Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:19, 29 December 2013

This is SummerPhD's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 12 months

Ye Olde Rules and Common Sense

1) Questions you ask here will be answered here, unless they are remarkably rude, pointless, pig-headed, etc.
2) Please post at the bottom of the page and "sign" your posts using the squiggly things: ~~~~
3) I did not delete "your" page or block you. I am not an admin. I may have suggested that the page should be deleted or that you earned a block.
4) I cannot undelete "your" page or unblock you. I am still not an admin (see #3, above).
5) I don't care if you did hear it from your best friend that her next-door neighbor's cousin knows this guy who once dated someone who went to high school with a roadie for the band, we still need a reliable, verifiable source.
6) The possibility that the blog/myspace/youtube/sign on a telephone pole you read is a reliable source is roughly equal to the chance that I will be the next Pope. I'm a lesbian. You do the math.
7) Please do not assume I am stupid, lazy or "out to get you" (or your favorite non-notable whatever). (Assume whatever you want.) We probably just disagree.
8) I do not intend to waste time responding to remarkably bogus, hostile, and/or trolling remarks. (Actually, it's kinda fun. I'll respond if I feel like it.)
9) Your First Amendment rights state that the U.S. Government will not restrict your speech. Misplaced Pages is not the U.S. Government.
10) No shirt, no shoes, no dice. Meh.

Archives

/Archive 1/Archive 2/Archive 3/Archive4/Archive5/Archive6/Archive7/Archive8

This page has archives. Sections older than 366 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present.

Andrea Mitchell

Berklee Alisa Edit

Thanks for the help...wasn't sure I should add the New York Times Bestseller bit, but decided to put it in anyway. Thanks for tidying it up. :-)

~usmarinesjz

question

Why did you not remove the CN here ? Petroleum products (especially high surface-area fabrics) are flammable and do emit toxic odors when burned. I understand your intent, but it seems intellectually dishonest to remove a link to a wealth of information about the flammability and toxicity of petroleum, while allowing the appearance of a question surrounding the issue at hand. 75.142.11.87 (talk) 08:54, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages cannot be used as a source for itself. "I'm right because I say I'm right and you know that's right because, as I just proved, I am right." The statement in question needs to cite a reliable source stating that microfibers are flammable, and emit toxic gases (not "odors") when burning. There are petroleum products that not particularly flammable and petroleum products that burn without much in the way of toxic gases. - SummerPhD (talk) 17:40, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Solid petroleum products, especially microfibers, are not one of them. graphene _might_ be an exception. The edit, however, wuz perfectly correct. If someone demands a source, and it is not in petroleum, then it should be found. 75.152.117.14 (talk) 15:08, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

I honestly cannot figure out what you are trying to say. Also, because this was 8 months ago, I don't remember what the situation was. If you wish to discuss whether or not content should be in an article and whether or not it needs to be sourced, I'd suggest taking it to the article's talk page. Also, as your IP keeps changing, it is impossible to contact you directly and you have no automatic way to track articles you are working on. You might want to register an account. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:53, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

blocked editor

I'm declining to remove some of the articles by Androstachys that I think particularly helpful and unlikely to be soon contributed by another editor.. I'm aware of who wrote it, but WP would be harmed more by removing it that keeping it. The policy reads, "may be removed," not "must be removed". DGG ( talk ) 04:36, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Not a problem. I figured as much, but from where I sit, the more that disappear, the better. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:50, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

hi; with all due respect, i agree with DGG, rather strongly. your mass-speedy-ing of articles written by the user Androstachys, for the given rationale, is disruptive, & at least borderline "pointy editing"/vandalism.

further, your reply above "I figured as much, but from where I sit, the more that disappear, the better." DOES NOT present your position in a favourable light, in that it suggests "personal reasons" for the nominations.

in the spirit of agf, i would like to ask you for a clarification as to why you want to remove (apparently ALL of) this persons contributions?

Lx 121 (talk) 15:47, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Could I also point out that, as far as I can determine, the articles which you are tagging were created before this user was blocked. Granted he is a sockpuppet, but for some reason it appears that the sockmaster was only blocked for 72 hours in 2007. Hence creating these articles is acceptable, assuming that the articles themselves qualify for retention. --Anthony Bradbury 22:35, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Lx 121: "Vandalism"? I do not think that word means what you think it means. In any event, yes, I do believe that my given rationale is valid based on the information I had at the time. Speedy G5 is for "Pages created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, and which have no substantial edits by others." The block notice I read last night for Androstachys says, "20:20, 10 August 2011 Hesperian (talk | contribs) blocked Androstachys (talk | contribs) (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of indefinite (Long term abuse: new account of community-banned long-term disruptive editor Paul venter / Rotational / etc)" To me, that says Androstachys was created by a community-banned long-term disruptive editor. As for the puppeteer previously having been blocked for 72 hours, I'm at a bit of a loss to explain the wording of the block notice in that light. For my own part, I guess I missed the "Paul venter" listing (right before the line break) and searched for "Rotational",

I invite you to see User:Mangojuice/delete, an essay on the topic of deletionism. A number of wikipedians are against notability., therefore the topic is controversial, so controversial that it might explain why your front page has been vandalized. I've never seen the forum; don't want to go there; pretty sure user:Jeremy Hanson had his hand in it before he wuz banned (over and over and over...). A number of articles could probably be resurrected from evidence in The Wayback Machine.75.152.117.14 (talk) 14:46, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Michelle Thomas

hi, i'm a little confused about the references for the birth and death of Michelle Thomas. for the death, there is "quality sources" beeing quite clear. and some other, 3 liner sources, beeing unclear. would it be possible to ignore these low quality 3 liner websites? --ThurnerRupert (talk) 22:53, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

This issue has been discussed at some length. Please see the article's talk page. If you disagree with the consensus, please discuss the issue there. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:39, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

oh, i see it now. this was indeed a lenghty discussion, not to say quarrel. wikipedia and michelle thomas is not important enough to let one drag into such a discussion ... and to be honest i am unable to see the consensual statement on the talk page. if you really doubt the dates, i'd personally prefer you put these doubts in a paragraph of the article and not cluttering the whole text with either/or clauses. --ThurnerRupert (talk) 05:57, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

We cannot discuss "doubt(ing) the dates" in the article because we do not have reliable sources discussing it. We have reliable sources giving one date and other reliable sources giving another date. We cannot simply choose one or the other, so we cite both. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:24, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

hehehe ... you _really_ seem to be convinced a source is reliable if the date of death cannot be determined? WP:OR does not mean that you need to make a text unreadable. you are free to choose one date, e.g. the one out of the best researched article, and add a paragraph that no source does exist to confirm the date, citing the other sources including the dates they offer. --ThurnerRupert (talk) 10:32, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

I am convinced that a source is reliable if it is reliable. If you have suggestions for improving the article, please discuss them on the article's talk page. If a consensus can be demonstrated to match what you propose, that consensus will be reflected in the article. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 16:56, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

i cannot follow. are two sources stating differing death dates of a person reliable or not? and if yes, what makes them reliable? it cannot be the research, otherwise they would have found the real date. or is there as well room for interpretation - i.e. a person can have two death dates? @talk page and consensus: do you think you and i can find a consens? if yes, i put it on the talk page. --ThurnerRupert (talk) 21:25, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Sources are "reliable" if they follow the guidelines set up at our guidelines for reliable sources (which I have repeatedly linked to). A broad over simplification of that is that the source (newspaper, magazine, book publisher, etc.) "has a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy". This is not the same thing as the source being "correct". For her age at death, we have the Miami Herald vs. The New York Times. For her date of death, we have one date from Variety, Entertainment Weekly and The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel vs. People Magazine and the Bay State Banner. All of these sources are reliable sources. It is obvious though that not all of them are correct. The consensus established on the talk page is to include both dates and both ages. If you disagree, you will need to address the issue on the article's talk page. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:12, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

obviously we do not agree on what is reliable. your stand point is that these sources are reliable, even if you know that some of them are wrong. and i am saying, if these sources did not make the effort to really cross check and state it in the article that they did so, the source (beeing the article, not the newspaper) is not reliable. the proof is that we cannot tell the date. this does of course not mean that ny times or variety in general has a less good reputation now. and i am saying the date of publication matters. if a 2 line article goes out during the holiday season, and a lenghty written article goes out 2 weeks later, common sense says that the chance of beeing right is greater on the latter case.

that we do disagree here is fine for me. what does this mean for the article? i guess not a lot, we agree that the dates are not sure. so there is one single question remaining: are you open to formulate it without the and/or clauses, and move the discussion about the reliable sources and varying dates into a separate paragraph? this means _both_ dates are in the article, just not on the place they are now. (i am asking only you, as you reverted the article, and if you do not agree it is 100% sure now that we do not hav a consensus on this) --ThurnerRupert (talk) 12:12, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

You do not seem to understand Misplaced Pages's policy on reliable sources. Feel free to address this on the article's talk page. - SummerPhD (talk) 13:11, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Evan Williams (actor)

The above article has been undeleted as the prod was contested at WP:REFUND. I always inform people when I do so, so that they can decide whether to take to AfD.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:02, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I've yanked the unsourced bio info and updated the filmography as best I can. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:03, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Discussion Moved

I moved this discussion to Talk:Penn Jillette because it concerns the content of that article. --Guy Macon (talk) 19:51, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Ancient Astronauts and Salvador Freixedo

Salvador Freixedo is notable. Take a look at his article.

Thanks,

--Ljfeliu (talk) 07:37, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

...now that the article exists. It needs some work. - SummerPhD (talk) 18:13, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Layla

I wonder if you can fix issues that I raised in article talk page. --George Ho (talk) 05:46, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Featured article review/Layla/archive2. --George Ho (talk) 04:07, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Request_for_input.2C_and_if_it_boomerangs_that.27s_fine

Yeah, you're informed. - 124.168.221.199 (talk) 09:27, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

I have responded there. - SummerPhD (talk) 17:55, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

It appears that our IP editor with the suspiciously comprehensive knowledge of ancient arbcom cases has stopped editing, and the ANI case has been archived to .

I suspect that what we are looking at here is a banned user using an IP address as a sockpuppet, then dropping off the radar after repeating the behavior that got him banned. If so, he may turn up again. Please drop me a line on my talk page if you run into a "new" user with the same behavior pattern. I am unwatching all the pages associated with this. Thanks! --Guy Macon (talk) 00:28, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

I couldn't find the duck for this quack, but I'll let you know if I do. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:39, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Proactiv

Hi Summer. I wanted to let you know that I am now coaching Guthy-Renker on the proper way to engage with Wikipedians. In the future you shouldn't see any article-space edits from us and I will be the only COI participant from the company. My approach is to offer contributed content for consideration, without editing the article, leaving editorial decisions up to yourself and other non-conflicted editors who serve the reader's best interest. I've told them that being neutral means including (for example) a significant controversy about their advertising in the UK and they seem very receptive to just working on creating a neutral, complete article, bringing it up to GA eventually.

If you have a little more patience left to spend on us, I would like to humbly request your ongoing collaboration on the Talk page. I will aspire to earn your time through valuable contributions and exceptional integrity. CorporateM (Talk) 18:23, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Summer. Just a heads-up, I have offered a draft for consideration on the Talk page on Guthy's behalf, which I think is much better. Your review and feedback is welcome if you have time. Cheers. CorporateM (Talk) 20:23, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Vandalizing?

Your page was an invitation! What's up with that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.58.96.84 (talk) 22:55, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

"If you're going to vandalize my page, please update the counter." By updating the counter, you confirmed that you were vandalizing the page. - SummerPhD (talk) 00:24, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Re

Thanks for the suggestion. It turns out that this issue has been discussed numerous times. The reference indicates that about Catalonia is not a country but a region of Spain. In infobox is clear that the country is Spain. Greetings.--Marcospace (talk) 17 January 2013 (UTC)

You might want to link to that discussion on the talk page of the article in question. - SummerPhD (talk) 14:25, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I've done it. --Marcospace (talk) 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:46, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:20, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

South Philadelphia High School (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Negro National League, Baltimore Colts, Fabian and Sumerian

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:22, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Joe Poyer

Hello and thanks for tagging this for notability back in Jan 2008. I'm not sure but am inclined to think it's not notable. You may want to take it to the Notability Noticeboard or AfD to get it resolved. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 22:30, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't believe that you understand the issue here

Your first message on my talk page states that "Misplaced Pages says the Ancient Greeks believed the Earth is hollow. Clearly the Earth is not. Is Misplaced Pages wrong? No, because the Ancient Greeks did say that." However, my complaint was about listing Juggalo as an allied gang of the Bloods/Crips, which is directly calling Juggalos a gang. I cannot see how you do not understand why there is a problem with directly calling a music fanbase a gang. I cannot see how you can claim that calling a music fanbase an ally of a gang is not calling a music fanbase a gang. I cannot see how you can compare this to an article on the Ancient Greeks saying that the Ancient Greeks believed that the Earth is hollow. I am not complaining about an assertion that the FBI claims Juggalo is a gang, I am complaining about articles DIRECTLY CLAIMING that Juggalos are a gang. It is blatantly patronizing for you to claim that placing "Juggalos" as an ally of a REAL GANG is not an assertion that a music fanbase is a gang. --BigBabyChips (talk) 18:40, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Summer, you might be interested in this: . Niteshift36 (talk) 19:50, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

BigBabyChips: I believe I do understand the issue. I do not believe I am superior than you, but I'd expect that after 8 years on Misplaced Pages I might have a more complete understanding of our policies and guidelines. (Your claims of an exemption from 3RR based on NPOV was a red flag in my mind.)

