User talk:SamEV/Archive 4

• Archive 1 7/2004 – 10/11/2007
• Archive 2 10/11/2007 – 12/31/2009
• Archive 3 2010

I sincerely thank your for your support in defense of White Argentine, but it was not enough. This site is invaded by intelectualoid !@#$ (Andy the Grump, GiovBag, etc.) so I'll move for greener pastures. I'll concentrate my efforts in my own website Razas del Mundo, and I won't waste them here where they are not considered valuable. Thanks for everything, you have made my Wiki-experience a little less forgettable.--Pablozeta (talk) 02:38, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I just found out about the deletion minutes ago. I expected it.

I modified your comment above; it's either that or I'd have to remove it, because I really buy into WP:CIVIL.

Good luck, Pablo. And please stay away from that Hitlerite website (I honestly can't remember its name and that makes me very glad) that let you upload the article's content. Hasta luego. SamEV (talk) 02:49, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Believe me when I tell you I'm not pro-Nazi and that Metapedia (that's the name of the Hitlerite site) was definitely not my first choice. But, what else can I do if that was the only site that welcomed my work? Any way, I have created copies of White Argentine in every wiki-site that I could find, so nothing is actually lost, just the place of one copy. Thanks for your advice.--Pablozeta (talk) 15:16, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SamEV. You have new messages at Template talk:Ancient kingdoms in Anatolia.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I see you added back the Google books comparative link in the Frankie Muniz article. So I looked through all those books and sure enough some of them say Ridgewood and others say Woodridge. So how do we know which one is correct? I assume we're not going by the number of sources found for each place. Is there some definitive source? If so then that's the only one we should use. If not then perhaps we need to leave a note in the article explaining the confusion. Actually even if there is a definitive source we should still leave a note explaining the situation. Just having someone compare Google books doesn't really make the point very well (for instance, I don't know which ones to believe). Thanks. SQGibbon (talk) 07:06, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I figured it couldn't hurt to show that most sources say Ridgewood, since apparently it wasn't enough that the source already cited says it. The other editors of the article, with the obvious exception of the pro-Wood Ridge editor(s), found the comparison useful. I'm not really involved in the article, though, so do as you sincerely think is best. SamEV (talk) 21:52, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm not that interested in the article either but it keeps popping up in my watchlist and this point in particular. So do you know which is the correct name? SQGibbon (talk) 16:15, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quick update, I don't know why it didn't occur to me before but I looked up both city names on Wikipedia and only Ridgewood is listed. Doesn't mean Woodridge doesn't exist but it's pretty good evidence. One last update and one last "duh" moment. New Jersey's website only lists Ridgewood. I think perhaps the best option would be to just list one or two sources and leave a hidden note that there is no such city as Woodridge. SQGibbon (talk) 16:22, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, wait a sec... we're both wrong. I never questioned Wood Ridge's existence, but here's confirmatiion that it does exist: [1]. I've just noticed that filmreference.com says "Wood Ridge" and that highbeam.com says "Wood-Ridge". Those two sources have been cited in the article since before I added the Google Books search results last April. Too bad I didn't bother verifying what the article already stated, because I could have discovered that the highbeam quotation had been tampered with, changed to "Ridgewood". I added the comparison precisely because of the lack of a definitive source; again, it seemed like something useful to throw into the mix. But I think we should definitely name both places ('born in Wood Ridge or Ridgewood') , as you recommended at first, because they're supported by sources. SamEV (talk) 18:48, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nuts, when I went to this page, I searched it for "Ridgewood" and "Woodridge" and only came up with the former. It did not occur to me that "Wood-Ridge" would be the name. So yeah, until we can find a definitive source (I guess an interview with him) we should list both and leave a note. SQGibbon (talk) 22:19, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't want to reply until I'd acted on what we've resolved, but I didn't think it would take this long for me to get around to that. I hope it's all settled now. SamEV (talk) 04:28, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey old friend, how you been? Well if your not too busy I was wondering if you can help me with a project? Please respond, thank you, AJona1992 (talk) 02:27, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jon.

I'm sorry, but I am indeed very busy. I'm been barely editing at all for weeks.

