Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:27, 8 April 2010

It is approximately 12:37 PM where this user lives.

User:Zhang He/Navbar

For 2009 discussions, please visit the following link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Zhang_He/2009

January 2010

Discussions archived

An archive of January 2010 discussions can be found here.

February 2010

Discussions archived

An archive of February 2010 discussions can be found here.

March 2010

Discussions archived

An archive of March 2010 discussions can be found here.

April 2010

Reverting all of 24.3.220.206's edits.

(Response to your post on my talk page) How exactly should I respond to something like this in the future? I see a user make a huge number of unnecessary that are uncalled for and they need to be revered. I left a message on his user page but instead of responding he went back and revered all my changes. With such a large number of edits whats the best way to physically undo them? Is this a feature that only an admin would have? --Triesault (talk) 15:30, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I have reverted your edit to the George Lopez article

This edit. I had removed the content with this explanation:

(removed content not directly supported by cited source; if the actual correct quote is inserted, it should also contain the context)

You then re-inserted the contested content without addressing my concerns, stating only:

(There is actual video proof. That's why I reverted myself after I reverted DLL.)

I have reviewed the video, just to be sure. Perhaps you could indicate the exact (minute and second mark) in the video that supports this statement: "In February 2010, he referred to Sarah Palin as a "special needs" "". I still don't see it. You do realize that link is to a stand-up comedy routine, right? Why do you misleadingly insert content that says Lopez "referred" to anyone as anything without noting that it was actually the punch-line to a joke? I did hear Lopez say, "La Cabrona". I also heard Lopez say, "Sarah Palin said that it is wrong for President Obama's advisor Rahm Emmanuel to use the word "retarded", but it's alright for Rush Limbaugh. When someone becomes irrational like that, complaining, not making any sense, it means only one thing: they're special needs." But I still haven't seen Lopez refer to Palin as a "special needs" "". I also see no justification, per WP:WEIGHT, why that was inserted into the article at all. Perhaps you could explain? Thanks. Xenophrenic (talk) 18:17, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

At 00:08. "Special needs" is most likely a way to put it nicely. - Zhang He (talk) 18:22, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

As editors, we don't "put things nicely". I checked 00:08, and I still don't hear the content there that you inserted. I also still do not see the context of the information you wish to add. We put things accurately. I also note now that you have made 3 reverts and a self-revert to that article within a 24-hour period. Please do not edit-war on a WP:BLP. BLP policy states that when contentious and inaccurate information is disputed, the burden is upon the inserting editor to justify the content. Please address all concerns expressed above before re-inserting a more accurate version of that content. Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 18:26, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

George Lopez and the reverts

Xenophrenic is asking me to revert on my talkpage. I told him no there as per my comments on his talkpage. We need to avoid a 3RR situation. Morenooso (talk) 18:43, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced

i understand unreferenced info is not ok, but you do realize, just because someone adds info without a source, it doesnt mean it has to be removed. i'm simply saying that the entire article is unsourced, it could be AFD for deletion. so that's why i left it in, to be preserved so more information can be found later. you do know what WP:PRESERVE says to right?

Also, about the character section, please do not remove it from the main article until the characters article has substantial information enough to fork out from the main article. Also look at WP:CFORK. at the moment, there is no sources for the article, i'm currently keeping it preserved to see when info will be added. but it's been a while and it's been at the same state.Bread Ninja (talk) 23:20, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Unprotection

Done. Good luck. :) SlimVirgin 01:49, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! =D - Zhang He (talk) 01:50, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Mr. Ed

Actually, User:Tryntius was right. Snopes confirms it. Mr. Ed was a zebra. -

You are right, you didn't, I apologize. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 03:48, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

It's not your fault. Tryntius is the one that posted here (I reverted Tryn, of course), so it made you think I had something to do with it. Anyway, apology accepted! - Zhang He (talk) 03:51, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Reversion of my edit

Hi. I don't agree with your reversion of my edit to SETI. Perhaps there has been a misunderstanding. I am re-reverting and opening a discussion on the talk page for SETI.--75.83.69.196 (talk) 16:46, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Mail-order bride

I'm not sure I see how the IPs edits would be considered vandalism. Please reconsider your use of revert. --Onorem♠Dil 03:20, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Some appreciation

	The Working Man's Barnstar
	For doing a remarkably diligent job covering for the broken AIV helper bots, making many admins' lives easier! ~ mazca 00:53, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Wow, thank you! - Zhang He (talk) 00:55, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

You left the following message on my talk page:

This is the final warning that you will receive regarding your disruptive edits, such as this edit you made to User talk:Reach Out to the Truth. If you vandalize Misplaced Pages again, you will be blocked from editing without further notice. Zhang He (talk) 01:22, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I would like to know:

How was that vandalism, I just left a fair and honest question on ROTTT's talk page, Isn't that what talk pages are for? Otherwise how am i supposed to respond to comments left on my talkpage? 64.223.101.244 (talk) 01:25, 8 April 2010 (UTC)