User talk:General Ization/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

→

Archive 15

Country name in birthplaces

The information I'm contributing is completely correct. Do you dislike facts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clayton Forrester (talk • contribs) 17:45, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

@Clayton Forrester: See WP:PLACE. "New York, New York" requires no disambiguation as to country, as there is no other. General Ization ^Talk 17:53, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Shrimp vis-à-vis prawn

The meaning is clear and precise.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/vis-%C3%A0-vis

kencf0618 (talk) 00:19, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Which of the two?

User:General Ization, as a linguistic expert, which of these two origins is most realistic for the surname Maior, this [1], or this [2]. Thanks --Emperorofthedaleks (talk) 18:32, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

@Emperorofthedaleks: I'm not a linguistics expert (and I'm curious why you thought I was) or an expert on the etymology of surnames, but the explanation at the second link seems to me more likely to account for most occurrences of the surname Maior (and the text at that link is somewhat better sourced). However, it's entirely possible that there are people named Maior whose surnames are derived from both (there are many examples of names of different derivations that share a common modern spelling). By the way, I would not think of www.houseofnames.com as a reliable source for encyclopedic information about the derivation of surnames (though some of the sources cited in the articles there might be reliable). General Ization ^Talk 03:45, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

@General Ization: I confused being a linguistic expert with another user, but thanks for looking at the website and giving me your answer, I appreciate. Houseofnames.com isn't the only website that uses these 2 origins for these names, but when looking at my own name (Goram), the website gives this origin ([3]) related to Goring, instead of being related to this name ([4]), Gorham. Is this right? Thanks --Emperorofthedaleks (talk) 15:18, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

@Emperorofthedaleks: I have no clue. General Ization ^Talk 15:31, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Pseudonyms Should Be Abolished

It is very easy to hide behind pseudonyms. You are really "generalizing". Who are you and why are you doing this? Laszlo Csatary was my father. I have rights in this case. You do not! No one has the right to slander another or protect slander. That is oppression. Is that clear? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.150.36.88 (talk • contribs) 21:08, April 3, 2016‎

This is being discussed on the article's Talk page, where your comments and/or complaints regarding this article belong. If you continue to use the word "slander", your comments will be regarded as a legal threat and you will be blocked from editing. General Ization ^Talk 22:24, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Make that "blocked again" for legal threats. Meters (talk) 22:30, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors April 2016 Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors April 2016 Newsletter March drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's backlog-reduction drive. Of the 28 people who signed up, 21 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. April blitz: The one-week April blitz, again targeting our long requests list, will run from April 17–23. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the requests page. Sign up here! May drive: The month-long May backlog-reduction drive, with extra credit for articles tagged in March, April, and May 2015, and all request articles, begins May 1. Sign up now! Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Miniapolis, and Baffle gab1978. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:48, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Notability of personal secretaries to Presidents of the United States

To answer your question here, yes, there are at least 13 personal (administrative) secretaries to Presidents of the United States in the modern era who have Wikipedia articles. They are listed here. The four five without Wikipedia articles probably would qualify for articles, by virtue of that role alone, if someone bothered to do the research and write them (e.g., Rose Conway). To me, the fact that you didn't look into this before making your argument speaks volumes. General Ization ^Talk 20:50, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

@General Ization: How exactly does that "speak volumes"? I did not know the answer to the question. You seemed more knowledgeable about the subject. So I asked you the question. Assuming that you would know the answer. So, how exactly does that "speak volumes"? And about what exactly does it speak volumes? Please advise. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk)

You can't possibly be so dense as to not understand my comment above and its meaning. So I will assume (in a variation on AGF) that you are not that dense and instead that you are intentionally trolling me, something I really don't have time to indulge. General Ization ^Talk 21:31, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

@General Ization: Not sure how that answered my valid question. In fact, seems to avoid it altogether. So I will repeat it one last time. I also don't have time for your games. Question: How exactly does that "speak volumes"? I did not know the answer to the question. You seemed more knowledgeable about the subject. So I asked you the question. Assuming that you would know the answer. So, how exactly does that "speak volumes"? And about what exactly does it speak volumes? Please advise. Thanks. Answer that question. Or leave me alone. Thanks. Bye. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 22:08, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

