User talk:TheRedPenOfDoom

And there is also This archive

Holiday Cheer

		Holiday Cheer
		Michael Q. Schmidt talkback is wishing you Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and aHappy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings. - MQS

January 2014

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Saarang 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:

• | location=Chennai, India | work=The Hindu | title=Campus confluence | date=8 January 2004}}</ref>], Orange Street and [[Moksha]] (in 2005),<ref>{{cite news| url=http://www.hindu.com/2005/01/24/
• [[Sulekha|Sulekha.com]],<ref>http://www.sulekha.com/saarang/</ref> 160by2, Amadeus global studios], miglebox.com.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:26, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Vishal–Shekhar 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:

• '''''Vishal–Shekhar''''' are a music directing duo (Vishal Dadlan] and Shekhar Ravjiani) working in Hindi, Telugu and [[Marathi cinema|Marathi]] films. Their works

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:43, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Kolam 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:

• '''Kolam''' {{transl|ta|ISO|kõlaṁ}}) is a form of painting that is drawn using [[rice]] powder/chalk/chalk powder/white rock powder

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:46, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mohanlal filmography 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:

• | 2005 || [[Reflections (Silent Short film)]] || [[[Bejoy Nambiar]] ||

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:07, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, TheRedPenOfDoom. You have new messages at Jackmcbarn's talk page.
Message added 18:29, 2 January 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jackmcbarn (talk) 18:29, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

You are simply ruining a great source of information on the snowtown murders. I have gone through all your edits and made pdf saves of all of them, so I can retain all the information you're deleting. You are not helping this website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CuriousWriter1 (talk • contribs) 22:50, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

I'll go save all my favorite wiki pages before you delete the crap out of them. Have fun policing wikipedia and making it less helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CuriousWriter1 (talk • contribs) 23:07, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

agreed- you Snowtown edits are unhelpful — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.203.32.98 (talk) 13:35, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Blanking of article / redirect

Please can you explain why you blanked/redirected this article?. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:12, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, when someone is asked a question about blanking an article on their talk page the solution is not to ignore the talk and blank the article again. Please see WP:BRD. I have noted that you appear to be edit warring with User:CWH on the page you redirected it too as well. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:20, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

As there is no discussion, I will restore the article a second time. If you wish to delete an article then there is WP:AFD. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:29, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

It's reasonable to give an editor some time to respond. Round here it's after midnight on a Sunday, in the USA it's still Sunday.

I've restored the article – although I would expect it to be blanked for a fourth time. One can only assume that both editors involved in blanking it haven't actually read the article and don't realise that there are more languages used in China than Chinese. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:56, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

You caused a significant amount of disruption by your blanking of that article, wasting several hours of editor time. You were asked the question "(1) Please, for context, have you before blanked sourced articles with a substantial edit history and then blanked again when challenged? If so can you please give diffs to a couple of examples." You didn't address the questions, but the issue is there permanently now on the Talk page. Please do not blank sourced articles. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:01, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Stop changing!

hey, how dare you keep changing my edits? just look at all the bollywood stars and their filmography pages and tell me whats wrong? if you do this again I will report to senior mods!

Desirockerz (talk) 02:54, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

@Desirockerz You can't say that to anybody to stop editing unless you have given warnings Herald talk with me 12:47, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Unusual Deaths

I am unsure as to why you believe the source needs to specifically state that the death was unusual. I looked at other sources for different stories, such as the Segway death, and could not find a single mention of the word unusual, bizarre, or strange. Can you point me to somewhere where it states that this must be included in the reliable source? The addition has since been restored, but I would like to clarify with you about this so we can avoid any edit warring. Thank you. --Tarage (talk) 11:17, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

I see. I was not aware of that stipulation. Well, here are two reliable sources that state that the death was unusual or strange. Take your pick.

• http://www.thebright.com/Police/former-marine-kills-stepfather-atomic-wedgie/
• http://www.11alive.com/news/article/318272/40/Oklahoma-man-killed-by-atomic-wedgie

This should satisfy the criteria for inclusion, correct? --Tarage (talk) 11:37, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Date of birth Reed Alexander‎

All I did on the Reed Alexander‎ page was to revert an anon-IP who had changed his year of birth from 1994 to 1995. I spent a lot of time trying to find a reliable source and failed, all I had was the tweet which confirmed the year. Now you come along and say "The source says 22". I am curious to know where this source is. The tweet is ambiguous because of time zones (it says 5am 23rd for me in the UK), and he did not necessarily send it on his actual birthday. Periglio (talk) 15:39, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Zach Line

Why are you erasing his weight? according to NFL.com he weights 233 pounds. 96.59.136.148 (talk) 18:03, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker)How is that encyclopaedic? Soham 18:09, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