Niteshift: Thanks for the heads up. I won't be commenting. Typical handling at the various noticeboards will take it from here rather well, I suspect. - SummerPhD (talk) 23:14, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages search for images

Excuse me, but is there anything on Misplaced Pages that can help me search for images that were posted on it. Is there at least a search bar for looking for images. If there isn't, is it okay if I describe the image I'm looking for to you. Maybe you will be able to help me find it.Peta8 (talk) 23:12, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I do not know of any image search function on Misplaced Pages. Good luck. - SummerPhD (talk) 23:35, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Is it okay if I describe the picture to you? If you can't find it, do you know anybody who can? I really want to find this picture. Peta8 (talk) 23:59, 25 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peta8 (talk • contribs) 23:55, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia. If you wish to help build an encyclopedia, we'd love to have you join us. If you are just here to ask people to research when individual episodes of "That 70s Show" were filmed, what the birth dates should be for fictional characters in "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" and similar nonsense, you are clearly not at the right website. - SummerPhD (talk) 00:10, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

I — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peta8 (talk • contribs) 03:53, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Movie ideas

Hey I have had ideas for my own films and I will created them for real when I'm 18. My first film is Dreamworks' A Journey to the Golden Coconut Tree. It is from the creators of Shrek and Kung Fu Panda. It takes place in South America and has the voices of Ricky Gervais, Katy Perry, Steve Carell, Jane Lynch, Martin Short, Ben Kingsley, Sofia Vergara and Danny DeVito.Crow54 15:40 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Good for you. Let us know when ANY reliable sources report on your dream. Until then, we'll leave it out of Misplaced Pages. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:49, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I won't do it until I start production on the film. The film also stars will.i.am, Denis Leary, Michael Caine, Jada Pinkett Smith, Wanda Sykes, Isla Fisher, Ben Stiller and I voice a character too even though I am the film's director and producer.Crow54 10:51 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Uh, yeah. Sure. Good luck with that. - SummerPhD (talk) 18:42, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

When I start the film for real, you will like I'm sure. The movie is in Real 3D and IMAX 3D and the film's rated PG. It is to be released 2018 and production starts 2017. Crow54 19:36, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Uh huh. - SummerPhD (talk) 19:42, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Alice's Inferno

Hello, you may want to contribute to the discussion linked above, and consider nominating the article is merged. You tagged this for notability back in 2008. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 14:32, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Just realised you also prodded it, but it was removed by a person who only edited about this band. You may want to consider AfD, but I think the recommendation would be merge. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 14:35, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Jon Stewart

http://www.chacha.com/question/is-jon-stewart-atheist — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.72.155.84 (talk) 17:52, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

To add that Stewart is an atheist to the article, you need to find a reliable source and cite it in the article. An answer by "Eric S." in an online forum is not a reliable source. Giving a link here is not citing the source. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 18:33, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) This interview may be helpful. Stewart does suggest that he believes in deities in this statement, "It may be true that the Hebrew prophets used humor in that regard" but that's really just suggestive and not iron-clad. About halfway down he describes his beliefs in a way that may be more usable

Hope this helps. The source isn't the best, but for something like religion, if it were me I would prefer to get something said directly by the article-subject, in an interview such as this. CorporateM (Talk) 01:13, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

)

Mister Exe (talk) 19:51, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Asda page

hi, just so you know, there is no source needed for the Asda page as it is common knowledge in Britain that this is Asda's jingle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jojoeheh (talk • contribs) 00:54, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

JoJoeheh has been indefed as a vandalism-only account. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:42, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Tory Belleci Birth Name/Date Info

Hello SummerPhD,

I saw that you reverted my edits when I added Tory Belleci's birth name and birth date. I decided to respond here on your page instead of the article's Talk page because, as you most likely noticed, I am new to Misplaced Pages and definitely could use all of the help I can get right now, so this response is really more about seeking advice than it is about the article. I saw your reasons for the reversion and I must say that after reading them, I now agree that the source I provided is insufficient to prove that Salvatore Paul Belleci and Tory Belleci are the same person. This is where I need advice. I do have conclusive evidence that they are indeed one and the same via cross-referencing multiple sources, but the problem I'm having is that each source on its own is inadequate. How would I go about "combining" them to prove that Tory Belleci truly is Salvatore Paul Belleci? If you would like to see the sources and the way I cross-referenced them, just ask and I will provide that for you. Thank you for any assistance you can provide. —Wthrman (talk) 03:58, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Good to "meet" you and welcome to Misplaced Pages. We have a lot of guidelines that we all bump up against from time-to-time. If someone challenges anything you do (as I did), discussing the issue (as you did) is the best way to reach a consensus.

Kind of a side point here, but the source used was also problematic as a primary source, which we generally do not use. (See WP:PSTS, part of Misplaced Pages:No original research.)

More to your point, we generally do not combine sources. Suppose we have one source that says Belleci was one of several people at filming of a particular segment and another source that says all of the people at that filming were fluent in Italian. It would seem reasonable to conclude that Belleci is fluent in Italian. However, stating this requires synthesis of sources: combining information from two sources to state something that neither one says. (See WP:SYN, also part of Misplaced Pages:No original research.)

If you don't agree with someone else about content or feel there is a reason to ignore a rule, the article's talk page is a good place to discuss the issue. Other options (when you can't reach a consensus or, perhaps, another editor is being unreasonable) are discussed at WP:DISPUTE.

As a rule, no one person (except Jimbo Wales, who generally stays out of day-to-day stuff) decides much of anything, but most long-term editors can/will answer general questions you might have and point to policies or guidelines that might apply.

Again, welcome to Misplaced Pages and thanks for your reasonable approach! - SummerPhD (talk) 04:27, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Laurie Elyse

Hi Summer. You participted in the AfD with some effort to improve the article. There's a request at the Help Desk mentioning something about "I was contacted by a person to take over a wiki page that was about me. I would like to have admin rights transfered to this individual because recent editing from the person who created was malicous." Seems that they are saying that the originally created article was malicious, but that wasn't mentioned at the AfD. I can't see the original article. I'm not sure if there is anything for you to add at the Help Desk, but I thought I would let you know about the follow up to the AfD. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 10:22, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Tagging unreliable sources

Hi SummerPhD, this is a very delayed response to you tagging issues on an article in November. You tagged it as unreferenced and explained in HTML text that its only source was a "pseudo-source" because it's a blog. I thought you might want to know about the {{unreliable sources}} tag for such cases. I've already updated that article. Thanks, BDD (talk) 18:46, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

I'll stop

I'm sorry about asking nonsensable questions on talk pages. I'll stop. Just so you know, I didn't want to know when each individual episode of That 70s show was filmed. I only wanted to know when each season was filmed. This website says when each season of iCarly was filmed. I just thought they should do that for That 70s Show. Anyway, I'll stop.Peta8 (talk) 03:58, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Inappropriate Uses

This thread really inspired me: Talk:Duct tape#Inappropriate Uses

It's obvious that Misplaced Pages needs List of inappropriate uses of things

Example:

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:38, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Let me know when you start it. I'm sure I can find academic sources for:

Thing	Inappropriate use	Notes
Lightbulb	Butt plug

SummerPhD (talk) 14:47, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello

I don't appreciate the deletion of the edit I made on the page of Pimp C. Quick question: do you have any idea who Pimp C is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ParaguaneroSwag (talk • contribs) 03:55, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Your claim was: "Since death, Pimp C is one of the most mentioned rappers in hip-hop songs, for people showing respect." You did not provide a reliable source for the claims. If you are having trouble identifying reliable sources or figuring out how to cite them, I'd be more than willing to help. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:21, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Binders full of women for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Binders full of women is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Binders full of women until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.

William Rittenhouse

Please inform yourself, before you "identify" anything as "vandalism". The officials of the town his was born posted a site with informations on his life ]. If you don't trust them, come visit Germany and have a look in the parish register yourself! Rettinghaus (talk) 08:59, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I've restored the name, citing a reliable source. If you have additional material for the article from reliable secondary sources, we'd love to have it! - SummerPhD (talk) 15:05, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gay male teen fiction, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Alex Sanchez and Mesmerized (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) 11:22, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Tory Belleci

What ist the problem with the source? It is used on many other wikipedia language versions. --91.115.30.78 (talk) 06:32, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

The source statyes he is "known as" that name on Misplaced Pages. Misplaced Pages cannot be used as a source for itself, nor can Misplaced Pages use a source that cites Misplaced Pages. That other projects make this mistake is not a reason for us to make the same mistake. - SummerPhD (talk) 07:05, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Is the IMDB record suitable as a source? --62.46.191.159 (talk) 13:19, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, as biographical information on IMDb is user submitted (and does not cite sources), it is not a reliable source. Unless he's mentioned it in an interview somewhere (which is unlikely) we'll just have to see if it's ever added to his bio page at Mythbusters or his personal website. - SummerPhD (talk) 19:33, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Coconut oil for deep frying

Hello!

First off a pre-emptive apologies if I muck about the formatting!

You posted on my talk page - http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:ScienceandFitness - RE: "Coconut oil should not be utilized for deep drying, as multiple use may be associated with production of polyaromatic hydrocarbons, a carcinogenic compound"

I'm not really sure how to source this? It's more of a general-truth that you deep-frying (multiple usage) causes fatty acids to degrade. It's kind of the same issue found in BBQed meats, but in a lesser amount. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScienceandFitness (talk • contribs) 14:47, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

As a rule of thumb, if reliable sources do not discuss something (directly discussing the topic of the article), it doesn't belong in the article. Please see WP:OR. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:40, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Psyllium flatulence!

Hah how is that for a title :)h

RE: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Psyllium&diff=543747928&oldid=543729018

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1312763 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7829013 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8554251

In the future if removed, should I re-add with like the above citations? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScienceandFitness (talk • contribs) 14:53, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Sources are always helpful. (Part of the reason I reverted was that your edit was contrary to my understanding. Without sources, your edit simply looks like one of us is right, the other wrong and no way to tell.) First, I'd suggest being sure the sources are saying what you are saying.

Your edit said "(Psyllium) is also one of the few laxatives not to promote flatulence."

Your first study states that psyllium did not increase breath methane. This does not address psyllium as "one of the few laxatives". It says nothing about flatulence.

The second study found no change in flatus. Two issues: Again, no "few laxatives". Because the study reports that their findings were "contrary to previous reports", those previous reports should probably be noted. Maybe the previous reports were wrong, maybe this report is wrong, maybe it's somewhere in between. Hard to say and hard to write objectively.

The third study does not discuss flatus directly (and, again, does not single out psyllium as "one of the few"). More importantly, IMO, is the explanation it gives for the seeming contradiction: the bloated feeling patients interpret as excess gas is likely due to increased bulk.

All in all, I'd say the 2nd and 3rd sources are useful here, but the edit must summarize what the sources actually say. Cheers. - SummerPhD (talk) 16:00, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment

Hey SummerPhD; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:58, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Jenna Rose for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jenna Rose is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Jenna Rose (4th nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

I am curious about what you think this AfD this time. I reread the guidelines and really felt they would have applied. Rogerthat94 (talk) 00:28, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Re: Changes to Hartford, CT

Hello - It is crucial that readers of Misplaced Pages fully understand how "shart-like" Hartford, CT is. I can only imagine that you removed my comment because you felt that its location (and not its substance) were inappropriate.

I will re-add this crucial information to the (S)Hartford page and trust that you will not fuck around any longer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.136.192.1 (talk • contribs) 09:36, 14 March 2013‎

Apparently it's a slow week at The Hartford. - SummerPhD (talk) 13:53, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Coconut oil

coconut oil is very heathly for you give me a souce where health companies think its bad for you mma fighters n athelets eat it everyday — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.89.170.247 (talk • contribs) 23:55, 22 March 2013‎

That various atheletes use it does not, in any way, demonstrate that it is healthy to do so. The "Health" section cites numerous organizations (United States Food and Drug Administration, World Health Organization, International College of Nutrition, the United States Department of Health and Human Services, American Dietetic Association, American Heart Association, British National Health Service, and Dietitians of Canada) saying as much. If you disagree, please discuss the issue on the article's talk page. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:14, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Nori

Hi SummerPhD, I wanted to ask why you changed the nutritional data at nori from dried to raw. The data for raw laver that you added isn't really applicable for nori as it is typically consumed, so isn't of much use to someone who is looking up the nutritional data for nori sheets. I have absolutely no objections as to the data itself, but wouldn't it be better suited for the laver article? HMman (talk) 02:37, 26 March 2013 (UTC).

Looks like a candidate for a merge:

• "Laver is an edible, littoral alga (seaweed)...known as...nori in Japan"
• "Nori (海苔?) is the Japanese name for edible seaweed...called laver in Wales and other English-speaking countries" - SummerPhD (talk) 03:01, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I've understood "nori" (in English usage; I'm not entirely sure as to its proper Japanese usage) to refer to the finished, dried sheet, while "laver" refers to the seaweed itself; sort of like with "jerky" and "beef". Admittedly, this is just how I've percieved it; I'll have to do some more checking into it. HMman (talk) 04:09, 26 March 2013 (UTC).

Three penis wine

Yes, it really is mentioned in the source, p. 40 of Paul Levy's book Out To Lunch: perhaps you can see this Google snippet view? As to what it tastes like, I can't comment -- I wasn't there :) Andrew Dalby 18:57, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I knew it had been mentioned in an episode of The League. A quick Google found nothing but copies of our article. I'm kinda shocked/kinda not at all surprised this is real. I know there are editors who love to create articles about bizzare/pseudo-trivial topics. I'd love to see this one, but I somehow suspect that redlink with be there for quite some time. Cheers. - SummerPhD (talk) 19:45, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Changes to Chartered Financial Analyst

Hi

There was a long pending case between ICFAI and CFA Institute. Now that case has been resolved, and I've updated the same.

Moreover, as this case has now been resolved, we dont need content like future of this dispute and people's views on the same as both the parties have already resolved the case.

And sorry for not quoting the reasons for deletion. I'll ensure that this mistake will not happen again.

Thanks for taking some time out to review my post. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.64.51.192 (talk) 13:45, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Percy Sledge

Hey Doc. There is such a thing as "reading in context". What else would it be but his signature song if the analogy is another signature song? Don't be so literal. That being said, here's another source. --Middle 8 (talk) 07:47, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm aware of context, but the context we're working in, coupled with the absurd length of that example farm and the relative ease of finding a better source... well, you get the idea. - SummerPhD (talk) 16:13, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough! Agree, article needs pruning bigtime. --Middle 8 (talk) 01:49, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Joan Aiken links

Hi, I'm Joan Aiken's Literary Executor, so I am officially concerned with how she is presented in the public media. I have studied your ELNO page, checked rules on Official links,and have already corresponded with one Wiki mediator about my edits today.

The situation is that Facebook have put up a page for Joan Aiken which is basically a copy of the Misplaced Pages page.

The only way I can moderate that page is by editing information on Misplaced Pages. You will see that I do keep an eye on the Joan Aiken page, have helped edit over the years, and on the whole do not interfere with others' submissions if they are accurate, and take trouble to correct misinformation. I am also Joan's daughter, so am careful about conflict of interest, advertising, etc. and do read your guidelines.

However I would like to direct interested parties to the Official Facebook page as opposed to one over which I have no control - they do not have your clearly very on-the-ball check up teams! This is why I wanted to list the Official Joan Aiken Facebook page. May I now replace it? Lizza Aiken LizzaAiken (talk) 13:46, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, Facebook has many mirrors of Misplaced Pages articles. There is nothing particularly bad about that.

Their may be numerous Facebook pages "about" a particular person or topic. The same is true for Myspace, Twitter, YouTube and dozens of other sites. The individual may have "official" pages on all, some or none of these sites. In the case of a deceased individual (and some other topics) there may be more than one page on a site claiming to be the official page. Additionally, there are often pages and sites that claim to be official that are not connected to the subject. With all of this in mind, WP:ELNO specifically states that we do not link to "Social networking sites (such as Myspace and Facebook), chat or discussion forums/groups (such as Yahoo! Groups), Twitter feeds, Usenet newsgroups or e-mail lists." Additionally, if there is an official webpage for the subject, we assume that page will link to the appropriate social networking sites. - SummerPhD (talk) 18:49, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Jessie Creek Winery

I responded at Talk:Jessie Creek Winery, there was also a brief discussion of this at the talk page of WP:WINE. --ColonelHenry (talk) 14:17, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

• Responded again.--ColonelHenry (talk) 21:11, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Summer, I really think you should realize that Misplaced Pages is not a game of whac-a-mole. We're here to build an encyclopedia, to share the knowledge of things we love with others who may be interested in learning how to love it. I look over your contributions and I see a user wielding rules, deleting, reverting, and not really contributing much. One thing I don't see much of in your contributions is actual contributing, just rule enforcement. When it becomes about bludgeoning others with rules and deletionism, you've missed the point of what this project is. I think you need to reevaluate your dogged hatred of this article and ask yourself "is the world going to end just because Jessie Creek Winery has an article?" You've written more than enough articles that are marred by the very shortcomings you're trying to hold against this one. And if you want this to go down that road, I have all the time in the world to take it there and would indulge you, but I don't care to--I believe you have to offer what you love, I have to offer what I love. Stick to that. Even if you think the subject is not-notable, and in violation of other policies, it isn't grounds for stomping on an area of knowledge other people might be passionate or other people might want to know about even though you are not so inclined. I could care less about the Doctor Who, Pokemon, and other nonsense articles that get accolades around here, but I don't think they ought not exist. When it comes to cases like these, let the dogged persistence in enforcing rules go. --ColonelHenry (talk) 05:18, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Ignoring all the rules for no reason results in an "encyclopedia" that is not an encyclopedia. I'm sorry if the gym teacher/garage band/winery you love is not notable. We have guidelines for a good reason: to weed out the non-notable. - SummerPhD (talk) 16:45, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

That's your entire oeuvre, it seems--when you actually do (on few and far between occasions) contribute content. Perhaps I will take a little time this evening to give your paltry non-notable contributions a taste of your own medicine. It's only fair. --ColonelHenry (talk) 21:15, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

If I understand you correctly, you intend to make a point by going after my contributions. That's probably not the best frame of mind to edit articles. - SummerPhD (talk) 21:54, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Summer, I replied to your comments at Talk:Jessie Creek Winery. DavidinNJ (talk) 04:14, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Signature

Just stopping by to say your signature (and your name on your userpage!) looks great! ☺ – 29611670.x (talk) 08:13, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry

Really sockpuppet. Why I'am I being accused of this I did nothing wrong, this flase --Miss X-Factor (talk) 03:09, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Please respond at Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Miss X-Factor. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:13, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Diet Coke and Mentos Eruption

I added the Thermodynamics section to this article to better explain how the reaction causes the fountain from a thermodynamic perspective (for a class project/presentation). The formulas and work were found and simplified by myself and other members of my project group. I am not sure how this section could be referenced unless it would simply be a See Also: First law of thermodynamics note since the formulas I posted are derived directly from thermodynamic energy balance.

