private schools to be characterized as non-affiliated as well as religious, in infobox?

Specifically, it asks that "religion = none" be allowed in the infobox.

The first RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:

• 15 June 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion.

The result of that RfC was "unambiguously in favour of omitting the parameter altogether for 'none' " and despite the RfC title, additionally found that "There's no obvious reason why this would not apply to historical or fictional characters, institutions etc.", and that nonreligions listed in the religion entry should be removed when found "in any article".

The second RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:

• 31 December 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion in infoboxes.

The result of that RfC was that the "in all Wikipedia articles, without exception, nonreligions should not be listed in the Religion= parameter of the infobox.".

Note: I am informing everyone who commented on the above RfCs, whether they supported or opposed the final consensus. --Guy Macon (talk) 03:21, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Nymf. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm working on a study of political motivations and how they affect editing. I'd like to ask you to take a survey. The survey should take no more than 1-2 minutes. Your survey responses will be kept private. Our project is documented at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_%2B_Politics.

Your survey Link: http://uchicago.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9S3JByWf57fXEkR?Q_DL=56np5HpEZWkMlr7_9S3JByWf57fXEkR_MLRP_cLLHo6Bp3rReHhr&Q_CHL=gl

I am asking you to participate in this study because you are a frequent editor of pages on Wikipedia that are of political interest. We would like to learn about your experiences in dealing with editors of different political orientations.

Sincere thanks for your help! Porteclefs (talk) 20:58, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Evan Rachel Wood, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 22:07, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Nymf. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)