What do you mean? 96.59.136.148 (talk) 01:42, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Surreal Barnstar
	You're certainly a Wild Card, thats fo' sure and add "special flavour" to the Wikipedia for me, can't talk about others. Soham 18:13, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Dailypost

dailypost.com and sunnewsonline.com are reliable or not? Bladesmulti (talk) 14:31, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, but what about sunnewsonline.com? http://www.africanspotlight.com/ ? http://www.theheraldng.com/ ? Bladesmulti (talk) 14:41, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Remember, i am not arguing at all. Only having your own view about each of the sources, so if i use next time i am aware of multiple opinion already. Bladesmulti (talk) 14:45, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Multiple? So Theheraldng and Africanspotlight? Remember, nigeria is pretty remote for much of popular media, otherwise we surely had more RS. Bladesmulti (talk) 15:03, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Fine, so you agree that information is needful, yet complicated? I should post at WP:RSN right? Bladesmulti (talk) 15:11, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

http://www.dailytimes.com.ng/ and http://www.punchng.com/ have covered them as well, They are reliable? Bladesmulti (talk) 15:21, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Tribune.com(.ng) has also covered. Bladesmulti (talk) 15:28, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Done, have a opinion here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticism of Tamil Brahmins. Bladesmulti (talk) 16:36, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

fancruft

No evidence? What a joke you another joker you dont watch mlp wow really im just adding existing facts and they are true go watch the show and stop accusing me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fireydash21 (talk • contribs) 01:30, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Existing facts are just readded. I will report you for accusations and insults — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fireydash21 (talk • contribs) 01:33, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

ok

Itssan (talk) 16:02, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Shahrukh Khan filmography shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 18:47, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm IndianBio. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Ranveer Singh without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry: I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 19:14, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Join here again. And please stop edit warring over this. What is wrong with you? —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 06:27, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Reliable source

Hello, I tried to make a change to an article, Treehouse attachment bolt, but you undid the edit because I didn't provide a reliable source. My source is my boss Scott Baker, who wants to be included in this article because he was involved in it. He has meet with Michael Garnier many times over the years (1997-2013) about tree biology and bio-mechanics and this detail where used in the designing of the attachment bolt. To cite him what would I do? Baker,Scott (1997-2013)?

Treesolutions (talk) 22:14, 13 January 2014 (UTC)treesolutions

Strange?

I'm sure you have noticed this by now, but do you find it the least bit strange that a new editor[1] has popped up who seems to be targeting your edits in several articles? Even the very first edit that was made was to revert you. Cmr08 (talk) 02:19, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

I think that first edit is just the IP editor from that page starting an account and then going on a jihad because they had not been allowed to create a fanpage undisturbed. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:26, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

Thanks for filing the DR/N. Soham 13:11, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikilawyering, sorry mate if you think so of my actions. I want the petty dispute to end, nothing else. Soham 13:38, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014 - edit-warring

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Mr Whoppit. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:14, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

Jasmine Waltz Someone's dob is hardly controversial.--The Totter 02:16, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 04:27, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello TheRedPen. You made seven reverts at Hotel California (2013 film) starting at 02:26 on 13 January. Since an admin might consider this to be long-term edit warring, I recommend that you respond in the complaint and agree to take a break from the article and its talk page for seven days. These reverts do not seem to be justified under any of the exceptions to 3RR. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 07:07, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

RSN thread involving you

Since no one appears to have notified you beyond Echo, I think you should explain your grievances with the Telegraph here. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 17:17, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Edit-warring notification

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Mr Whoppit. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Yet another instantaneous undiscussed revert? Andy Dingley (talk) 17:17, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

ANI notification

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is TheRedPenOfDoom.2C_tendentious_editing_and_a_free-pass_to_edit-war.. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:17, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Just because in my travels around Wikiland, I see your username very, very frequently attached to good contributions!

Cogito-Ergo-Sum (14) (talk) 04:10, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Removal of Abby Martin images

Those images are free to use and appropriately licensed. Why did you remove them? Viriditas (talk) 00:28, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

And six minutes after you erroneously removed them they were deleted on Commons, which is a world record of some kind. I'm curious, are you coordinating edits with other users on IRC? Viriditas (talk) 00:55, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

as you are fully aware there is a grand cabal whose entire purpose is to keep Martin from Wikpedia. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:10, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

How did the file get deleted on Commons six minutes after you removed it on Wikipedia? Are you aware that the license was valid, and that RT licenses images for use on Wikipedia? Did you ask someone off-wiki to delete the file? Viriditas (talk) 01:14, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

There are only four options: 1) a Commons admin saw that you removed the images from sandbox pages that few people watch and deleted it six minutes later. Highly unlikely and very unusual. 2) you said you wanted an image deleted on IRC, and a random admin obliged. Somewhat likely. 3) you personally contacted an admin and they deleted it by request in a record six minutes. Possible. 4) you have an admin account on Commons. Unknown. Viriditas (talk) 01:28, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

you forgot 5) the secrit Anti Abby Martin Cabal. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:42, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