If you believe this section cannot be posted without a citation I understand, but if you have another suggestion for me to be able to keep my submission on the page as an alternative to a reference, I would welcome it.

--Seankieran (talk) 02:58, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, to add the material we would need a reliable source discussing this in direct reference to the subject of the article. Otherwise, it constitutes original research. While this may seem pointless, please understand that similar additions are often made to other articles in attempts to "explain" that the evolution is a myth, veganism is the "natural" human diet, homeopathy somehow works, etc. As a result, we generally do not add unsourced explanations of how or why basically anything works. Basically: This is why we can't have nice things. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:18, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

AN Notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "J. Leon Altemose is blatant COPYVIO. Need assistance.". Thank you. Dpmuk (talk) 19:03, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I'll not leave a template per WP:DTTR, but this is your only warning for copyright infringement via excessively close paraphrasing — any more will result in a substantial block. Nyttend (talk) 19:31, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

• Hmmm--I didn't see the deleted versions so I can't comment on the paraphrasing issue, but I'll take Nyttend's word for it. And while we're piling on, it's probably best not to call someone a dick (repeatedly)--then again, they were rightfully blocked for calling you an asshole. Hey Summer, how's it going? Haven't seen you in a while--maybe we should write an article together. Oh, I received my copy of Fun Home today. My boss said it's titillating: I can't wait. Drmies (talk) 03:44, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

I can't imagine what I did there. I must've hurried through re-writing info from the source (and inadvertently left in some of the original) to get something up, figuring I'd clean it up later. I guess that didn't happen. Urg. I assume since it was killed as a copyvio I can't really see what was there. (When the tag went up, I assumed it was more of the point being made and only checked the first paragraph or so against the source. I didn't see anything close and left.)

I can't really say I'm all that familiar with Fun Home. As with any banned book, though, I heartily recommend it. I'd say I'll add it to my reading pile, but I'm supposed to be planning a "vacation" to Georgia. I'm secretly wondering if I can schedule elective emergency surgery: "I'm positively heartbroken. I reeeeally want to spend July in Atlanta, but I really needed to have this dimple on my knee looked at. Darn." Since I've blown off any chance of a reading recommendation, any recommendations for surviving stifling weather while visiting stifling in-laws? I'd assume alcohol is critical. I'm not really much of a drinker, but I'm considering making a three week exception. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:23, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

I don't know that much about drugs; I'm not that hip. If there's a better medicine for stifling weather than a mint julep (or four), I don't know what it might be, and try not to move. Or breathe (wait, that's Athens). Works for in-laws too, but cheap hooch is good enough for that. But you're a girl, you can always claim an illness in the unmentionables in a way that doesn't work for us boys. Did you know I have a boy living in my house now? He's teething too. As for real reading recommendations, I have only one: Austerlitz. And possibly 2666, but that's not for the faint of heart. Oh, wait, Atlanta--I went to school with the author of The Help. I'm sure that will work there.

Like I said, I haven't looked at the actual edits in the history of that article. Wait, I remember I did, a little bit, but I didn't have access to the article cited so frequently in the article. Whatever happened, happened. Water under the bridge. Please say hi to your southern belle, and good luck with that dimple. I'd invite you down further south, but that's probably the last direction you'd want to go. Also, drop me a line anytime you're in trouble and I'll come to your rescue, you being a helpless female and me being a superknight. Ha! Now I'm off to ride my phallus into the sunset. Drmies (talk) 04:49, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Gallantry and a disturbing image involving the cowboy from the Village People... I'd better call it a night. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:59, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

As you're a long term editor in good standing if you really want to see what the content was I'm going to offer to e-mail it to you. I know this is quite unusual as this is something we don't normally do but I'd consider such an e-mail fair use of the material as it would be showing you were you went wrong. This would be on the proviso that the material not be re-added to wikipedia as three separate admins have all said they consider it a problem. Re-adding it, without first reaching agreement with the admins involved, would likely lead to a block. Dpmuk (talk) 04:40, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Dpmuk--I'm sure Summer won't be re-adding that material (and if it's a copyvio she's hellbent on committing, she could just copy it again from the same source). Drmies (talk) 04:49, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Thanks, Dpmuk, I would greatly appreciate that. I am not challenging the opinion, I just want to see what I did. After some time has passed (and I'm sure it won't be tagged to death to make a point) I will take another pass at the article, with writing that is based only on the ideas in the sources. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:56, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Just give me a way to e-mail you and I'll do it - it appears you don't have e-mail enabled here and I'd need an address to do it any other way. Dpmuk (talk) 05:03, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

I've enabled e-mail. - SummerPhD (talk) 05:18, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

E-mail sent. hopefully you'll agree it's too close to the source. If not I'm happy to discuss where my concerns lay. Dpmuk (talk) 05:45, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

And just wanted to add that I've seen you around and this seemed out of character. That was the main reason I wanted a second opinion before deleting as I wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something. Dpmuk (talk) 05:05, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I deal with far too much plagiarism outside of Misplaced Pages to want to be part of the problem here. The only explanation I can think of involves a setup by Drmies, the Trilateral Commission and the Stonecutters. I appreciate being given the chance to see what they did to me. - SummerPhD (talk) 05:18, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

War on Women/NPOV noticeboard

I've started a discussion on the NPOV noticeboard on the question of whether it is fair to limit this article to uses of the term "War on women" to attack conservatives/Republicans.William Jockusch (talk) 06:20, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, I've responded. - SummerPhD (talk) 11:54, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Kendra Leigh Timmins

Getting decent biographical information on this songbird is not easy. However, for many Canadian show biz birds there is not wiki information on them at all. Brittany Sara Adams and many like her on Canadian television in the past 5 years have no wiki pages at all. Use of middle names for (North Ameircan) girls in Wiki should be more universal as there are about 330 millions in North America and two part names can't tell people apart. It is reasonable and fair to have more links then text for many show biz birds as often there is not much else. Eyreland (talk) 06:54, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

For Timmins to be notable (and keep an article), she must be the subject of substantial coverage in independent reliable sources. (Whether or not she uses her middle name is immaterial.) - SummerPhD (talk) 12:15, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Roof Cleaning

I don't understand how incorrect information can be left up for so long and when the correct information is added it gets taken down almost immediately and then you ban the people who are trying to provide the correct information. If you actually look at the sources and read about shingles then you and everyone else would know NOT to use high pressure or scrubbing methods or robots on household shingles! This is completely ridiculous and could void warranties with shingle manufactures. Please consider revising.

http://roofing.owenscorning.com/homeowner/thingsyoushouldknow/needaroof.aspx#algae (Click on "#1 - Algae Growth")
"High pressure washing is not recommended due to the possibility of removing granules, thereby shortening the life of the Roofing System" "Scrubbing will loosen and remove granules"

http://www.asphaltroofing.org/sites/default/files/press/MS%20Algae%20&%20Moss%20Article%20May1411.pdf
Asphalt Roofing Manufactures Association (ARMA) states: "Apply with a sprayer and allow the solution to dwell on the roof surface for 15 to 20 minutes, and then rinse thoroughly with low pressure water."

http://www.asphaltroofing.org/sites/default/files/tech-bulletin/tb_217.pdf
Asphalt Roofing Manufactures Association (ARMA) states: "Caution! High pressure washing systems for algae removal should not be used."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlZvRCwh0Sk
"If you blast your roof with a garden hose or pressure washer you can seriously damage your roofing shingles"

http://www.thisoldhouse.com/toh/asktoh/question/0,,401167,00.html
"No pressure washers, please. They're likely to damage the shingles"

http://www.doityourself.com/stry/how-to-care-for-your-asphalt-shingles#b
"If you choose to pressure wash, make sure you choose a low pressure wash to avoid any permanent damage to the shingles."

http://en.wikipedia.org/Bleach
"Many bleaches have strong bactericidal properties, and are used for disinfecting and sterilizing and thus are used in swimming pool sanitation to control bacteria, viruses and algae and in any institution where sterile conditions are needed."

--GAFShingles (talk) 18:24, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

The "people" person repeatedly blocked for adding this have all had obvious conflicts of interest. Please discuss the issue on the article's talk page. - SummerPhD (talk) 19:10, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Jerry Lee Lewis

I am not sure how to add a citation for IMDB, but that's the only place that I have seen call Great Balls of Fire Jerry Lee Lewis' signature song. Besides, going by what the article describes as a signature song, Jerry Lee Lewis' signature song is Great Balls of Fire. Every time I have brought up the subject of Lewis, the person I was talking to almost instantly said something like "Oh yeah! He did Great Balls of FIre." That being the case, whats wrong with having it in the article? Its certainly his signature song that everyone knows him best for. STCooper1(STCooper1 (talk) 05:35, 6 May 2013 (UTC))

As IMDb is largely user created, it is not a reliable source.

That you feel "Great Balls of Fire" fits the description of a signature song is original research.

If everyone thinks it is his signature song, it shouldn't be too difficult to find a reliable source (or several) saying that. - SummerPhD (talk) 12:02, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Even if all the people I talked to about were older people that had seen and known him for practically their whole lives? Thats what they all were and they all knew him solely by that song, even though he wasn't a one-hit wonder. Going by the article on here, his case would be Great Balls of Fire because it is his most famous. Thats not my own research thats me comparing this wiki's own say about signature songs to that of Jerry Lee Lewis and it comes out compatible. Just read the article. STCooper1(STCooper1 (talk) 17:48, 6 May 2013 (UTC))

You comparing what reliable sources say about "signature songs" (as presented in the article) to what you have heard from other people and determining that the song is his signature song is a textbook example of original research. While it may not be what you call "original research", it is what Misplaced Pages calls "original research". - SummerPhD (talk) 18:17, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Fine, whatever. STCooper1(STCooper1 (talk) 20:37, 6 May 2013 (UTC))

Discussion of inclusion of Kyoto Prize in criterion 2

Please participate in the discussion. Misplaced Pages talk:Notability (academics)‎#Inclusion of Pulitzer Prize for History. Solomon7968 (talk) 11:14, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Alexander's Choice

Hello SummerPhD, Thanks for your message suggesting I have a conflict of interest in writing about "Alexander's Choice", though I cannot help finding the implication unfair. Please tell me frankly how I'm supposed to answer this? I've read this novel, having been alerted to it by an article in a major newspaper (The Daily Mail), I admittedly think it has something important to say and was therefore inspired to write the article. Today I noticed that all the work I put into writing it was under threat because it was termed an "orphan", so I linked it in three rather obvious ways. Why is this a conflict of interest? The links could not seem more obviously justified to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Periandros (talk • contribs) 21:10, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

It is, of course, entirely possible that you do not have a conflict of interest. If that is the case, take it as a "heads up" that your writing has been -- in one editor's opinion anyway -- somewhat POV. (That, coupled with your (thus far) singular focus and user name was enough to warrant concern.) - SummerPhD (talk) 01:36, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Having only just started participating in Misplaced Pages, I'm not sure how one avoids coming across as singular, but it is a very useful warning as to how may be misconstrued, for which I'm grateful. You have me lost over my user name though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Periandros (talk • contribs) 04:38, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

You can safely ignore my interpretation of your user name.

In any case, I'd suggest paying a bit of attention to the talk page of the article you've created. I haven't had much luck in finding reliable sources discussing the book. Any you have to add would be helpful. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:52, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

re

what are you doing a didan't edit anything — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lsmith670 (talk • contribs) 09:40, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you are referring to. I have not edited any of the few article's you've edited. I think you might have meant to contact someone else. - SummerPhD (talk) 12:25, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

User talk:108.249.22.222

Hi, you may want to evaluate that last warning again and change it to a level 4/final. The IP editor blanks their user page after each warning, so Twinkle doesn't escalate the warnings correctly and they keep it at level 1... Keri (talk) 13:33, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Talk Page has Same Policies as Actual Wiki Pages?

You claimed I made an edit to a biography of a living person in May of 2013 for the Westboro Baptist Church without a citation. In fact, I was simply taking part in a discussion on the 'Talk Page" for that Wiki article, and I did cite my source (a Fox News interview with Sean Hannity that anyone can find on YouTube). I realize my citation was not in the typical format that would be required on an actual Wiki article, but this was on a talk page. Does Wiki actually now impose the same exact standards on their talk pages that they impose on their actual pages and, if so, would you be able to cite a reliable source (besides you) for me about this policy that applies to talk pages? :S — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjpr2121 (talk • contribs) 04:12, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I did not, and do not, feel that "The interview with Sean Hannity (can easily find it on YouTube)" is sufficient for a controversial statement about a living person. (Even if you had directly linked to it, youtube is seldom useful for our purposes. See Misplaced Pages:Youtube#Linking_to_user-submitted_video_sites.) Our policy on biographies of living persons does indeed apply to article talk pages: "The BLP policy also applies to user and user talk pages." Misplaced Pages:Blp#Non-article_space - SummerPhD (talk) 04:21, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Oswald Vitor

What you should do when I edit on Misplaced Pages? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oswald Vitor (talk • contribs) 10:58, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I am not sure what you are asking. If you are asking about your edit to List of tomboys in fiction, you needed to include a reliable source for the information you added. - SummerPhD (talk) 13:26, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

My change to an article.

Just read your comment on my change to an article.

http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Bobklahn

I don't follow this very well, in fact, pretty much not at all. So I don't even recall what the change was I made. Is it still available for review somewhere? I have only edited a few articles, and only when I have a specific interest in the topic. So I am not that familiar with the process.

Bob — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobklahn (talk • contribs) 14:18, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

From any page, clicking "History" will show you a list of all of the edits to that page. By clicking "dif" next to an individual edit, you can see what was changed in that edit. Also on the history page are links to each editor's talk page and list of edits ("contribs"). The edit you are looking for can be found this way or by clicking the "contributions" link at the top of every page (when you are logged on).