It means that you wasted my time and the time of every other editor engaged in the conversation at Talk:Murder of Kitty Genovese by making this completely spurious argument about how Rose Mary Woods is entitled to an article because of her association with the Watergate scandal, and therefore Walter Moseley should be entitled to an article because of his association with the murder of Genovese, when (as I pointed out here) Woods already met the requirements for notability as the personal secretary to a US President. And that even after I explained that, you couldn't be bothered to actually look to see if secretaries to Presidents are notable here, instead asking a question that you were entirely capable of answering for yourself. So, I conclude that at least one of these several things are true, and possibly more than one: you are an exceptionally poor researcher, you are exceptionally lazy and content to let others do your research for you, and/or you are completely oblivious to the degree to which you waste other editors' time. Now before you accuse me of incivility, allow me to point out that I was quite happy to leave it at my relatively diplomatic comment above, knowing that in order to go any further I would need to insult you, but you insisted on my giving you the completely unvarnished, un-diplomatically-phrased truth as I see it. There it is; make of it whatever you wish. General Ization ^Talk 22:29, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

You are 100% right. I am 100% wrong. Not sure what I was thinking. Thanks for your keen insight! Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 22:43, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

I did my changes but it reverts

Hi,

We as a team management of Taher Shah did some minor changes on their personal profile named with

Eye to Eye ( Taher Shah Song )

Taher Shah

Both profiles belongs to our singer celebrity MR Taher Shah who's recent song Angel has been viral any got famed around the globe. Last night our IT Manager also send you a detail email regarding our changes and its reverting

We did a minor change in both of our celebrity profiles that mentions totally wrong on his profile. The changes are listed below

Label: Blue Note Productions ( mentions in Eye to Eye ( Taher Shah Song ) profile on right hand details )

Blue Note Productions clearly mentions in first line of ( Taher Shah profile )

Who's this company we don't know its not relate to us or our celebrity, its a fake company published by your side we condemn to change it to EYE TO EYE limited company who belongs to us and produced both of these songs. EYE TO EYE LTD is a government registered company we can show you its registration and also its universal ID as well for your confirmation but we didn't know about this BLUE NOTE PRODUCTIONS and its any person, somebody wants to attach their name with our celebrity.

Our company website:

Www.eyetoeye.com.pk

Our celebrity website:

Www.tahershah.com

Kindly change this BLUE NOTES PRODUCTIONS to EYE TO EYE LTD or simply remove this its fake information updated on our singer celebrity profiles people are commenting and asking for us regarding this. I hope you understand this matter that's why we change this again n again from this profile, you can review the changes done from our side

If you need any further information so kindly let us know we are glad to provide all required information,

Looking forward for your response

Regards, Management's team Taher Shah

Taher Shah (talk) 09:56, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

@Taher Shah: See the Talk page of the article Taher Shah. You actually have no business editing the article (or Eye to Eye (Taher Shah song)), because you have a conflict of interest: see WP:COI. But if you (or other editors) continue edit warring over the name of the production company without providing a published, reliable source for the name, I will see that you are blocked from editing. General Ization ^Talk 01:07, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Taher Shah's Production House

Hey there! I just want to clarify that Taher Shah's all songs and videos are produced by Blue Notes Productions. It is a very inside fact because this production house never claimed in public that it produces Taher Shah's songs and videos. I am stating this with such confidence because I am also affiliated with this production house and also assisted his owner Farrukh Sheikh on many projects. Please put its name on this page. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.203.150.17 (talk) 01:03, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

See the reply to user Taher Shah directly above your comment. General Ization ^Talk 01:09, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

By the way, we do not publish "very inside facts" on Wikipedia; all content here must be verifiable using published, reliable sources. See WP:V. If there is no public documentation that Blue Notes Productions produced Shah or his work, that "fact" will not appear here. Your affiliation with this or any other company means absolutely nothing here (other than that you may also have a conflict of interest, as I mentioned to the other account above). General Ization ^Talk 01:15, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Recent edit of "Zealand"