Good luck. SamEV (talk) 08:25, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ok well thank you though and I meant "good old friend" :) AJona1992 (talk) 14:38, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please, participate in this discussion by adding your opinion and arguments why it should be kept, or why it should not. --Pablozeta (talk) 17:14, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Same editor who was been vandalizing Domminican immigration to Puerto Rico is vandalizing Puerto Rican people article. Can you warn used and help file a vandalism complain with the site?--XLR8TION (talk) 18:56, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Something needs to be done, I agree. Let's see what happens first with the edit warring report you filed. SamEV (talk) 02:26, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am a new Wikipedian and just added to the page Hispanic and Latino American Politics. I would appreciate any comments, tips, and edits to make this page better. Thank you for your help! Thisonewins (talk) 03:20, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for improving that article. I'll make specific comments on its talk page minutes from now. SamEV (talk) 05:31, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There a AfD in progress here which I think you may find interesting; if you want, add your opinion whether it should be kept or deleted. Thanks.--Rusoargentino (talk) 19:03, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi.

I've never contributed to that article, so I don't think I should comment. Good luck, though. SamEV (talk) 18:15, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:44, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the detail. I am so sure you have laugh a lot. Sometimes I think we are alone over here. There is a lot of vandalism in DR articles like this [2] and this [3], and what about this one [4].

Hope everything is ok. Oscar 20:33, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Asian Hispanic and Latino Americans#Change from Redirect. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 16:57, 19 May 2011 (UTC) (Using {{pls}})[reply]

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Thanks for your lovely follow-up on Abraham respectively, as Wikipedia needs more users like you :) ~ AdvertAdam talk 07:44, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! SamEV (talk) 23:55, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you recently re-linked "American", this time piped "more specifically" to "People of the United States". Is this a useful link, given the generality of the target article and the number of other more important, apposite links in the vicinity? Is there a specific part of that target that you believe might be useful to the reader of that anchor article? Tony (talk) 11:50, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yes, I think it's useful to be precise regarding what the word means, because this is a worldwide encyclopedia, and in particular because of the subject's Latin American origin. Readers who are of such origin may not necessarily take for granted one meaning of the word. SamEV (talk) 00:22, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you maybe interested in joining a low population WikiProject? --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:29, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the invitation. I've so far been reluctant to join any Wikiprojects, because of concerns that I may not have the time to really participate, and also because I try to remain as independent as possible. But I sometimes think I should join. We'll see. SamEV (talk) 20:54, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your commitment to Wikipedia ideals.--LatinoMuslim 05:29, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I ended up waiting a couple of weeks, by which time I noticed you were around, so I decided to wait some more to see if you had anything to say about that user's action. Meanwhile, another couple of weeks passed...

I plan to drop by and copyedit the article one day soon. Take care. SamEV (talk) 07:37, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sam, I'd REALLY like your input here at: Talk:Curse of Ham#Jubilees location dispute

Mm... Jason, I think that might be called canvassing.

Besides, it looks to me like you guys pretty much resolved the dispute or are on track to do so. SamEV (talk) 20:06, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Canvassing! Who me? lol... No, really, I wanted your input. :) Actually it went to some administrator board requesting the attention of multiple editors! hm! No one replied. lol. So... yeah, the topic is pretty much bagged. Jasonasosa (talk) 21:15, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll read the article and tell you what I think; but it probably won't be today (maybe not tomorrow either).

The Curse of Ham is an interesting subject. I came across Goldenberg's book a few weeks ago and found some great stuff in it (I was researching something else entirely--or so I thought!). SamEV (talk) 21:32, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I always appreciated your inputs and edits... so I'm down with whatever you find. I'm actually concidering revamping the entire race and slavery sections because they are poorly put together... its not as informative as it could be. Anyway... catchya later. Jasonasosa (talk) 21:37, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sam. I have the same topic here, but on a different article. This one is German Americans. The notes are in the talk page. I was hoping, given your experience in editing other pages of a similar nature, that you could put your $.02 in with respect to the ever-increasing amount of infobox images. Thanks. Erikeltic ^(Talk) 00:15, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I guess that debate's over. Mind you, I'd be reluctant to wade in, since I don't edit the article regularly.

Enjoy the great holiday season, Erik. SamEV (talk) 22:04, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Sam. You too. Erikeltic ^(Talk) 17:04, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Thanksgiving Tony the Marine (talk) 15:56, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In Lasha, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Callirrhoe (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) 11:03, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The dab page is the closest thing to its own article that the city Callirrhoe has, bot. SamEV (talk) 12:40, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	Wishing you a "Feliz Navidad and a Prospero Año Nuevo" (Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year) Tony the Marine (talk) External audio Jose Feliciano's "Feliz Navidad "

Hi. When you recently edited Canaan, son of Ham, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sinites (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) 11:04, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]