The edit you are asking about added an unsourced opinion about a source being discussed. Misplaced Pages strives for a neutral point of view in articles. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 14:31, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Titanium drinking straw

"Unlikely"? Is that some sort of challenge? 8-) I've already got sporks and pocket crowbars in Ti. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:34, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Titanium is notoriously expensive to work with. Possible? Sure, but I'd want a source. - SummerPhD (talk) 00:20, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I sometimes hand-forge Ti (http://codesmiths.com/shed/things/shiny/cloak_pins.jpg). There was a spork-making workshop in our local Hackspace recently (thin cold sheet works quite easily). A straw would need my little TIG welder to seam it up, probably from spiralled strip, but it would be an interesting challenge. 8-) Andy Dingley (talk) 07:56, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I knew a woman who made customized gear shift knobs -- a completely unique pursuit, AFAIK. To match the car's hardware with the new knob took an extraordinary amount of work, resulting in rather high prices. The problem was that people seem to base prices they are willing to pay on how much they want something, rather than how difficult it is to make. I'm thinking your nascent Ti-staw business may face troubles from this seeming truism. Good luck. I suspect you'll need it. - SummerPhD (talk) 17:47, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Removed content

In response to your comment, I believe I removed a disparaging comment referring to Greeks as being familiar with anal sex. I listed it as removing an nonconstructive edit. I can't remember another edit I made without listing an edit summary, but if I did, thanks for catching it. I hope you didn't put back the Greek comment. I found it offensive as I'm sure others would have. "Selene Scott (talk) 10:30, 28 May 2013 (UTC)"

I restored the content you removed from Sexuality of Jesus as you did not give a valid reason for removal of reliably sourced content ("omitted nonconstructive edit"). If you disagree, please take it to the article's talk page. - SummerPhD (talk) 13:04, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Vit B12

well, delete results published in Nature! well done mate ;))) what is contrary to mainstream science!!! yes Galileo was burnt indeed! thanks for wasting my time — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmvernay (talk • contribs) 20:23, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

You are citing individual studies which are contrary to the widely held conclusions that A) there are no reliable natural dietary sources of B12 other than from animal sources and B) B12 produced in the gut is not reliably absorbed. Both of these conclusions are sourced to reliable secondary sources.

"Individual primary sources should not be cited or juxtaposed so as to "debunk" or contradict the conclusions of reliable secondary sources." WP:MEDRS

I'll revert this again in a day or so. If you disagree, take it to the article's talk page. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:56, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Looks like someone else beat me to it. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:43, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Thank you for contributions to Misplaced Pages! Logical Cowboy (talk) 03:46, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/Non-stick_surface

Hi SummerPHD,

I am the guy who edited the 'Non-stick surface' on the 29th of May with a reference to the HomeWorld survey.

I am a complete newcomer to this and I'm sure I messed up! I tried to give a source for HomeWorld report by mentioning another website which reported it - as unfortunately the HomeWorld survey is behind a pay-wall. The article concerned was published on February the 4th 2013 and was 'HomeWorld Business Cookware and bakeware report 2013'. The article's title was 'Can Ceramic Coating Momentum chip away at PTFE Dominance?' by Diane Falvey.

A PDF copy of the article is available here: http://www.gmmdl.com/media/ceramics-0213.pdf

I would really appreciate your advice on how to go about reposting my original amendment to the article. I'm using this piece as a first step into the big wide world of article writing for wiki and desperately need guidance!

Yours, FGCD321 — Preceding unsigned comment added by FGCD321 (talk • contribs) 04:39, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

The original edits ( & ) were unsourced. The link above is to a cookware manufacturer hosting the original report. The cookware manufacturer is not a reliable source (other than for trivial, non-contested facts about that company in an article about the company). The company that conducted the survey reporting on their own survey is not an independent source.

Think of it this way: Joe Blow conducts a survey about widgets. Joe Blow reports on his survey. So what? A widget manufacturer reports on the survey (perhaps they like something the survey said). Joe Blow's survey is still in the realm of "So what?" because the widget manufacturer has an interest in reporting some findings and not others. If, however, an independent reliable source (say, the New York Times) reports on the survey, we would have something. Unlike Joe Blow, the Times has no particular reason to inflate Joe Blow's image: they would be reporting on the survey as being meaningful and relevant to the general public. Further, they aren't reporting the results as a result of them being pro-widget. Clear as mud?

Basically, IMO, we need a reliable source that is not connected to the survey or the subject of the survey. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:44, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Summer, clear now. FGCD321 (talk) 05:11, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

spoon straw

I saw your note and would like to know if patent information and/or a link to MoMA's collection (of which the spoon straw is a part) is sufficient. I would consider both reliable. As far as what is written in Widipedia, I don't understand where the person who wrote the blurb got his/her information. There is no source cited. Thanks.Sedaykan (talk) 05:42, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

A verifiable cite to MoMA should be sufficient for general information about spoon straws. It cannot, however, be used to cite that there is a straw spoon in the MoMA collection as it would be a primary source for that fact.

If there is info in the article you would like a source for, add a cite needed tag, {{fact}}, immediately after the info. If you doubt the info, you can remove it instead. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 11:55, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

So to be clear, I can remove the information that I believe to be incorrect (and which has no valid source). I am still a little confused on the MoMA citation. Can or can't it be used to prove that Arthur Aykanian invented the spoon straw. Like I said, there is the patent and the inclusion in the MoMA collection. Will that work? Thank you for your patience and advice. Sedaykan (talk) 06:25, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Briefly: If a source is being used to say something about itself, it is a primary source. Misplaced Pages does not use primary sources, in most cases.

The patent is a primary source for anything it says about the straw spoon or its inventor (who likely filed the application). As such, we generally don't use it for anything. The MoMA source, so long as it is used for information that has nothing to do with it being in their collection, would be a secondary source and, IMO, reliable enough to state whatever it says. Using the MoMA source to say the spoon straw is in MoMA's collection, though, would make it a primary source and not useful. (If the New Yorker mentioned the straw spoon was in MoMA's collection, that would be a secondary source.) - SummerPhD (talk) 12:09, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

AAFM - FYI

As noted here, the following has been posted online and a rough facsimile was emailed to the functionaries email list earlier this week, and then forwarded to the Foundation legal department.  Frank  |  talk  04:03, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi

I can prove it easy but I dont know how to use this site, you can read about my father on facebook under my name Steve Alaimo — Preceding unsigned comment added by STEVE ALAIMO (talk • contribs) 14:58, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Facebook is not helpful here. We need reliable sources for this claim. Please see a discussion I have started at Talk:List_of_Italian-American_mobsters#Inclusion_criteria. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:09, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Vegan Reich

I have removed the DB tag on Vegan Reich. I believe the article makes a credible assertion of notability for this band as one of the defining bands of a particular sub-genre of music. I don't know if the genre itself is notable enough that the band becomes notable for defining it, but I think that's a matter for AFD. WikiDan61_ReadMe!! 13:07, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

2013 Philadelphia Wiki-Picnic: Saturday, June 22

	Philadelphia's Great American Wiknic at Penn Park
	You are invited to the Philadelphia edition of the Great American Wiknic taking place in Penn Park, on Saturday, June 22, 2013! We would love to see you there!---DThomsen8 (talk) 00:32, 7 June 2013 (UTC))|}}

Gelatomyway.com

Hello,

apparently You removed a link that I added to the "Gelato" wikipedia page. My link is about a non profit site that talks about true italian gelato homemade recipes. There is nothing more appropriate than explaining how to make a gelato in a "gelato" wikipedia page.

Can You please restore the link?.

Thank You Best Regards Gelatomyway.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gelatomyway (talk • contribs) 14:53, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Your personal website fails WP:ELNO #11. Additionally, you have a clear conflict of interest. You are not here to build an encyclopedia. You are here to promote your website. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:06, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Happy Wiki-Birthday!!

Hey, SummerPhD. Just stopping by to wish you a Happy Wiki-Birthday from the Misplaced Pages Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Pratyya 13:01, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Legal threats

Please don't shoot me; I'm the messenger. In case you've not seen it already at Talk:American Academy of Financial Management, I'm here to let you know about this page; it seems a thoroughly frivolous complaint, but it still might be worth your attention, since you are named in the complaint. Nyttend (talk) 00:35, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, but I've already seen it. The poorly written threat seems to be coming from a "law firm" run by the founder of the "AAFM". His grammar is less than impressive. I have been "removed from article under legal policies" (by whom? whose policies?). If I edit the article now I will be "committing a conflict of interest" (as it is, I'm committing a dislike of absurd threats). In any case, here I am: publicly participating, despite laughable efforts against same. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:50, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For your post - and efforts - on American Academy of Financial Management GRuban (talk) 09:12, 16 June 2013 (UTC).

Template:Z147

Hello, SummerPhD

Thank you for yor message. Please understand that: The photo I removed was taken without my permission, and I never signed a release for it's public use. My understanding is that this is potentially libellous, and that I'm protected from abuse of my image. I have much to much respect for Misplaced Pages to think that you'd allow somone to take advantage of a public person on one of your pages. Thanks for your help! Cindy Morgan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cindymorganinfo (talk • contribs) 02:56, 18 June 2013 (UTC) Cindymorganinfo (talk) 03:09, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Bernie Sanders

Hi, the PG article from 1990 says that Sanders is the first socialist in six decades. Now it has been two more decades, so it's been eight decades. 76.120.184.122 (talk) 20:38, 19 June 2013 (UTC)76.120.184.122

Yes, the prior socialist was elected eight decades ago. That, however, is NOT what the article is saying. It was six decades BETWEEN the last socialist's election and Sanders' election in 1990. - SummerPhD (talk) 21:50, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Lucy Liu

Hi Summer (a pitty that a lot of people don't use their real name when adding info on Misplaced Pages)

I added the information about the discovery of Lucy liu by an agent but wasn't logged in at that moment. Thank you for contacting me about this.

Did you have a look at the interview? The source is namely actually quite good: A television interview where Mrs. Liu presents the information herself.

This is the original source (not Youtube as in the reference): http://www.wendyshow.com/2013/06/18/lucy-liu-elementary/ The section about the "discovery at the age of 19" starts at 3:11. Enjoy viewing. It's a nice interview. Can you make a better reference to this interview?

This is new information is interesting because this means her career starts a year earlier. Now the big job is to find out what this commercial was about.

Regards,

Jacco — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacco Huisman (talk • contribs) 17:09, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Slowing down a bit, I now see that it is the show's official youtube page, not a copyright violation. I kinda jumped the gun: IP editor + no edit summary + youtube = copyright violation. I've reverted myself. - SummerPhD (talk) 20:09, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Ship of Theseus

Hi! I'm wondering whether a Ship of Theseus deletion you made might be able to be re-incorporated into the page. Recently I was looking for the story of how the Japanese considered a temple that had been burned and replaced to be the same temple, an excellent illustration of cultural norms related to identity. I was sure it was on the Ship of Theseus page but when I looked it was no longer to be found. I tracked the disappearance of the passage to your edit last month, with a note of "unsourced examples; see talk". I was confused by that since the item was sourced from a Douglas Adams book, with credit. Over on the Talk page I see Talk:Ship_of_Theseus#Do_we_really_need_all_these_examples.3F I don't know whether that was the relevant talk item, but didn't see another entry that seemed more related to the edit.

I agree that the page was becoming overwhelmed with examples that didn't really add anything and needed trimming, but still think the Adams story did contribute something positive. Perhaps it was a bit too long and could have been summarized instead, though I personally like it in the form in which it originally appeared.

Do you think the original section could be restored? Or should be restored but abridged? Or added to the Kinkaku-ji page, the one for the temple in question, and incorporated by reference?

Thanks for thinking about it. Vttale (talk) 16:34, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

The talk page item in question is Talk:Ship_of_Theseus#Example_farm. I yanked the various "examples" not due to length or detail, but because the sources (for those that were sourced) did not refer to the Ship of Theseus, the topic of this article. As a result, all of them were/are original research. If you can find reliable sources discussing the temple's history as it relates to the Ship of Theseus, feel free to add it back in. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 00:14, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Do you think it has a place in the Identity and change page, perhaps in an "In Culture" section? Vttale (talk) 15:40, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Wow, that article is a mess with one source (a bare, dead link at that), it is basically an original research essay. If you have sourced material that you feel is verifiably discussing "identity and change", have at it. At some point, someone (maybe you?) is going to need to source and/or rewrite that entire article. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:37, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Smash Mouth

I think you may have misunderstood my intention. I removed the content because I was moving it into a separate discography article (Smash Mouth discography). It wasn't just a random, pointless vandalism blanking - I even provided a link to the discography on the Smash Mouth page. Therefore, the restoration of the content means that it is only being forked around numerous pages. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 06:41, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. - SummerPhD (talk) 14:04, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

David Gregory article

Hi SummerPhD, I noticed your revert of my recent edit of the David Gregory article. I don't feel your revert was justified, but I may be wrong. I have taken the issue to the article's talk page here. --JHP (talk) 20:10, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Binders full of women

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Binders full of women (3rd nomination) Trackinfo (talk) 07:41, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Adding new information to an article or finding a reference?

I apologize if I am doing this incorrectly. I feel like I am trying to learn to ride a bike for the first time.

I was surprised when I saw a commercial for CBS show "Under the Dome" and learned that it was not based on the story "The Lanson Screen" published in 1936. I wanted to provide a link to "The Lanson Screen" that would allow readers to view the short-story/novella and make draw their own conclusions.

Your note indicates that my text was deleted because is was original research. My intent was to provide access to what appears to be relevant information, any editorial content I added was entirely unintentional. You recommend a reliable source for citation and this was my intent when providing the link to the document text. Again, my intent was not to promote a view or option but to provide access to information so the reader could form their own opinion. There was some discussion about the origins of the story (unpublished work by King vs story-line from The Simpsons). I would like to provide information about the 1936 story as another similar work published prior to "Under the Dome". How do you recommend finding a citation for a story that was published over 75 years ago? Is there no way to add relevant information that does not have a modern scholarly review published?