Hello General Ization,

You recently reverted my edit which is fair. However, I would ask for your help. "Zealand" as you call it in English is not correct in Danish it is called Sjaelland and is pronounced "Sheh-lan". I am guessing the confusion came about because the Dutch and Danish are always getting mixed up by outsiders, and so assume that Sjaelland is like the region in the Netherlands Zeeland. In danish we seldom use "z's" so why people think Sjaelland is Zealand i don't know? also the talk on the spelling of the Dutch Zeeland backs me up a bit http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Talk%3AZeeland.

so i ask for your help to correct this error in history. if not then i'll try to find better sources to back me up. Either way thank you for a good discussion

-Margoth195 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Margoth195 (talk • contribs) 03:26, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

@Margoth195: See [5], [6], [7], [8], and any number of other sites found with a search for zealand -"New Zealand". You will see that the term Zealand is commonly used in English to refer to the island the Danes call Sjaelland. As I have already explained, this is the English Wikipedia, so we use the English name. At the Danish Wikipedia, it is called Sjælland, as appropriate in that encyclopedia's language. General Ization ^Talk 03:44, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

TPS

Thanks for helping out with that talk page query. Much appreciated. GAB^Hello! 03:44, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

No problem; I saw your Wikibreak notice and thought you might actually be taking a Wikibreak. (I have one of those, semi-permanently, also.) General Ization ^Talk 03:45, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Honestly, that template is kind of meaningless for me anymore, but thank you. GAB^Hello! 03:48, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you!

7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it. To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:07, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Not Allowed to correct a Grossly Misleading Page

Your bias is showing. It would be nice to think that Wikipedia would be neutral, but I guess that isn't going to happen. I attempted to correct grossly misleading language in your article regarding the Malheur Refuge protest. The constant use of "anti-government" and "militant" is deceptive. None of those people are militant, and none are anti government - they are anti-corrupt government. I hope that you are on the receiving end of the government's corrupt some day, it's what you deserve. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.53.46.189 (talk) 16:40, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Make your proposal on the the article's Talk page. Your edit was clearly not reflective of a neutral point of view, so was removed. Whether the article uses the word "militant" or "protester" will be determined by WP:CONSENSUS, not by you or me alone. General Ization ^Talk 16:44, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Emily Ratajkowski/archive4

You were involved in one of the prior WP:FAC or WP:PR discussions about Emily Ratajkowski. The current discussion at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Emily Ratajkowski/archive4 needs more discussants. In my prior successful FACs, success has been largely based on guidance at FAC in reshaping the content that I have nominated. I would appreciate discussants interested in giving guidance such guidance.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:55, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Trump

So if I run for president that atomically makes me a politician. I have no political background, never been interested in politics but, if I decide to run that make a politician just like that. Sally Book (talk) 04:16, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

@Sally Book: Yes. General Ization ^Talk 11:35, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Shouzheng0001

I told Yamla ‎about the talk page abuse and it seems they've taken care of it. :) Feinoha ^Talk 01:45, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Keira Knightley

Now look i know its "England" but she is VERY posh. So thats why i was putting in the fact that she is "British". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.176.105.29 (talk) 21:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

We do not determine someone's origin or nationality in the encyclopedia by considering whether or not they are "posh". "British" refers to any resident of the United Kingdom. Keira Knightley was born in London, England so is indeed British, but specifically English. Please stop editing unconstructively. General Ization ^Talk 21:08, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Pan Am Flight 841

On 30 April 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Pan Am Flight 841, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after the 1972 hijacking of Pan Am Flight 841, the pilot received honors at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport as well as death threats and vandalism at his home? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pan Am Flight 841. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Pan Am Flight 841), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 15:07, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Dang!