So you won't answer a single question? Again, did you look at the licensing? I can't even point you to it or review it because you were able to get it deleted from Commons in six minutes, which is apparently a new world record considering how difficult it is to remove images from there. I think it took almost a week to delete images I nominated recently, not six minutes. Which brings up the issue of gaming the system to support your POV. I wonder if I need to escalate this to another noticeboard. Is your behavior still under discussion on AN or ANI or do I need to start a fresh report? Viriditas (talk) 01:48, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Secrit Anti Anti Abby Martin Cabal commandment #4.62 paragraph 3(a) Section B8. Do not answer questions about how the cabal is able to keep all references of Abby Martin from Wikipedia. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:51, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

You do realize, that all attempts to discuss the reason you removed a licensed image have failed due to your refusal to discuss it? Is there any reason this should not go to ANI? Viriditas (talk) 02:00, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

The Anti Abby Martin Cabal obviously already controls ANI, you would obviously be wasting your time. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:03, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

You were asked multiple questions about why you removed this file. You were also asked if you requested deletion off-wiki. In all cases, you refused to discuss it here. Therefore, I am filing an ANI against you. Please look for the link to report on this page in my next message. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 02:42, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Explanation about The recent change

I have removed the bold text just now. Other than that, there are sources required for some. But it's necessary to explain on the lead that Caste system is observed in other parts. If you go by archive, there was huge consensus about it as well. President of India is the first citizen, and a dalit being president is also a notable point. Bladesmulti (talk) 05:01, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Cleared all unref(all were unref for like 1 year or more) now. Bladesmulti (talk) 05:08, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Changed the lead. Bladesmulti (talk) 05:15, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	TheRedPenOfDoom, thank you for your welcome message - I am new to Wikipedia, so appreciate the help navigating around & getting my feet wet Healthcare.technologist (talk) 21:08, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Egyptian Constiutution

Look at the last speech Adly Mansour. He said constitutional amendment in 2012 not a new constitution. This is an amendment in 1980 as the constiution 1971 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panam2014 (talk • contribs) 23:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

But it's just a change in the constitution of 2012 is not a new one. This is a modification as it happened to the constitution of 1971, which was amended in 1980, but there is no article. Egyptian President Mansour spoke amendment in 2014 while Morsi spoke of a new constitution in 2012 --Panam2014 (talk) 23:59, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of American feminist literature, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Herland (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) 13:37, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Constitution of Egypt

From your edit summary when you undid my edit, I get the distinct impression that you did not even look at the hatnote I added to Egyptian Constitution of 2014. "Doing a hatnote for 12 subjects" is not really an accurate description of what I did. But of course, it is very difficult to explain one's reasons for an edit fully in the limited space available in an edit summary. My concern is that a disambiguation page, by design, is just a bare list of article titles that does not provide much, if any, context for the reader. In this case, a reader looking for information about prior constitutions of Egypt would be helped more by the article History of the Egyptian Constitution, which provides that context, than by the bare list of a disambiguation page. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 16:09, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

PEAR

Hello Red Pen, I noticed that you nixed the WP:PROD on Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research. While I agree that there are third party sources which could be used to rewrite the article I think that PEAR may have a bigger problem: notability. When the article was first written (in 2004) PEAR was possibly the most significant parapsychological laboratory in America. However, now that PEAR has been closed for close to seven years I see little indication that PEAR has had any enduring impact on parapsychology. While I don’t doubt that it seemed notable in 2004, it doesn’t seem that PEAR has really left a mark on history. I think it might be useful to let the article undergo a deletion discussion to establish what place (if any) PEAR has in Wikipedia.

That’s my suggestion anyway. Please think it over. 76.107.171.90 (talk) 17:55, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

No, I don’t wish to question that presumption. My concern is chiefly that others will question that presumption and that the article will end up on the chopping block sooner or later. It would be a shame if you took the time to flesh it out only for the article to be deleted for lack of notability.

That said, if you’re determined that it should stay then I guess I trust your judgment. 76.107.171.90 (talk) 18:29, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Broken refs

You have broken a few refs with your edits.

What i am suggesting is that.. Should i revert back to my version? And remove the "caste system is also observed in Japan, yemen, China", we can see for it's consensus later on.. Ok? Bladesmulti (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

HubPages Requested Edit

Thanks so much for your help!

The pages I'd like to reference for requesting edits to the HubPages entry are the site FAQ:

{domain}/faq/

And the site's Learning Center:

{domain}/learningcenter/contents

38.111.148.243 (talk) 21:08, 20 January 2014 (UTC)