Sdtrent (talk) 18:13, 1 July 2013 (UTC) Shane

Thanks for your note. Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia. We report what existing sources have to say about a subject. We do not publish new ideas. In order for us to say something in Under the Dome about "The Lanson Screen", we would need a reliable source noting a connection. My own quick Google finds numerous blogs, comment sections and forums mentioning the two, but nothing else. The only connections I can find sources for are the earlier King story and The Simpsons Movie (both discussed in the article). If you can find a reliable source discussing this, it would be interesting to add. That said, it is entirely possible that the connection is coincidental as the idea of a domed city is fairly common in fiction. - SummerPhD (talk) 18:35, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank for your help. You should give the story a look, 26 pages if I recall. The similarity is uncanny, a shield appears suddenly, the town is cut-off from the outside world, people cope with the realization that society no longer exits... But just because it is unlikely to be a coincidence does not mean that is is not a coincidence. I will pursue alternate paths to promoting a discussion and link that back in when something is published. Sdtrent (talk) 18:41, 1 July 2013 (UTC) Shane

Ancient astronauts

See Talk:Ancient astronauts#Nation of Islam - you may wish to respond. AndyTheGrump (talk)

Raw Vegan

Educate me: as far as citing a source to verify concerns about carcinogens in cooked food, what type of source might be considered more of a "reliable, published source" other than a study by the California Environmental Protection Agency? Any alternative suggestions would be appreciated. This is in reference to the deletion of my edits to Raw Vegan.— Preceding unsigned comment added by StacyOnEarth (talk • contribs) 12:24, July 6, 2013 (UTC)

The specific concern here is not that the CA EPA is unreliable. The problem is the source does not discuss the subject of the article: raw veganism. The source is off-topic and anything supported by it in this article would be original research. - SummerPhD (talk) 17:03, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps You Know Who Is Coming Back

Does this rant remind you of THC Loadee and its abuse of sockpuppets?--Mr Fink (talk) 03:25, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Looks like a match to me. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:36, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

So how do we reopen an investigation?--Mr Fink (talk) 03:48, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

MacGuffin

Hello, Nylar4000 responding about your comment on my talk page in regards to reverting my MacGuffin page edit. The image I added under examples was itself a verifiable reference. I believe I even cited the episode number and the scene. (Edit: Oops! No, I just looked, I had forgotten to cite the episode and scene. But anyway...) The problem about linking to the actual full episode is that would be copyright infringement according to wikipedia's policies, though it is available to watch on youtube if one were to search for "Morton & Hayes - Daffy Dicks". It's episode #1 written by Phil Mishkin http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0592771/ and featuring Kevin Pollak, Bob Amaral, Christopher Guest and Catherine O'Hara. Anyway I am a little unclear on how this is not verifiable or a reference? Thanks.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nylar4000 (talk • contribs) 17:59, July 8, 2013 (UTC)

Basically, I'm looking at this as an issue of trivia, but there are other issues butting into this. First: The photo is from a copyrighted show. Generally, Misplaced Pages's interpretation allows limited use of such material for "identification and critical commentary on the station ID or program and its contents". We don't have sourced critical commentary of the show discussing the "MacGuffin" aspect. Identification of the show would be better served by the show's title card. (Pick a TV show: I Love Lucy, CHiPs, You Bet Your Life, Curb Your Enthusiasm, whatever, and you'll see that's generally what we use.)

The trivia issue is a bit harder to pin down, but Misplaced Pages:"In popular culture" content comes pretty close. As we do not have reliable sources discussing this show relative to "MacGuffin"s, including it becomes part of a "indiscriminate collection" of such references (dozens of which have been added and axed over the years). Including the photo merely shows that yes, the show had something with a name similar to the subject of the article, rather than "(d)etailing a topic's impact upon popular culture". My standby example for this type of issue is Gerald Ford. We could easily include an extensive list of TV shows, movies, books, plays, etc. that mention him. That would be an indiscriminate collection (how did we select which ones to include? we added the ones that whichever editors happening by could think of...). The Gerald Ford article would not gain from the inclusion of such a list. The article, however, would be incomplete if we did not include the effect of Chevy Chase's Ford skits on Saturday Night Live.

Long story short: Your addition does not include a reliable source that connects your addition to the topic of the article. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 22:23, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Teahouse Invitation

Hello! SummerPhD, you are invited to join other new editors and friendly hosts in the Teahouse. The Teahouse is an awesome place to meet people, ask questions and learn more about Misplaced Pages. Please join us!

Tariqmudallal (talk) 01:05, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Apology - July 2013

Hello SummerPhD. I would like to say that I'm sorry. My actions in my 2 edits to your talk page were very rude and I have become quite overconfident. Anyway, I would like to know if you accept my apology. I don't mean to hurt your feelings or anything. Batman194 (talk) 19:57, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Reply

Well, we ironed this problem out a week ago, and we haven't had any contact since, so in my mind we've settled our problem. I said we were too old to be bickering over redirects, so we laid down our sticks and moved on. Rusted AutoParts 00:52, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes RAP is right, I'm sorry to RAP for my mistake but we are even now. -- Assassin! No, Captain Assassin! 03:33, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Spelling reform

Since the topic of spelling reform iz off topic in Talk:Cruciferous vegetables, perhaps you would prefer to keep my rules about it here (or on my facebook wall, or via e-mail, since Talk:English-language_spelling_reform duz not welkum fohrum kontribyuushunz.75.152.127.191 (talk) 03:25, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Article talk pages are for discussing improvements to articles. Occasionally, we have editors attempting to communicate in a language other than English. Our standard warning in that case reads: "I noticed that you have posted comments in a language other than English. When on the English-language Misplaced Pages, please always use English, no matter to whom you address your comments. This is so that comments may be comprehensible to the community at large. If the use of another language is unavoidable, please provide a translation of the comments. For more details, see Misplaced Pages:Talk page guidelines. Thank you." Whatever your reasons for using idiosyncratic spellings, you are reducing the readability of your comments. Sometimes, they are close to incomprehensible without considerable effort. To be understood and taken seriously, you must be understandable. Dthoz hoo waish too komyuunikaat dthaar thowts rr wall adviiyezd too couz uh methud uhproopreeaat too dthaar intended awdeenns nnd hav noo riit too deemaynd dthat dthu intended reesipeennts xxpend signifikent ffert in deekriptng dthaar ideeoosinkratik myuuzngs. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:54, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana.
Aww, excluding other languages from English talk pages is kinda sad, really. I am surprized you do not know about google translations. There's also and , both of which are older. I often go through talk pages and offer comments on old discussions. It may be just a matter of time before a multi-lingual (or machine-aware) person happens on some Spanish in an English talk page. It might just be someone who has learned to read English without learning how to write it, and so she wants clarification for her contributions to a Spanish page.

Moer's truism:
The trouble with most jobs is the job holder's resemblence to being one of a sled dog team. No one gets a change of scenery except the lead dog.
You are doing quite well in the consistency department, except where the double-oh is concerned. Consider "wood, hood, took, shook, book". Those contain schwas. A double-ay is good for a simple rule concerning vowels. However, I prefer "ay", because it's in frequent Ingglish (I know a shopkeeper who used dhat exact same spelling) use. What we are talking about is not really another language: It's a transcription. A very similar scheme to mine is called on wikipedia for the transcriptions that go into the introduction of some articles. "Dhohz huu wish tuu kumyuunikayt dhayr thots awr wel adviizd tuu chuuz a methud uhprohpreeit tuu dhayr intended awdeeyens and hav noh riit tuu deemand dhat dhee intended reesipeeyents ekspend signifikint efert in deekripting dhayer ideeohsinkratik myuuzngs." (It is common for teh to be slurred into a dee in North America, so common that you might be mistaken for a foreigner if you whisper a tee.) "See, Jee, Kyuu, and Eks" are redundant names for letters. I notice that IPA uses /x/ for the sound in a Scottish "Loch", or a Jerman "Buch", while respell uses "kh". I prefer IPA on that count. 75.152.117.14 (talk) 13:15, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Original Gangstas may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• /ref> The film holds a 50% rating on Rotten Tomatoes based on 14 reviews.<ref>rottentomatoes.com, "[http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/original_gangstas/ Original Gangstas". Accessed July 21, 2013.</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:13, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Auto-Tune

Oh Hi I did remove them cause they either have incorrect terms used or it is completely wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.203.121.232 (talk) 08:42, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Australian English

Hi SummerPhD, I've reverted you reversion of a spelling change to Waterfall Gully, South Australia, as the article is written in Australian English. Please note that "metre" is the correct spelling in Australia. Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 03:31, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Looks like I slipped on that one. Thanks for the revert and the note. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:36, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Coconut oil

Hi Summer, just FYI that IP at Coconut oil is a sock of indef-blocked THC Loadee, feel free to revert at will or report to RFPP if he won't go away. Zad68 04:39, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

I didn't see enough for a sock report (so I gave him a bit more rope). If you think there's enough, please file. Thanks! - SummerPhD (talk) 04:43, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Yikes! Not sure what I was looking at before, that thar is a duck. Filed. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:47, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

90.185.23.219

I suspect this IP editor is either user "Schlafly", aka Roger Schlafly (Phyllis Schlafly's son) or else another sockpuppet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.162.87.53 (talk) 13:08, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

I suspect you have an ax to grind and want me to help. Feel free to open a sock case yourself. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:15, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

IP template for TJLS

Frankly, I think we've got the attention of the TJLS staff & faculty. And they will play by the rules, I'm sure. Is the IP template necessary or helpful? I think not. They are not using the IP address to vandalize the article. I'd remove it. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 01:42, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Watercooler Gossip

One is moved to wonder why THC Loadee has to go to such lengths of lying, sockpuppetry, harassment and making enormously impotent threats to get his point, whatever it was, across. I mean, is he aware of how silly he sounds when he brags about how the only alleged way to stop him is to destroy Misplaced Pages? He doesn't seem to be aware that his edits can be easily reverted.--Mr Fink (talk) 13:54, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

In a few years, when he's old enough to drive, he'll buy a sports car to prove how big manly he is. Until then, his amazing feats of sockpuppetry will have to serve as proof. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:30, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Re: Veganism

Numerous top level athletes follow it, until you examine the claims and find that the individual athlete tried it for part of a season, until he decided he needed to add in a little chicken, fish and eggs to his diet.

I'm not sure where you are getting this from, but it's wrong. Brendan Brazier and Murray Rose didn't add those things to their diet. Viriditas (talk) 20:18, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm referring to several athletes repeatedly added to and removed from various vegetarian, vegan and fruitarian articles with either no sources at all or sources that show the person briefly toyed with one of these fads before discovering it simply didn't work for them. It took months to remove the crap from fruitarianism and there are still repeated flair-ups there (various crap claims that you don't need B12 or you can get it from bug shit on your food or that various people were fruitarians or we shouldn't include a white supremacist who was, etc.) all from true believers who believe what they want. The various vegan and vegetarian articles are crying out for similar work, but there are far more true believers defending them. - SummerPhD (talk) 20:27, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't know about any of that. There appears to be too much overlap between veganism and vegan nutrition. Viriditas (talk) 20:58, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Assassin! No, Captain Assassin! 14:57, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Replied. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:46, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey buddy, relax!

My memo on the update clearly stated that I was merely saving my work as to not get lost. The editing format for the Robin Williams page was unfamiliar to me, so I needed to a few minutes to figure out how to clean up my format and to add sources. I understand why you removed the changes, and perhaps I should've utilized a different way to save my work rather than posting unsourced material. I honestly didn't believe 5-10 minutes left much likelihood that anyone would view Robin William's wiki page, unless there are editors or williams fans constantly monitoring his page for any changes. However, I am going to revert your changes with sources. If you believe these items are defamatory, then we can bring a-whole-nother discussion to the mix on the talk page.--Jmurdock21 (talk) 18:01, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

I reverted your edit because it provided contentious material about a living person. We take biographies of living persons very seriously: "Contentious material about living persons (or in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced – whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable – should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." - SummerPhD (talk) 20:48, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Your edits have changed the entire context of my original entry. Your edits have put information on this wiki page this is 100% false. Your edit that "simplified" the paragraph actually changed the wording entirely. Your edit stated that the listed comedians had previously stated that Williams had used their stand up material. Among those comedians in that list were Marc Maron and Carlos Mencia. Why did you make that statement? You did not list any sources to verify that and to my knowledge, those statements have never been made. My original statement said there were several comedians that claim to have witnessed Williams using other peoples' material or have spoken of these claims at length.

Also, we need to determine what is a verifiable source. I'm not sure what standard could or should be used because any claim against Williams is hearsay. If you read further down in the discussion list, this topic had already been addressed and the editor said any mention of joke thieving would not be addressed because there were no specific incidents listed. That is why I listed the David Letterman appearance. There are dozens of pages on the internet that reference that incident, which is fairly infamous in the world of stand up comedy. There is no denying that that actually happened. But what do we need to be able to list that? We can have 1000 people reference the incident and we treat the incident as rumor but 1 person who works for the Boston Globe writes about it and now it is considered fact? The Letterman appearance is also similar to a topic on Carlos Mencia's wiki page concerning a joke he did that was very similar to Bill Cosby's. Therefore, I believe it's correct to follow precedent that has been accepted and established, otherwise there is no consistency and rules are applied arbitrarily, as they appear to be for Williams concerning this subject.

I don't know how familar you are with stand up comedy. But Robin Williams has had the reputation as a joke thief for over 30 years. The three most notorious people for this are Robin Williams, Dennis Leary, and Carlos Mencia (both Mencia and Leary have sections on their page addressing the issue.) I'm not anti-Robin Williams by any means, but the allegations of plagiarism are well known enough that they definitely need to be addressed somewhere on his page. You have determined that accounts and quotes from RW's peers will not suffice as legitimate sources. I would argue they are much more reputable than the "reputable sources" I believe you are wanting to see.

I realize wiki editors take personal bios, very seriously. But at no point did I ever say Williams was guilty of anything. I merely stated that there were allegations of wrong doing and gave an example of such an incident and quotes from the people who were directly involved in these incidents. I also must revert back to your revision where you incorrectly stated Carlos Mencia and Marc Maron accused Williams of using their material without listing a reference to that claim. The section titled "Criticism" is already far removed from what I entered and needs to be deleted completely due to false claims and lack of sources. I would have no problem consulting with you on the section. But I would ask for your input to be more precise about what's acceptable source material and I would ask you to adhere to a "common law" system and allow for the section to follow precedent of other similar wiki pages, or state why the accepted precedent should not be followed. --Jmurdock21 (talk) 06:07, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

What you see in Misplaced Pages article is not precedence. It is something in another article which might or might not be correct.

Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about a living person should be removed on sight. We need independent reliable sources of high quality for all such claims.

I removed several blogs quoting material that might be useful. Blogs are very rarely useful sources. All too often, blogs turn out to be quoting another unreliable source or misquoting a reliable one. For this reason, that there are "dozens of pages" on the 'net saying something is not a useful argument.

If you have specific concerns about what the article does and does not say, please address those concerns on the article's talk page. - SummerPhD (talk) 12:44, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Also, regarding the "simplified" matter, Jmurdock21 must be talking about this edit made by GoingBatty. Flyer22 (talk) 00:24, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

@Jmurdock21: - If you're referring to this edit made by me, could you please explain how it "actually changed the wording entirely"? I see that I changed "Among these comedians are" to "including", and the second instance of "David Brenner" to simply "Brenner". Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 21:26, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Martyr

copy of text to the other editor

I have left a message on the martyr page regarding neutrality. HOw do you add secularism into God, and God into atheism? Same goes for martyr, martyr is a religious word, it is not a secular one......... you can not just delete my work, edit it......

here's a copy of the text there too :)

I need help Neutrality. How do you add secularism to word God, and to word martyr??? These words can not be secular. Word martyr is in many religious texts as we can see in the contents section, now just because someone decided to name some people martyr's in some event that happened in time who didn't even die or that did die doesn't make them martyrs, even though we call them. Now this word is used by secular people the word God is used by secular people when they say that God is someone else other than God. This is the same problem with this word. I need help with these trigger happy undo button pushers suggested by automated program that counts bytes??? The word martyr means witness yes, but we do not mean a witness in court here :) , we mean a witness in religious terms here, so there is no room for secularism on this page just as there is no room for athiests on religious pages, and religious people on atheists belief's pages :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DeputyBob (talk • contribs) 15:36, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

I am replying on the article's talk page. If you are blocked for edit warring before you can reply, feel free to discuss the issue after your block expires. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:52, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Persistent adding of unsourced material by IP user 97.86.5.61

Hi. I'd like to draw to your attention please, that after you gave the IP user a final warning on 27 July 2013, he/she has continued to add a lot of unsourced material to numerous articles.

Thank you.

Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 00:06, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

I have now reported this troublesome IP user to Admin. The user has been given a 3 month block - Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 00:37, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

A kind request

I saw your comments on Captain Assassin!'s talk page. I also saw that the messages were template messages given using twinkle. I know you mean well but doing it over and over again, kinda gets repetitive and annoying to the editor, its usually rude to give an experienced editor a template warning such as the six or more that you gave to him, I would like to see it being discussed rather than a pre-made template that doesn't help. Thanks in advance. -- Prabash.Akmeemana 03:36, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Spam Links

The style of your user name is really cool. How did you get it like that? You have a lovely name. I removed those spam references about Mara Wilson being an Atheist and her Nickel allergy. And SummerPhD that blog link that you added about Mara's religious views counts as spam. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.249.20.17 (talk) 02:57, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/108.249.22.222 - SummerPhD (talk) 03:06, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

User 121.54.58.136 Vandalism on Meet the Spartans

User 121.54.58.136 seems to do nothing but vandalize articles. I don't see why this person isn't blocked.TL36 (talk) 14:45, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

With large time gaps in editing, no discernible pattern as to what they are editing and the fact that it's a cellular IP, I don't know that we have much to go on in terms of claiming it's one person. There are some apparently legitimate edits in the mix as well. Also, it's clearly dynamic: note the changing IP at . Yeah, we need to warn them and, if it continues block them, but I don't see enough yet. - SummerPhD (talk) 16:45, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

ANI regarding Captain Assassin!

Hello. You might be interested in the ANI discussion for Captain Assassin!, which can be found here: WP:ANI#Inappropriate page moves by User:Captain Assassin.21 Thanks, Logical Fuzz (talk) 01:29, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Lightvd

Please leave this to me. :) --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 23:25, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Your edit of Lucy Fry article.

Thank you for you interest in keeping me straight as I enter the world of the Misplaced Pages. All help is appreciated. I have read both the advertising and the soapbox sections you referenced in your edit, and find no basis for your edit, so I'm a little confused. Buy pointing out that an actor is represented by an agency one only confirms that the person is an actor. My addition was a simple statement, there were no embellishments or additional commentary to that fact. I have no interest in Lucy Fry either personal or business, so conflict of interest isn't an issue.

Happy Jack 56 (talk) 15:57, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

There is no reason to list anyone's agency, unless the relationship is somehow unusual in a noteworthy way. Someone who has roles is an actor. Someone who has an agency is someone who has a contract with an agency. All too often we have persons connected with agencies showing up to add their agencies to various articles. As that was your first edit, it seemed likely to be the case in your situation. If that is not the case, please accept my apologies. - SummerPhD (talk) 17:44, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Hulk Hogan

Though the rest of Warthog5's edits to Hulk Hogan were unhelpful, the source does say his weight is 302lb now. Jackmcbarn (talk) 00:02, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Ship of Theseus / Trigger's Broom

Can you give me some idea of what you would consider a reasonable citation for this nugget of information? It is an example of the paradox that is considered very well known in the UK, and the citation to the corresponding wikipedia entry wasn't considered authoritative by you, so I provided one from the BBC's own website.

Is this a matter of citation? or notability? or is it personal preference?

It's not worth debating hugely, but I thought it was a value add for the page. Ashleyfrieze (talk) 15:08, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Articles like this frequently attract lots of examples and pseudo-examples. As such, they tend to build up indiscriminate lists of examples of no encyclopedic value. As we're discussing the content of the article, please comment on the article's talk page. Thanks! - SummerPhD (talk) 15:40, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Correct Edits

Please stop erasing my legitimate edits. Leave me alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.249.20.17 (talk) 15:44, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

You are editing in defiance of a block. None of your edits are legitimate. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:47, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Correct Edits

Please stop erasing my legitimate edits. Reporting me to Mr. Whales or taking "appropriate action" is a waist of time. Leave me alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.249.20.17 (talk) 15:44, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet_investigations/108.249.22.222 - SummerPhD (talk) 15:53, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

About you bragging on Mandarin (comics)

You have to stop repeating Mandarin on Killian, we already get it and how can you people possibly detect edits like them so fast anyway?71.186.174.177 (talk) 06:18, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but I really don't know what you mean about me "bragging" or "repeating Mandarin on Killian". I reverted your edit because you removed apparently relevant content without explaining why in an edit summary. - SummerPhD (talk) 22:45, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

hELP

Hoping you can help? I just created a new page (one of my firsts!) for a Supremes single entitled "He's My Man". I failed to use correct capitalization when creating it; how can I fix? Thanks for your guidance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marybrewster (talk • contribs) 17:54, 20 August 2013 (UTC) A belated welcome to Wikipeadia. It looks like you've already figured out how to move this on your own. Cheers. - SummerPhD (talk) 20:09, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

reversion in error of my Eton College edit

- re your TW reversion in error of my Eton College edit - this was not an isolated 'opinion piece' but was reported by the Independent and other national news papers as well as discussed on the radio - Certainly a controversy to be asking such questions of anyone as part of an entrance exam let alone such young children- reason I cited this source is that it contains a direct image of the 2011 examination paper

thanks

Tony TonyGosling (talk) 19:41, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

The only source you cited was the opinion piece. The source is evidence that the opinion writer has an opinion about the question. To include this issue in the article, you will need to cite independent reliable sources. (Additionally, some of the author's POV leaked into your edit. Compare the author's "morally defend the murder of civilians" to the questions "after two days of protest...protesters have been killed.... How will you explain why employing the Army against violent protesters...". The question posits explaining employing the Army. You and the author have this as "murder". The question discusses violent protesters. You and the author reduce this to simply "civilians".) - SummerPhD (talk) 20:01, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Again, we do not include material based on one opinion piece. If we included every opinion piece, how long would the article on Tony Blair have to be? - SummerPhD (talk) 14:39, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

It's not an 'opinion' that this was a controversial question to ask. It's a fact. There are around 4000 references to the story online. The way to edit this would be to correct the words you disagree with. such as reverting to civilians. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/matthewholehouse/100218671/eton-boys-are-taught-they-were-born-to-rule-its-a-shame-so-many-are-not/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by TonyGosling (talk • contribs) 20:46, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Have added an extra reference and improved the wording - do be aware that this page must include public criticism of Eton. This true and accurate story went around the world. If you have any genuine problems with this entry do please carefully edit rather than simply delete - I'm fairly new here but understand that is the protocol. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TonyGosling (talk • contribs) 21:05, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

I reverted your original addition because you backed up your claim with a single editorial. Without discussing the issue or addressing that concern, you restored the material (albeit with revised wording). I reverted the addition a second time as there was no change in the issue. Now you are providing two sources: The editorial and a blog. If those are the strongest of the 4000 sources, this will be a problem. I will take further discussion to the article's talk page. - SummerPhD (talk) 23:04, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

File:Édouard-Henri Avril (28).jpg

Hello! I'd like to talk about the changes that took place a few minutes ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JmAmO (talk • contribs) 01:54, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Regardless of the image in question and what an accurate description of it may be, do not change other editors' user pages as you did here. With few exceptions (such as potentially libelous material, copyright violations and such), only the editor in question should edit the page. Please see Misplaced Pages:User pages.

You have stated "The title of "Ancient Greek sodomising a goat" is false, since no ancient or modern Greek were ever wearing turban/sariki on the head. The painter was Algerian This picture is coming from a website which is selling it. So, the title is totally arbitary". I am unaware of anything about the commercial sale of images which would make the title arbitrary. Whatever your opinion/knowledge of ancient Greeks may be, the ultimate source of this image is De Figuris Veneris, a collection of ancient Greek and Roman eroticism. That Avril was Algerian/French is immaterial. As he was commissioned to illustrate an ancient Greek, the description is apt, whether or not the image in entirely accurate. If you disagree with this, you will certainly want to correct our descriptions of Michelangelo's David. We repeatedly describe the work as being of the Biblical David. However, the statue is clearly uncircumcised, while all of Jesse's sons would have been circumcised at 8 days of age. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:16, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

About the article "zoophilia"

The page "zoophilia" has a lot of inaccurate information which need a good revision by people who have real knowledge.

For example, the term "philia" in Greek means only friendship, and not love.

Then, about the picture with the title: "Ancient Greek sodomising a goat". First of all, this picture is an indirect advertisement to a commercial website, which sells those pictures. Then, the title is totally false and it has been put by the sellers (and not by the artist) for various reasons. The real title exists in this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/File:%C3%89douard-Henri_Avril_(28).jpg and it is "Shepherd sodomising a goat".

Moreover, Greeks were never wearing turbans on the head. So, since the painter was Algerian, I don't see how it is related with Greeks. I am Greek and this constitutes a negative propaganda against my culture!

And last but not least, the terms "zoophilia" and "zoophiles" (which are Greek) have totally different meanings in Greek language, which I don't see nowhere in this article.

I'd suggest to change the title of this article to "bestiality", which is the correct title for its content.

I can offer my knowledge to improve this article in a decent way, but I need good collaboration. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JmAmO (talk • contribs) 02:25, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

There is a lot of baggage in your comment here. I haven't time to unpack all of it. For the moment, if you wish to change the title of the article, you will need to build a consensus to that end on the article's talk page. As the overwhelming majority of the sources for the article use the term "zoophilia" and bestiality is described as an aspect of zoophilia, you will likely find this to bean unpopular idea.

Yes, the image does depict an ancient Greek sodomizing a goat. The image is not some kind of hidden advertisement for the site selling copies of the image. It is taken from a book whose copyright has lapsed. ANYONE can freely reproduce the image without paying anything to anyone. If anything, we are subverting attempts to sell the free image.

Various meanings of various words in modern Greek are not discussed in the article as this article is discussing the English use of the term "zoophilia". While "zoo-" and "-philia" are indeed taken from Greek, English usage of the word(s) are likely different. You will note that shampoo discusses the hair care product, rather than the massaging of the scalp that the word originally meant.

If you feel that an image of one individual ancient Greek sodomizing a goat is "a negative propaganda against (your) culture", I would advise you to leave the Internet at this point without looking back. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:56, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

May I see the proof that Avril was really commissioned to illustrate an ancient Greek?

Not to mention that the image is a total garbage from the side of aesthetics! — Preceding unsigned comment added by JmAmO (talk • contribs) 02:39, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

If you are contesting that Avril illustrated the French edition of De figuris Veneris, I haven't the time. This was one of his most notable works. If you doubt that De figuris Veneris was a collection of ancient Greek and Roman eroticism, I haven't the time. It is simply what the book is. If you doubt that the description is taken from that text, I haven't the time. Feel free to ask your local library to get the edition and see for yourself.

"...total garbage from the side of aesthetics". You don't like the photo. I get it. I am quite confident there are loads of images on Misplaced Pages that you won't like. Your personal dislike, though, does not dictate whether or not the image should be here or how we should describe it. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:11, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Again I don't see any proof that the purpose of the artist was to picture a Greek and not an Algerian. Could you please send me a link where I can see that proof? Misplaced Pages is an online encyclopedia, isn't it? How can information be published here without having a valid online source? Moreover, there is indeed a link in this Misplaced Pages page: https://en.wikipedia.org/File:%C3%89douard-Henri_Avril_(28).jpg which redirects people to the commercial website here: http://www.kunstkopie.de/a/avril-edouard-henri/ancient-greek-sodomising.html. This website is in fact the only source of the title: "Ancient Greek sodomising a goat".

Then, I have a question about the title of the article "zoophilia". Since this edition of Misplaced Pages is the English version, why you don't have any article about "bestiality"? Please, I'd like to see it.

As for your personal advices to me for leaving internet, I am sorry but I am on internet almost since the beginning. Thank you, but I'll stay!

Yes, Misplaced Pages is an online encyclopedia. It is an encyclopedia and it is online. Not all of our sources are online. Our policy on this specifically states: "Some reliable sources may not be easily accessible. For example, some online sources may require payment, while some print sources may be available only in university libraries or other offline places. Do not reject sources just because they are hard or costly to access."

Yes, there is a link from the image to the online location of the image. (There is also a link to the image at another location.) Yes, the site is trying to sell prints of the image. Here is another one (guess how it describes the image). That the source of the scan is commercial is immaterial. If you would like to provide a cleaner scan from another source, feel free.

The website (actually, every website I can find agrees on the title:, , , , , etc.) is not the ultimate source for the title. The caption of the image in the text is the source: "STC79198 Ancient Greek sodomising a goat, plate XVII from 'De Figuris Veneris' by F.K. Forberg, pub. 1900 (hand coloured lithograph) by Avril, Edouard-Henri (Paul) (1849-1928); Private Collection; The Stapleton Collection; French, out of copyright". Is it possible that every website, every poster seller, every library, everyone is wrong? Sure, but that is an extraordinary claim. You will need extraordinary evidence. Find the book, scan the page. Then you will have something.

Again, if you would like to change the title of the article or spin-off the bestiality content into a new article, please raise the issue at Talk:Zoophilia.

My advise to leave the Internet is based on your statement that the image was somehow "negative propaganda against (your) culture". Yes, one artist depicted one ancient Greek screwing a goat. If that destroys someone's image of Greeks against Hippocrates, Plato, Socrates, Aristotle, Herodotus, Pericles, Homer, Aesop, etc., etc., well, there's no hope for that person anyway! - SummerPhD (talk) 04:20, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it is possible all webpages to reproduce the same fake source. This is how so much misinformation is reproduced all around internet nowadays. There is no way to convince me that the picture depicts an ancient Greek, since turban or sariki was never part of the Greek culture! Moreover, I cannot see why a disputed title is so important about such a picture in such an article. The picture talks by itself.

By the way, thank you for changing the title of the picture. This is fair for everybody!

Also thank you for the clarification about: "φιλία (philia, meaning "(fraternal) love"). As a suffix, "-philia" indicates an abnormal liking for or tendency towards a given thing. Thus, the term denotes an abnormal human sexual attraction to animals."

In Greek, we have 2 words for "love": 1) αγάπη (agapi), 2) έρως (eros). The first one (agapi) never indicates lust or sexual desire, and it suits well for the Greek root of "zoophilia". For describing bestiality in English by using a Greek word, more suitable are the terms "zooerasty" or "zooerastia".

Finally, I am not interested to start a new article for "bestiality", since that subject is very repulsive for me. I leave that duty to somebody else here.

I am an active member of a few organizations for the protection and welfare of animals, so I'll only report this article to them.

Since the terms "zoophilia" and "zoophiles" are used widely in Greece for indicating organizations and people who protect the welfare of animals, and of course detest bestiality.

My regards. JmAmO (talk) 22:33, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

The Occam's razor answer is not that these disparate sources all incorrectly cite the same source the same way while zero sources get it right. Rather, all available evidence strongly supports the idea that the illustration was intended to represent an ancient Greek sodomizing a goat and that the text captioned the image to reflect that. I did not change the image caption to meet your concerns. Rather, I had restored the "Ancient Greek..." caption everywhere in Misplaced Pages before I saw your discussion on the subject. I have not yet restored the caption at Zoophilia. As of now, I intend to restore that caption unless there is a compelling reason not to. I see the caption has also been bowdlerized on Commons. I'll restore that as well.

Whether or not the image correctly depicts an ancient Greek is immaterial. The image was produced to represent an ancient Greek. Images on our article on David have him with red hair, curly hair and all manner of historically inaccurate clothing. So far as I can see, there is no policy/guideline based reason to change the caption based on your original research.

What Greek word might be better to describe the subject is a moot point. While the English word "zoophilia" was based on Greek words, it now has a meaning of its own. In English, "zoophilia" is a paraphilia involving sexual activity between human and non-human animals or a fixation on such practice. - SummerPhD (talk) 23:25, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

The point is that in the article about filthy bestiality, there is an image which: 1) is not at all art, but the porn of its time, 2) with a fake caption which can be easily translated as an attack against ancient Greek culture.