 Self-trout Completely misread that IP - didn't realize it was the same one. Thanks for catching that -- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 17:57, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Took me a minute to confirm it myself. No worries. General Ization ^Talk 17:57, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

@Samtar: Actually, as I look again, it isn't the same IP (last octet is 161 vs 151). So you could revert me, or we could assume it's probably the same person and that the same principle applies. General Ization ^Talk 18:01, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Well spotted (again) - three hours had passed between the addition and reversion, so I would imagine it is the same person being assigned a new IP -- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 18:04, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Message from Wii Kate Pedia

I apologized for my bad edits and reverting the edits you reverted. Please don't block me. -Wii Kate Pedia (talk) 19:23, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Why did you revert a good edit? That edit was so good I made. So please undo that edit you made if you want to undo it. But first tell me why you reverted my edit below the line. -Wii Kate Pedia (talk) 19:30, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

@Wii Kate Pedia: No, the meaning of "vital" is not the same as the meaning of "important"; look them up. We generally don't use contractions (wasn't versus was not) in the encyclopaedic voice. In short, these edits were not improvements to the article, so were reverted. General Ization ^Talk 20:18, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Genesis

Story in Genesis. I based my change on this, http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Abraham&diff=718537090&oldid=718536745 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maureendepresident (talk • contribs) 18:45, 4 May 2016‎ (UTC)

@Maureendepresident: Saying "the story of Abraham in [the Book of] Genesis" is a little different than saying "the Genesis story", one interpretation of which reduces the entire Biblical book to "a work of fiction". I don't happen to be a devout Christian, but I am a believer in Wikipedia's policy of neutral point of view. The original language is more neutral and wasn't significantly improved by your edit. General Ization ^Talk 19:00, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

@Maureendepresident: Please stop editing Isaac, or any other article, just to edit an article. Edits should represent improvements to the article. If you want to experiment, please use the Sandbox. General Ization ^Talk 19:08, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Your equation of the word story to fiction is wrong. It is perfectly possible to speak of the story of Napoleon, or any other historical character. You are just mistaken here. Genesis is a story, just as any work of literature is a story. Fiction is something completely different. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maureendepresident (talk • contribs) 08:43, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

@Maureendepresident: You may well know more than I do about the Bible, but I (evidently) know more than you do about Wikipedia policies, and specifically its policy on neutral point of view. Since you are editing Wikipedia, you are expected to follow those policies when writing about the Bible, or about anything else. Whether or not it was your intention, your edit was less neutral than the original text, so the original text was restored. General Ization ^Talk 12:40, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Political affiliation in infobox

Hello General- Regarding your revert of my edit at Kirk Douglas and my edit summary: The political affiliation line in the infobox struck me as out of place. My edit summary was hasty; while I don't find Douglas' affiliation to be irrelevant, I don't think that info merits a line in an actor's infobox. It also comes across to me as US-centric (I'm American, by the way). I'm guessing we don't show the political party membership of many non-US actors here even if they are known to be politically active. I'm not particularly passionate about this, but I wanted to clarify what motivated my edit. Eric ^talk 22:40, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

@Eric: When an actor speaks out about their political affiliation, and especially when their political activity has been so notable as to justify a section in their biography called Politics, they are no less eligible than any other notable person here to have their affiliation noted in the Infobox. Please don't "guess" about WP:OTHERCONTENT and then use your guess assumption as the basis for an edit. When actors, e.g. Michael Caine or Glenda Jackson, are notable for their political activities and have declared an affiliation, that affiliation is generally noted in the Infobox, regardless of nationality. General Ization ^Talk 22:54, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

I think if you see something in a Wikipedia article that strikes you as out of place, and you don't have the hours it would take to compare it to every analogous one, and/or and hunt for the often elusive guidance, you might find yourself in the position of having to make guesses and assumptions. And I continue to guess (or is it assume?), perhaps optimistically, that many of our infoboxes on politically affiliated actors are missing their political party affiliation. Eric ^talk 14:13, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Law of Moses

You restored the words In the King James Version to this edit, at Law of Moses The Book of Deuteronomy (Deuteronomy 31:9 and Deuteronomy 31:24–26) in the King James Version records Moses saying, "Take this book of the law, and put it by the side of the Ark of the Covenant of the LORD." Similar passages referring to the Law include, for example, Exodus 17:14,

Here is your reason. Reverted 1 edit by Maureendepresident (talk): Reflects the specific Biblical version being quoted; not all versions may have precisely the same text.