I don't care what was the intention of the person who created that trash a century ago. Because Avril was not artist and the image is not art! So, it is at least ridiculous to even imagine to compare it with Michelangelo's masterpieces. It is completely irrelevant Avril's intention, or the intention of those who created that caption much later (which is what I am supporting here).

The important point is that in that article, there is no other image which indicates the nationality of somebody who is having sexual contact with an animal. Like for example, "French is sodomizing a mule", or "Chinese is having sex with a chicken". But only "ancient Greek..."!!! Does it sound good? Does it serve a purpose of art, or philosophy, or science, or anything else which has a real value for humanity?

Moreover, since it was not me who changed again the caption of that ridiculous image, and it was not you..., there must be a few sensible people around the block.

About the terms "Zoophilia" and "Zoophiles", you like it or not, are Greek. And Greek is an alive language which is spoken by some millions of people today.

Zoophiles are called the activists who fight for animals' rights in my country.

Misplaced Pages is an international online encyclopedia, and as such it has to include in its articles the origin of these terms, and also how the terms are used today by those millions of Greeks around the globe. JmAmO (talk) 18:21, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Moreover, here is the link for the official webpage of the association which supports bestiality (ZETA):

http://www.zeta-verein.de/en/

"Welcome to the webpage of the ZETA association! And welcome to the unique German swarm-based project addressing zoophilia und zoosexuality."

It seems that Germans know much better that zoophilia and zoosexuality are 2 different things! And it is exactly what I am saying here:

1) Zoophilia is the act of protecting the welfare of animals and fight for animals' rights. 2) Zoosexuality or zooerasty is the sexual contact of a human with an animal.

"The most recent events: The German parliament tries to reintroduce a ban on bestiality by a revision of the animal protection law. Sexual contact with an animal is to become a misdemeanour with a fine of 25 000 Euros maximum."

Again Germans know much better that the sexual contact with the animals is called bestiality and not zoophilia!

Because zoophilia is not bestiality!

If people who apply bestiality have this exact knowledge, I don't see what is the problem with Wikipedians... JmAmO (talk) 23:05, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

You consider the image pornography, not art. Misplaced Pages does not care. You will find plenty to offended by at ejaculation, oral sex, anilingus, vagina, cunnilingus and countless others. The image depicts the topic of the article.

The image caption, is the caption from the image. If you wish to argue that every element of the image must be historically accurate, all of the images at David will have to be removed, along with images of Caucasian Jesus, Mary and Joseph at Jesus and similar images throughout the encyclopedia. To accomplish this, you will need a much broader consensus than you will find on this one article. I would recommend not wasting your time. If you wish to do so anyway, I'd suggest you take it to the Village pump.

You object to the article referring to zoophilia as "zoophilia". This is the English Misplaced Pages. The English word "zoophilia" refers to a paraphilia involving sexual activity between human and non-human animals or a fixation on such practice. If you disagree that that is what the word means in English, you will need to discuss it on the article's talk page. If you wish to argue that we should use Greek, German or whatever other language you might cite, you are wasting your time. Misplaced Pages is indeed international, but the English Misplaced Pages uses the common English terms for subjects.

On August 31, you changed the caption at Portal:Pornography/Featured picture/39, User:Putnik/porn and Zoophilia. You also made unsubstantiated changes at Zoophilia (disambiguation) on that same date. I reverted most of those. Otherwise, none of them have been edited since. I'm not sure who/where you think someone else changed this or how this supports your various positions. It doesn't matter. Misplaced Pages has policies and guidelines. If you wish to change this caption, remove this image or change the article's title in a way that directly contradicts these policies and guidelines, you will need to discuss the issue on the article's talk page and build a consensus to do so there. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 23:46, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Merida (Pixar) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• more reviews for kids, moms, and dads |publisher=EW.com|date=2012-08-01 |accessdate=2013-07-10}}}</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:57, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Appreciation

	The Original Barnstar
	For tireless watching and maintenance of articles. Herostratus (talk) 21:29, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

I actually only see you in one place (although I'm sure you're active in many), List of Magical Negro occurrences in fiction article, but your work there alone is worth a barnstar, since it's an WP:OR magnet and always will be I guess, and as the months turn into years you seem to not tire of maintaining it. If you really do have a PhD then all more the reason to be grateful to you for doing this scutwork. Thank you. Herostratus (talk) 21:33, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Regarding Tarantino's personal life

SummerPhD,

Hi!

Thanks for the message on my board.

I noticed you went and undid my edit several times. Perhaps you should add a link/source of Tarantino's 2009 interview with Howard Stern. Tarantino was dating several women throughout the years, up until 2011. One of those girls is Didem Erol, whom he dated until 2011. Your edit stated that he had revealed in an interview with Stern in 2009 that he was dating magazine writer Lianne Spiderbaby. He never once mentioned her in that interview.

Furthermore, here is an interview with Lianne Spiderbaby from a few months ago.

http://liannehaveyouever.blogspot.com/2013/02/have-you-ever-lianne-spiderbaby-delving.html

She stated that they met during Tarantino's "Django Unchained" shoot, which was definitely not in 2009!

Again, (BLP violation redacted) is all over the internet, but here is one of the many links.

(BLP violation -- not a reliable source -- redacted)

Thanks, I hope we can come to an agreement here, and P.S. My intentions are definitely not contentious. I am merely trying to keep things up to date just as you are.

Peace!!

User: Gq1212

The first edits of yours that I reverted removed a valid source that I knew confirmed the quote. It also added information that was obviously not sourced, including the contentious, unsourced claim about a living person. Per our policy on biographies of living persons, "Contentious material about living persons (or in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced – whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable – should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." Whether or not this is "all over the internet" is immaterial; without sourcing, it is a WP:BLP violation. With sourcing, we would need the source to directly tie it the relationship with Tarantino. Otherwise it is simply off topic.

The second time, your edit again made the contentious, unsourced claim about a living person and stated, without souring of any kind, that he had briefly dated Spiderbaby and is now single. I had restored the source for the quote and removed Spiderbaby entirely (as unsourced).

The third removal was by another editor, who indicated that the source you used is "Not a WP:Reliable source." I would add that the blog (in addition to not being a reliable source) does not mention Tarantino at all (he is, after all, the subject of this article).

As your edits have been reverted three times under WP:BLP by two different editors, please discuss the issue on the article's talk page before restoring the material. As the claim is contentious, it is generally preferable to link to the edit in question, rather than directly making the claim again on the talk page. BLP applies to talk pages as well. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 14:54, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Mummers

You are probably well-aware of it, but just in case, I direct your attention to . A full copy probably is in a library near you, to help you with your desire to improve Mummers articles. I hope that is helpful. 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 17:59, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Well. Hmm. Hard to believe that slipped by me. I guess I dove into the Mummers Parade article before that was published. Then, when I started on the individual bands/brigades/associations, I must have only checked for new newspaper coverage. Huge oversight on my part! Thanks, I'll take a looksee when I have a bit of time. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:03, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I found another book I hope you're aware of: . Also, some books which don't have a google preview:

• Title Oh! dem golden slippers: the story of the Philadelphia Mummers
• Author Charles E. Welch
• Edition illustrated, revised
• Publisher Book Street Press, 1991
• Original from Pennsylvania State University
• Digitized Jan 5, 2011
• ISBN 0962892114, 9780962892110

• Title Life, Liberty, and the Mummers
• Photographs by E. A. Kennedy, III
• Edition illustrated
• Publisher Temple University Press, 2007
• ISBN 1592135889, 9781592135882

Also, I have essentially finished the article on Ferko String Band today. All the best, 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 20:46, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Michelle Rodriguez edit

You deleted my addition, please restore it. The Reference you'r whining about WAS THE VERY SAME GATES TV SHOW "FINDING OUR ROOTS." So move the footnote number to end of my statement. It was a mere 6 minutes after the first thing she said. The words came out of her own mouth and were particularly egregious. Unless you are the type who feel its a sin to use the n-word but okay to bash the Caucasian race. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.226.20.130 (talk) 02:26, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Let me get this straight: You said "please" to be polite, then begin to throw around accusations, say I'm whining, accuse me of being "the type" who doesn't fall in line with your views on race, etc. This is your way of asking me to restore your WP:POV to the article. While your approach to life is interesting, I think you'll find that flying off the handle is seldom effective in securing favors and allies. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:33, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Tariqmudallal

Actually I would probably take the issue to ANI anyways; I asked the user to apologize for leveling a copyvio claim against a user not in the wrong, but they refused and blanked my request without comment. I came to their talk page to follow up and am not happy at all that they didn't. Nate • (chatter) 22:07, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Personally, I'd suggest you ask again. My goal is to get hir to respond to talk requests. Independent of failure to discuss them, neither issue is, IMO, uncorrectable: edit the warnings, apologize to the editor (despite their fiery response), learn from it and move on. - SummerPhD (talk) 22:21, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

I removed the editnotices and blanked Atomic Taco's talk page.

Tariqmudallal (talk) 14:10, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Explained

I explained why, because it was blatantly racist in nature. "Selene Scott (talk) 17:59, 24 September 2013 (UTC)"

When commenting about an issue, especially one from four months ago, it is helpful to give a link, mention an article or, in some way, give some context. Thanks.

I believe you are referring to this issue. If so, no, you did not explain. Here is your edit. There was no edit summary. I reverted that edit as "Unexplained blanking". Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:59, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Mail

Flyer22 (talk) 19:04, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm aware of the issue and have a few involved articles on my watchlist. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:10, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Remove teahouse

I removed the last teahouse template. Can anyone deprecate it?

Tariqmudallal (talk) 03:00, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

You did not answer my question. I asked why you continue to disruptively invite experienced users to a page intended to "help new editors become accustomed to Misplaced Pages". - SummerPhD (talk) 03:15, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

wasn,t me

User talk:86.15.49.149 Jump to: navigation, search May 2013

Information icon Hello, I'm SummerPhD. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Garden gnome, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. SummerPhD (talk) 14:59, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

not shared ip but didn't come from here.

86.15.49.149 (talk) 20:33, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Someone editing from the IP address edited Garden gnome on May 23, 2013. If it wasn't you and you'd like to avoid irrelevant warnings in the future, consider creating an account. - SummerPhD (talk) 00:22, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Coconut oil

I had reverted the IP edit on the knee-jerk assumption that it was made by you know who who was banned for sockpuppetry and other misdeeds.--Mr Fink (talk) 23:44, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, that's what I generally expect to find there, but I don't see it in this comment (yet). - SummerPhD (talk) 00:14, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Another one?

I happened upon this after an edit to was made to one of the pages on my watchlist, but thought nothing of it. Then it happened again (and again), and I discovered this. Related?

ʍw 20:50, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Looks pretty clear to me, I've added them to the list. I'm not really sure where to go from here. A sock case would lead to worthless blocks on the abandoned accounts and do little to prevent more from popping up. I'll probably take it to an admin board for any ideas other than the ongoing game of Whack-a-mole. Any suggestions? - SummerPhD (talk) 21:52, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Not a one (I don't have any real experience with sockpuppet investigations or hardcore vandal-fighting). As far as I know, the only potentially productive outcome of a sock puppet investigation in a case like this would be a range block; but as those are reserved for only the most disruptive and damaging cases, I doubt one would be applied here. Might be worth a shot, though. ʍw 22:18, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

• Special:Contributions/109.176.237.142 (previously at Horizontal Skyscraper – Vanke Center) (Eclipse Internet, London)

ʍw 13:18, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Equestria Girls

Why did you undo my edit. Isn't true that it a bad movie? Give me proof that it a good movie.184.20.209.241 (talk) 05:24, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I have reverted your similar edit on the same subject on the 'films considered the worst ever' page. I'd like to explain why. Your statement that this is a bad film is personal opinion, and wikipedia does not deal in personal opinion. It deals in statements which are verifiable by different sources. If you wished to make a statement claiming that it is a bad movie, cite some evidence from verifiable (preferably academic) sources to indicate so. Which brings to the next point, namely that you ask others to prove that it is a good movie - frankly, there is no need for people to do so, because they are not claiming that it is. You are claiming that it isn't. The burden of proof for a claim rests with the person who is making the claim, regardless of what the claim actually is. Therefore, if you wish to make this claim, the burden is on yourself to provide verifiable sources to prove that your claim is accurate. I hope that this helps explain the subject a little for you. Best wishes. Justin.Parallax (talk) 12:41, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

More to the point, 184, a look at your talk page shows that you have a history of editing articles on My Little Pony based entirely on your opinion, refusing to listen to our guidelines and policies and being blocked for it. Your most recent block was for 3 months. Your next block will be substantially longer.

If you are truly interested in contributing to Misplaced Pages, I would strongly recommend you consider teaming up with an experienced editor at Misplaced Pages:Adopt-a-user. - SummerPhD (talk) 13:34, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

184.20.209.241 has been blocked for 6 months. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:18, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

talkback

Perri Reid

Hello, I'm SummerPhD. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Perri "Pebbles" Reid, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. SummerPhD (talk) 00:05, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hello. i saw your changes as well. You took out alot of information that is FACTUAL. Like Perri's name, her kids, etc. Let's work together to source the info. Instead of just butchering the article. Are you excited about the movie on monday night ? 208.250.69.26 (talk) 00:28, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

This is a biography of a living person. We need reliable sources to add personal information. Verifiability is a core policy. Also, please don't revert to a version that is several months old to undo some of the edits. Doing so reverts every edit in that time frame. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:45, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello again. Im having trouble finding a link to her first marriage to G- L- S-. All I see is this  : (name and link removed due to BLP claims) . I need to get access to see archives of newspapers from the 1990s. What do you suggest ? Thanks.208.250.69.26 (talk) 01:39, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Without reliable sources, there is simply nothing to add. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:59, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

PLEASE STOP ADDING PERSONAL INFORMATION REGARDING PERRI REID AFTER IT WAS REMOVED. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.137.158.217 (talk) 03:20, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Please see the discussion below. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:38, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Recent edit

You felt that my edit was not constructive and while that may be true, it was not false information. If you disagree with the number of butts in Brookhaven, Mississippi, I would like you to cite your sources, if you can. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephenb898 (talk • contribs) 18:09, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

We have sources for the number of people and at least one child in Brookhaven. - SummerPhD (talk) 18:13, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	For this ;-) - DVdm (talk) 18:44, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Capriotti's

Hi SummerPhD, You undid my edit to the Capriotti's page, and I apologize for reverting it without an explanation, and I apologize if this is not the correct way to reply to you. Your reason for reverting my edit is that Misplaced Pages is not the menu of Capriotti's, which is true. There are, however, many items on the page that are essentially menu items. Some examples of these are the Cap's Specials section, Hot stuff section, and so on. I don't see how my contribution was any different or any more menu-like than the components of those sections. I don't have a huge investment in the page, I don't really care if you keep it reverted. I'm just trying to make 10 edits so that I can access a semi-protected page, and I thought this page was as useful as my contributions could get. Goekster (talk) 23:41, 21 October 2013 (UTC)Goekster

The article in question needs to be scrubbed of the menu-like material that is already there.

If you are looking for a quick way to find edits to make, try Googling the site for instances of common grammatical errors "could of" for "could have", mistaking "it's" for "its" (or the reverse), "casted" as the past tense for "cast", etc. - SummerPhD (talk) 00:01, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Perri Reid 2

Please do not update the Perri Reid page anymore with personal marriage information anymore. We are removing this information through a request from Perri Reid's counsel. Thank you for your cooperation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.137.158.217 (talk) 03:19, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Marriage information is rather standard fare for a biography. Per our policy on biographies of living persons, the information is taken from reliable published sources. As such, I'm afraid you will need to provide a much better explanation as to why the information should be removed.