Note that wikipedia is full of biblical references. They do not state which version of the Bible they are from. Do you think that every biblical reference should state the version it comes from? There is no point in stating the version unless the point is that different versions have different texts, or different interpretations. That is not the case here, so the addition of the version is pointless. We should be using secondary sources anyway.Maureendepresident (talk) 08:51, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

See WP:OTHERCONTENT. Beginning a discussion about the inclusion or exclusion of content here with "Wikipedia is full of" or "There are lots of other articles where" generally means that you have already lost the argument (and often is an indication of an assumption by the speaker rather than fact). In this case, the identification of the specific translation that was the source of the quote that followed was appropriate in context, and it was not an improvement to the article to remove it. General Ization ^Talk 11:50, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

One thing I have learned about wikipedia is that it is up to the person making the change to justify it. Bold Revert, etc. The change I made was made here. http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Law_of_Moses&diff=prev&oldid=718569237 I am therefore perfectly entitled to remove it, and ask that it be justified. I will do that and we can have the discussion on the talk page about whether or not the addition is appropriate. I do not see any justification that the source was appropriate. If the argument is that other translations of the Bible give different views then we can include that. At the moment the addition needs to be justified. It is not up to me to justify my removal. The addition is not an improvement to the article.Maureendepresident (talk) 17:27, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Sorry

About the revert. I accidentally restored the vandalized version of AIV because I must of been looking at the wrong contributor's page. Feinoha ^Talk 03:44, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

@Feinoha: I didn't even notice until it was all over. General Ization ^Talk 03:45, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Law of Moses

Your edit to this article is being discussed on the talk page. It seems clear cut to me and i don't understand why this is an issue. Meters (talk) 17:10, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Grammar : Stephen Hawking page --- a friend of his sister VS a friend of his sister's

http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/qanda/data/faq/topics/PossessivesandAttributives/faq0006.html All the best,Liane1950 (talk) 19:00, 7 May 2016 (UTC) Liane May 7, 2016

Find A Grave

Greetings! I noticed you added Find A Grave as a source to Margaret Hamilton (actress). In case you weren't aware of its status as a source, I figured I'd point you here. Cheers, and happy editing! 🖖ATinySliver/^ATalkPage 04:04, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Minnie Driver

Minnie Driver expressed frustration, through twitter, that her place of birth as shown on Wiki was incorrect. She provided me with the correct information: Middlesex Hospital, on Mortimer St in Fitzrovia, London. I was attempting to edit the page with the correct information. Please allow me to do so Regards Ian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Herrbartlet (talk • contribs) 21:16, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

@Herrbartlet: I rather doubt that Minnie Driver has spent a moment agonizing about how her birthplace appears on Wikipedia, but if Minnie would like to submit a request that her article be changed (along with sufficient information to establish that it is actually her), she can do so here. In the mean time, we will continue to rely on published sources for the information that appears in the article; those cited sources (in this case the UK Office for National Statistics) state she was born at Middlesex Hospital in St. Marylebone. General Ization ^Talk 21:20, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

No place for me to respond to your wholly flawed and conceited assumption that the subject did not want place of birth corrected. Just review her recent timeline on twitter. Horse's mouth,so to speak. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Herrbartlet (talk • contribs) 21:42, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi

The headteacher has recently changed in our school (JHGS) and I would like to make this change. His name is Cameron Phillips so you can Change it if you want. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:3B68:9500:FDE0:803B:C9AD:60F4 (talk) 21:11, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

It will be changed when there is a reliable, published source that makes the change verifiable – and not before. General Ization ^Talk 21:13, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

I tried to add correct information but you reverted it several times. I did use one as a joke but the rest where valid. After all I go to this school and you live in America 2A02:C7D:3B68:9500:FDE0:803B:C9AD:60F4 (talk) 21:27, 9 May 2016 (UTC)Anonymous

Yes, it's a shame; when you establish a reputation for yourself by making unsourced, false and/or "joke" edits, other folks will stop taking you seriously as a Wikipedia editor. Once again, we rely on published sources, not on unsourced editing by individual students of a school. General Ization ^Talk 21:30, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Not trying to seem stupid but I just wanted to update the information but the change happened last week I don't know where a cite for this information would be and I doubt there is one, but this is incorrect information on Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:3B68:9500:FDE0:803B:C9AD:60F4 (talk) 21:39, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

When the information is published, it can be updated here with a citation that shows where the change can be verified. See the links in my comments above. General Ization ^Talk 22:10, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

?

In addition to mine, I have read your talks and you seem to have a history of getting reverts wrong and having arguments about them. Just because you think you are right, doesn't mean you are. It is not me vandalising Wikipedia, but you preventing information from reaching the thousands of people who use it.2.120.170.235 (talk) 21:44, 9 May 2016 (UTC)anonymous

Since you have made no other edits on Wikipedia using this IP, I have no idea what reverts you're referring to, so will not respond. General Ization ^Talk 22:12, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Speaking generally, I have "a history" of getting into arguments about content here on my Talk page because that is part of my function as a rollbacker. Nobody likes being corrected, but it is necessary sometimes. As for "getting reverts wrong", that has happened from time to time in more than 50,000 edits on Wikipedia, but far less than you seem to think. General Ization ^Talk 00:09, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

June 2016 Guild of Copy Editors Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors June 2016 News Hello everyone, welcome to the June 2016 GOCE newsletter. It's been a few months since we sent one out; we hope y'all haven't forgotten about the Guild! Your coordinators have been busy behind the scenes as usual, though real life has a habit of reducing our personal wiki-time. The May backlog reduction drive, the usual coordinating tasks and preparations for the June election are keeping us on our toes! May drive: Thanks to everyone who participated in last month's record-setting backlog reduction drive. Of the 29 people who signed up, 16 copyedited at least one article, 197 copyedits were recorded on the drive page, and the copyedit backlog fell below 1,500 for the first time! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. June Blitz: this one-week copy-editing blitz will occur from 12 June through 18 June; the themes will be video games and Asian geography. Coordinator elections: It's election time again; how quickly they seem to roll around! Nominations for the next tranche of Guild coordinators, who will serve a six-month term that begins at 00:01 UTC on 1 July and ends at 23:59 UTC on 31 December, opens at 00:01 UTC on 1 June and closes at 23:59 UTC on 15 June. Voting takes place between 00:01 UTC on 16 June and 23:59 UTC on 30 June. If you'd like to assist behind the scenes, please consider stepping forward; self-nominations are welcomed and encouraged. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are eligible; remember it's your Guild, and it doesn't run itself! Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Baffle gab1978. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:01, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Arabs

Why Wikipedia is so much anti Arab? Since when southern Arabia were Arabzied ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Assaf122 (talk • contribs) 09:19, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

• Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Possible impersonator

See User:GeneralizationsAreBad vs General Ization. Peter Sam Fan 14:35, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Nakon-bot01

Howdy, nakon-bot01 (talk · contribs) is mine. Thanks for your vigilance. Nakon 04:00, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

EgyptAir Flight 804

Please do not encourage users who try to use wikipedia to spread their own theories about the accident's cause by actually discussing their theories. Wikipedia is no forum and the only appropriate action when you see such a discussion/talk page post is to ignore the content and to wrap an archive box around it. Tvx1 03:13, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Peg Entwistle

Thanks for deleting the entry on Peg Entwistle by Starhistorian68 (talk). This person is actually the Lisa Sinkko to whom the paragraphs refer! I know this because I have had many untoward dealings with her in public and private. I am the author of the Peg Entwistle biography referenced in the "Further reading" section of the Entwistle article. Starhistorian68 has stalked me on social media, and even used contrived accounts on FaceBook to hide her identity while trolling me. As you saw, she immediately challenged your deletion of her entry. It's likely she will try again.HollywoodSignGuy (talk) 03:57, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

My apologies

Hello, I wanted to make sure that we haven't gotten off on the wrong foot or anything here - I was the one who wrote the satirical analysis of the vandalism article a few days ago. If I recall correctly, it was "Admins died in a fire 2". That being said, I'd like to extend an apology if anything I did annoyed you; that is not my intention, by any means. Thank you! Zia224 (talk) 01:41, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

@Zia224: I thought at the time your attempt at humor by adding a bogus historical narrative to an attack page by a sockpuppet was ill-considered and less than helpful. I honestly haven't given it much thought since, but now that you've asked, I still find it evidence of remarkably poor judgment on your part. I appreciate your friendly effort to make amends, but I'm fairly certain nothing you could do at this point would change my impression. General Ization ^Talk 01:49, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