Additionally, please note that unless there is a decision from Misplaced Pages's administrators or the Wikimedia Foundation to the contrary, this information very likely will be restored to the article repeatedly because, as I stated, information on marriages is fairly basic information for a biography.

You will probably want to review Misplaced Pages:Blp#Relationship_between_the_subject.2C_the_article.2C_and_Wikipedia for more information on this. You will likely face questions as to who the "we" in your statement are, BTW. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:34, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Michelle Thomas

Hi Summer. When I updated the information on Michelle Thomas, the source that I used was an actual photo of her headstone. I looked at the talk page, and while there were several conflicting sources cited, none were vital records. As someone who does genealogical research, it is incredibly rare to find a tombstone that has an incorrect DOB or DOD on it. Furthermore, it seems that the last discussion on DOB and DOD took place over three years ago. At what point can we consider something confirmed? HarlandQPitt 04:19, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Vital records would be primary sources. We generally do not use primary sources. If you'll review the article's talk page, you'll see that we have already discussed using the tombstone, including discussion of an obviously wrong tombstone in another article. In short, before removing the reliable sources already cited in the article, discussion on the article's talk page will probably be needed. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:29, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Marcus Collins

I am curious as to whey you seem to be personally attacking our attempts to inform curious parties to the goings on of one Marcus Collins and his musical group The Texas Tenors. We are family members of Mr. Collins and are not interested in perpetuating lies about him or his group. We have been given permission by Marcus and his Texas Tenors partners to update their Misplaced Pages info. Everything we add to these pages is the truth and can be corroborated so I fail to understand your motives in regards to your actions! I see that you fancy yourself an expert on all things Misplaced Pages...instead of recommending our moderately successful relatives career and group for deletion, maybe you should offer some advice as to how we can satisfy YOUR criteria as to what is TRUE information in order to take us off of your radar.

Rahuff50211 (talk) 00:06, 24 October 2013 (UTC)rahuff50211

Please be aware that Misplaced Pages user names are not to be used by groups of individuals. Each user name should represent one and only one editor.

I am not "personally attacking" anyone or any thing. Rather, I am attempting to ensure that all Misplaced Pages articles meet our policies and guidelines. Among the applicable policies in the current discussion are notability and verifiability.

Misplaced Pages is not intended to be a collection information on everything. Rather, we aim to have articles on notable topics. In general, topics discussed in some degree of depth in independent reliable sources sufficient to write a reasonably detailed article are considered "notable".WP:GNG I have not been able to find such coverage. If you believe Collins is notable, please discuss this one the on-going discussion considering deletion of the article.

In articles that provide information about named individuals, we are especially concerned that all information provided cite reliable sources. This policy, WP:BLP, is a special category of our regular verifiability policy. All articles should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Contentious material (negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable) about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion. The Collins article currently cites thetexastenors.com, imdb.com and "Marcus Collins Resume". The Texas Tenors own website is not independent of the group as a whole or Collins individually. IMDb is not considered a reliable source for biographical information. Collins' resume is not independent of Collins, nor is it a published source (much less one with a reputation for accuracy). - SummerPhD (talk) 01:04, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

edit

sry thought it was supposed 2 say coffee not coffey :) Rrr30 (talk) 15:35, 28 October 2013 (UTC)rayzor7 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.216.89.85 (talk) 03:39, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Perri reid 3

Hello, I'm SummerPhD. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Perri "Pebbles" Reid, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please discuss the issue on the article's talk page. Thank you. SummerPhD (talk) 01:28, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Dear Summerphd, how come you are telling me to discuss edits on the article tak page FIRST, but YOU are not doing that. You really messed up the article taking out lots of information. And I see others have added it but you revert. So is this a csse of do as I say not as I do.If so, not alright. 64.134.64.124 (talk) 13:51, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

If you take a look at the article's talk page, you'll see I've been having a nice little conversation with myself. I've also been commenting on various editors' talk pages and explaining my edits in edit summaries. Thank you for finally discussing this.

The article is a biography of a living person. We have very strict standards for such articles, outlined at WP:BLP. Unsourced information, such as the various marriages you are repeatedly adding, is simply unacceptable. If you continue to add this information without citing a reliable source, I will continue to remove it, adding warnings to your talk page each time. If you continue anyway, you will eventually be blocked from editing.

Additionally, I have removed a blatant copyright violation. If you restore the text that was directly copied from another website, I will have an administrator remove the information from the article's history and, if necessary, have you blocked.

If, rather than reverting these changes over the warnings not to do so, you would like to discuss what we can and cannot add to the article, PLEASE discuss this on the article's talk page.

(As the various marriages you are claiming are factual are not sourced, I am again blanking them from your comments here.)

Thank you. - SummerPhD (talk) 20:11, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Blurred Lines 13:35, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Trivia

Your uncivil threat is one-sided. It take two to "edit war", yet the other party has not been simularly assulted by you on their "talk" pages. I suggest you consider that I am reverting changes that *have not* been discussed to a point of "consensous", and that your threats are not productive in this discussion. I have removed your uncivil threat from my "talk" page. =//= Johnny Squeaky 05:01, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

The "other party" is several people. The clear consensus is to label the section "In popular culture. You have labeled every request that you discuss this before insisting you are right and the consensus is wrong and uncivil threat. You are heading down exactly the same path that lead to your last block. - SummerPhD (talk) 13:01, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Baye McNeil

Hello SummerPhD. I see you made an edit to Baye McNeil questioning notability. The article was cleared through articles for creation help desk, and an administrator accepted and published it...I've noted several other sources since seeing your notability notice/tag. Also, I've made post at article's talk page (https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Baye_McNeil)...Thank you for your time! Minusminority (talk) 14:46, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Batman

Probably not a practicing Christian but if you read the comics, it proves he was raised a Christian because his parents were both Epi/Catholic and his parents graves have a Crucifix/Cross on top of them. Further on you can see a young bruce kneeled down and praying, pretty sure he is not praying to Buddah.

Please visit www.adherents.com/lit/comics/batman.html for proof and the comics relating and foreshadowing his religious background. To be honest, I am not a Christian so I don't really care, but facts are fact and I wanted to point that out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 993ironman (talk • contribs) 13:52, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

The non-reliable site in question says lots of things, including: "On rare occasions, stories have been published in which Batman has simply identified himself as an atheist or a Christian. It is reasonable to assume that, as with other people, Batman's precise beliefs, spirituality and relationship to God vary over the years, and sometimes shift depending on his experiences. The religious aspects of Batman's character also vary depending on the writer."

The Batman character has been around long enough, in the hands of enough writers that there are myriad discontinuities in various aspects of the character, including his religion. - SummerPhD (talk) 14:50, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

GLAM Cafe invitation

Wikipedians are invited to the GLAM Café at the Chemical Heritage Foundation to meet, talk, and edit. We provide the space, the coffee, and the snacks: you provide ideas and enthusiasm! On the second Tuesday of each month, starting November 12, 2013. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 21:05, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

You've been mentioned

Talk:Ventura_Freeway#Popular_culture Trackinfo (talk) 06:51, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Take care of Alice (Avril Lavigne song)

Hi, can you please take care of Alice (Avril Lavigne song)? And make sure if there's an unreliable sources or incorrect music genres. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.171.177.151 (talk) 03:15, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Now that the article has been protected, you will need to discuss the issue on the article's talk page. In fact, forcing you to do that is the reason the article was protected. No, I will not work around that for you. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:35, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Underworld

Underworld by Don DeLillo is a Great American Novel! One might say it is The Great American Novel. On my iPad it simply takes too long for me too fix the unholy mistake of it not being included in the wiki list of Great American Novels. I strongly recommend someone gets it included on there. I mean really, how is it not already on there??? Don DeLillo?? He is the great American novelists, and if only one of his novels were to on there, it is Underworld. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NotePadz (talk • contribs) 05:56, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

You'll need to find a reliable source that calls it "the Great American Novel" to include it. - SummerPhD (talk) 14:56, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013

This is your last warning. The next time you violate Misplaced Pages's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory or otherwise controversial content into an article or any other Misplaced Pages page, as you did at Perri "Pebbles" Reid, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. SummerPhD (talk) 02:43, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Who are you to give me a last warning ? You are NOT an administrator as you state atop this page. Edit collaboratively or not at all. Once of the rules of wikipedia is that your edits will be edited by others so if that bothers you dont edit. My edits are sourced and I discussed them on the talk page. But if you dont want to work together YOU need to stop editing the article. Dont ever threaten me again. You say you do not like people to talk at you so do not talk at me. I do not appreciate that at all. 65.205.13.26 (talk) 03:28, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

I am an editor enforcing Misplaced Pages policies with legal implications: WP:BLP and WP:COPYVIO. You have been warned about both and WP:3RR. In addition to my reverts, your edits have now been reverted by an administrator. I am not an administrator. That said, you are editing in violation of Misplaced Pages's policies. Until such time as you address those concerns, your edits will be reverted. If blocking you and/or edit protecting the article is needed to enforce Misplaced Pages's policies, that is what will be done. - SummerPhD (talk) 05:05, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

The article is now under semi-protection. Only confirmed users may edit the article. If you do not have a confirmed account, you will need to discuss the issue on the article's talk page and establish a consensus to have the edit made. - SummerPhD (talk) 05:27, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

(BLP violation redacted) is racist

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdhrPh09TX0 why cant i put it there if it is true. This video is very reliable. If i cant edit it, tell me how i can make a new (BLP violation redacted) post since i am new here. PS another video show roach lying about what he said. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isaisog (talk • contribs) 03:20, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

" Materialscientist (talk | contribs) blocked Isaisog (talk | contribs) (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of indefinite ‎(Clearly not here to contribute to building the encyclopedia)" - SummerPhD (talk) 04:25, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Sock Puppets

So, it's OK for that "editor" (actually, he's more of a reversionist) to claim I'M a sockpuppet because YOU don't like me? Sounds a little like bias to me. And in fact, if you took the time to look at his edit history and how long he's been an editor combined with the sophistication of his Wiki knowledge, you might consider that he is a sock puppet.

But again, why are you sending ME a nasty gram and not the other editor who continues to claim I use sock puppets? You don't like me so you play favorites? Wow. =//= Johnny Squeaky 03:01, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

You have repeatedly claimed the other editor is using socks without starting a case. If you do so again, I will report you for personal attacks.

The other editor made the claim about you one time (that I see). I notified that editor before your response here asking why I didn't. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:22, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

The editor in question is a sock puppet. You may not wish to consider it, but it is fact. He edits under several accounts. I edit under exactly ONE account, all my blemishes, all my warts. So be it. =//= Johnny Squeaky 03:39, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Start a sock case or stop making the accusation. Those are your options.

Incidentally, my guess would be that the sock puppetry accusation leveled against you was based on the edits under Special:Contributions/2601:1:B100:4E4:95D2:4ED3:8B20:4B34. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:27, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

After this, you'll have a lot harder time calling other editors on allegations of socking. - SummerPhD (talk) 00:28, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Trivia

Trivia is a legitimate section title, the PROOF being that while looked down upon, it is both ***NOT*** outlawed, and there is in fact a "trivia" tag. Again, being honest about the title of a section in reference to it's content is, well, honest. There is NOTHING wrong with labeling "trivia" trivia. What is wrong is including trivia under the complete bullshit title "In Popular Culture".

Did I mention that there is absolutely no / zero / nadda rule that outlaws "trivia" at Misplaced Pages. It must be properly labeled and in fact there is a trivia tag for doing so. =//= Johnny Squeaky 03:01, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

You are being disruptive. The consensus, as repeatedly demonstrated, is that these sections should be labeled "In popular culture". So far as I have seen, numerous editors disagree with you and none have agreed with you. You are editing against consensus, for which you have been blocked in the past. If you continue, you will be blocked again, eventually leading to a permanent block. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:39, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Warning

I appreciate your warning and will fold it into my consideration when I edit. I am not a bad editor, I am not bad person. =//= Johnny Squeaky 03:33, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Burt Shavitz

I didnt think i needed citation...he's my neighbor... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.68.237.176 (talk) 17:48, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, you do need a source. Verifiability is one of our core principles. - SummerPhD (talk) 00:20, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Help requested

Hello summer, I was wondering if you could help out with a very disruptive editor? I have noticed that you have had dealings with Johnny squeaky before and he seems to be up to his usual disruptive behavior yet again. Last night he started an edit war over an admin rollback on Leona Helmsley accusing others of being sock puppets and now he is reverting pertinent information on the Kleargear article with his usual comment of all I.P. Editors being a single editor using multiple I.P.s Others have tried to discuss but he just instigates and eggs people on. Any help would be appreciated166.147.80.218 (talk) 01:34, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

I'd suggest you review your options at Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution. If there is some particular reason you want someone else to do that for you, I'd want to know what. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:44, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Folk Nation

Can you help keep an eye on it and Lilsrlupq16? Niteshift36 (talk) 19:40, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

No thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:40, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Re:

Slap! This discution was in 2008! Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Alissa White-Gluz
Now is 2014 (without 16 days). Do you thing you banned Alissa for life? You are wrong. Alissa′s notability is incontestable, guy. XXN (talk) 17:33, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

The article was redirected because she doesn't seem to be notable independent of the band. I see no indication that has changed. Your restored version made three changes: correcting two typos and adding categories. Notability for musicians for individual articles (rather than a redirect to the band's article) calls for substantial coverage in independent reliable sources demonstrating notability for activity independent of the band. Articles about the band do not demonstrate that. - SummerPhD (talk) 20:37, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Walter White (Breaking Bad)#Real life meth dealer named Walter White

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Walter White (Breaking Bad)#Real life meth dealer named Walter White. Chunk5Darth (talk) 12:53, 21 December 2013 (UTC)Template:Z48

Making a correction; need citation

I just saw this message pop up for the first time:

Hello, I'm SummerPhD. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Hulk Hogan, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. SummerPhD (talk) 04:05, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

I don't recall what the edit was (it would be helpful if you included it in the message). I am guessing that i may have corrected Hulk Hogan's billed height, as i see it is incorrectly listed as 6'7", when he was billed for many, many years as 6'8".

I don't know what qualifies as a reliable source, but there are probably 500 videos on youtube where they announce his height as 6'8".

Here's one of the most famous of them (skip to 5:25 for the 'tale of the tape'):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOCqV23VkXU — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.37.107.119 (talk) 23:19, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

This is the edit in question. Yes, it was changing the height. The citation in the article was (and is) his WWE bio, which says 6'7". If you have a reliable source that contradicts this, I'd suggest taking the issue to the article's talk page. - SummerPhD (talk) 00:47, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

"Changes" by Faul & Wad Ad

Here is the stand-alone single article as required for listing is here Changes (Faul & Wad Ad song). The song is #1 on the German Singles Chart: , and is also charting in Austria, Belgium, Switzerland. I dedicate the smash hit to you: . I am adding back to the "Changes" list with the required link to the page. werldwayd (talk) 02:42, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Stalking

Your history of following be around Misplaced Pages is in fact claer evidence of "stalking". It's unfriendly, and really quite creepy. Please stop, it doesn't make Misplaced Pages better, it doesn't reflect well on you as an editor, and it is not proper "policing", which is not your job anyway. It is in fact "harassment". =//= Johnny Squeaky 06:19, 29 December 2013 (UTC)