@General Ization: You're right about that. I'm actually quite new to Wikipedia, and didn't think it would cause many issues. Thanks for your response; everyone has their issues and I'm glad I know what to work on. Zia224 (talk) 01:51, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Punctuation

Hello, You wrote on my talk page about how I changed the style of the article for Babadook. The only thing I edited was a few quotation marks and their punctuation; a.k.a. I moved the periods (full stops) inside the quotation marks where they belong. You directed me to read the article on style in Wikipedia articles, which I did just refresh on. In the article, it states:

Punctuation before quotations The use of a comma before a quotation embedded within a sentence is optional: Eve said "He ate the apple." Eve said, "He ate the apple." Many editors prefer a colon in this position if the quotation forms one or more complete sentences: Eve said: "He ate the apple."

However, notice how each and every period is placed inside the quotation marks. It is proper English grammar to do so.

Please let me know if you meant something different or if I am mistaken on something.

--Soccerfray (talk) 23:04, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

@Soccerfray: I directed you to read MOS:LQ concerning the logical quotation style used here on Wikipedia. It states in part: "On the English Wikipedia, use the 'logical quotation' style in all articles, regardless of the variety of English in which they are written. Include terminal punctuation within the quotation marks only if it was present in the original material, and otherwise place it after the closing quotation mark." General Ization ^Talk 23:14, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Note that the example you give above is a complete sentence, but each of the cases where you moved the period in the article is not, is rather a fragment; in such cases, we do not place the terminal punctuation inside the quotation marks. General Ization ^Talk 23:22, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. Can I ask why this is done on Wikipedia? Is it not more logical to follow proper English grammar style? --Soccerfray (talk) 00:00, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

@Soccerfray: See Quotation marks in English#British practice. There is no such thing as a single "proper English grammar style", and the decision was made by consensus here some time ago that we will use the logical quotation style in the encyclopedia. Not having been a party to that discussion, I cannot tell you what the arguments were for and against. General Ization ^Talk 00:05, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thanks for helping me, and making sure I add citations. I really want to contribute to Wikipedia, but the right way. And you sending that to me helps. Thank you again. Shortyfore (talk) 14:30, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Arbitrary Censorship. Thank you. GAB^gab 23:59, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Please stop moving subject

I think you are being too strict with the rules. Not everything has to be strictly enforced. Please leave that discussion at the top where it belongs, it makes a very good point and really doesn't need to be edited or moved, it is not interfering with any other discussion. You do not need to meddle with it although you feel it is within your right, you are not actually contributing anything or being helpful by doing this. This is a talk section, not the main article. You really don't need to make this correction. Thanks. ....SandwitchHawk.... (talk) 20:12, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

See your Talk page. There's no need for us to discuss in two places at once. General Ization ^Talk 20:14, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Broken section link at Orlando

Your section link in Talk:2016 Orlando nightclub shooting#Get rid of "2016" in the title is now broken due to archive. ―Mandruss ☎ 11:25, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanksgiving dates

I could see the reasoning if it were Easter or one of the holidays relative to Easter, but I would not characterize the date of Thanksgiving Day (U.S.) as particularly variable for a United States holiday. It is no more variable than Martin Luther King Jr. Day, Presidents Day, Memorial Day, Mother's Day, Father's Day, Labor Day, Columbus Day, or Election Day. I don't see that we need a chart to explain which date any of these fall on in, e.g., 2034. 𝕃eegrc (talk) 14:00, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

@Leegrc: You may not see that we need a chart to explain the dates of those holidays; nevertheless, articles concerning all the holidays you mention except Columbus Day and Election Day have charts that set forth 100-years-worth of dates for those holidays. I don't see that it's harmful to include these charts in any way, and they may indeed be a convenience for readers versus having to calculate the date for a given holiday in the future. Anything more than 100 years or so is clearly overkill; hence the change I made to Thanksgiving Day (U.S.) in the process of reverting your removal. General Ization ^Talk 15:53, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

You are absolutely right that those articles (now) include such tables (or at least the articles I just checked do). Shame on me for not checking that earlier. 𝕃eegrc (talk) 16:23, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

The ones I looked at (I didn't review the history of all) have had such charts literally for years. General Ization ^Talk 16:29, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Daniela Samulski

Hello General Ization, why did you revert my edit? Thanks--Buchbibliothek (talk) 18:06, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

See your Talk page. General Ization ^Talk 18:07, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

You're invited! Great Buckeye Wiknic 2016

Hello there! You are invited to attend the Great Buckeye Wiknic in Columbus, Ohio on Sunday, July 10th from 1:00 to 5:00 PM! Join us for a day in the park for food and socializing with others from the Wikimedia movement. We'll be meeting up at Fred Beekman Park, a park on Ohio State University's campus.

If you're interested, please take a look at our events page for more information, including parking info, food options, and available activities. If you plan on attending, please add your name to the attendees list. We look forward to seeing you!

If you have any questions, feel free to leave one on my talk page. Thanks! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 05:39, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

(Note: If you would like to stop receiving notifications regarding Wikimedia events around Ohio, you may remove your username from this list.)

There was no sources now stop vandelising the millennial page.

Stop vandelising idiot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.193.176 (talk) 19:45, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors July 2016 News

Guild of Copy Editors July 2016 News Hello everyone, and welcome to the July 2016 GOCE newsletter. June Blitz: this one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 12 through 18 June; the themes were video games and Asian geography. Of the 18 editors who signed up, 11 removed 47 articles from the backlog. Barnstars and rollover totals are located here. Thanks to all editors who took part. Coordinator elections: The second tranche of Guild coordinators for 2016, who will serve a six-month term until 23:59 UTC on 31 December, have been elected. Jonesey95 remains as your drama-free Lead Coordinator, and Corinne and Tdslk are your new assistant coordinators. For her long service to the Guild, Miniapolis has been enrolled in the GOCE Hall of Fame. Thanks to everyone who voted in the election; our next scheduled one occurs in December 2016. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are eligible; self-nominations are welcome and encouraged. July Drive: Our month-long July Copy Editing Backlog Elimination Drive is now underway. Our aim is to remove articles tagged for copy-edit in April, May and June 2015, and to complete all requests on the GOCE Requests page from June 2016. The drive ends at 23:59 on 31 July 2016 (UTC). Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Corinne and Tdlsk. >>> Sign up for the July Drive! <<<

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:54, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Unsourced material addition

My apologies for adding the unsourced material to several pages, I am working to revert those changes currently.PCN02WPS (talk) 21:06, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

FYI

FYI, I had to revision delete some of your revisions at Talk:Jo Ann Castle (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs) in order to fully hide the material added by the IP. The revisions may also have been oversighted by the time you read this. CIreland (talk) 00:52, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

@CIreland: No problem. General Ization ^Talk 01:20, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Europefan

Do you think is MArischka is Europefan? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:03, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Never mind. Blocked. Thanks, though. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:25, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Can you clear up some labels?

http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/List_of_countries_by_electricity_consumption

Units of time are very fuzzy. Can you clear it up?

Last column: Average Power Per Capita (watts per person) is not clear. Are we talking Year, Month, Week or day? rosebud (talk) 21:02, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

@Scottrainey, my only contribution to this article was to revert some vandalism to it back in May. Otherwise, I have no real expertise to offer on the subject. General Ization ^Talk 21:47, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Ralph Baer

I had changed the dates of Ralph Baer's death from December 6, 2014 to December 7, 2014, at the request of Ralph's son, Mark Baer. Mark has informed me that his father died near midnight on the evening of December 6-December 7, and the coroner's report was prepared on December 7. According to Mark, who is an attorney, the date should be the 7th.00:11, 1 August 2016 (UTC)Rolenta (talk)

I just spoke to Mark Baer and he says the death certificate says December 7. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.118.179.195 (talk) 00:23, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

@Rolenta: Sorry, that makes no difference here. Unless you can provide a citation of a reliable, published source that gives Baer's date of death as December 7, we will need to go with the obituary in the Washington Post, a reliable, published source which places it on December 6, 2014. All content on Wikipedia must be verifiable, and there is nothing verifiable about Mr. Baer's son's comments to you. General Ization ^Talk 01:45, 1 August 2016 (UTC)