User talk:CAVincent/Archive 1

Archive 1

Possible Link Spam?

From the help desk question about possible linkspam: I would say report it at [[WP:COIN|Conflict of interest and/or Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 03:32, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Tagging

I confess I'm not sure what the standards are; if you can't find any connection, do take it out. I tend to err toward inclusion. TREKphiler ^{hit me ♠} 23:45, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Christopher Hitchens

Hey how are you? I thought my last edit had both our respective points of view, (mine which was backed up by a third party source) I'm happy to discuss what you feel would be an acceptable compromise. JV-CDX (talk) 19:58, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I actually could live with the last version you had, though I would disagree with it as I consider him more American than English at this point. I am not going to change this a third time, but I think an opinion other than yours and mine would be useful. What is your reason for considering him primarily English rather than primarily American? CAVincent (talk) 20:10, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Little bit of history

Your edit to Fleet Admiral made sense, but this is interesting. From a historical point, WWII didnt end in the US until December of 1946 when Truman declared a formal end of the United States being in a state of war. This is why the World War II Victory Medal was issued all the way until the end of 1946. So, it isn't really wrong to say "since the close from of the Second World War" but saying since 1945 is fine too. Most textbooks state that WWII ended September 2, 1945 but this is just a little bit of history. Maybe I'll try and fold into the article some day. -OberRanks (talk) 12:17, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Americas

Calling another's edit "contentious" is hardly a valid edit summary. My edit was not intended to be contentious, but factual. America IS the Western Hemisphere, period. Full stop. SO STOP! Such edit summaries reveal your own denial of FACT, and express your own bias. Please, keep it out of Wikipedia! Prof.rick (talk) 11:07, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Ted Bundy

Can you please explain to me why you consider the Senator Evans/Ted Bundy connection to be irrelevent? I don't see how writing it off as an Obama/Ayers smear attack works. ie; Obama was associated with an unrepented terrorist, when in reality Evans of course knew absolutely nothing about Bundy's actions. I hope you don't think i'm a left winger trying to slander his name, i just believe a close association with a serial killer is worthy of an article blurb. Thismightbezach (talk) 13:03, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Dan Quayle

Although I have seen video footage of Quayle saying, "the future will be better tomorrow," I have not found any source for when and where he said it. If he said it on the day before the election, then it would be a completely reasonable remark, regardless of how silly it might sound out of context. The article is about a living person and it should not make negative statements about Quayle if there are doubts about factual accuracy. WillOakland (talk) 20:51, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I was removing some other unhelpful edits and inadvertently removed yours. Sorry 'bout that. CAVincent (talk) 22:04, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Nirvana references

I have a couple I can recommend to you. If you can't afford to buy anything or are unable to check anything out, let me know and I can show you some stuff available online. However, it's the print stuff that's the best. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:53, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Good print references would be awesome; if you could point me in the right direction it would be much appreciated.CAVincent (talk) 14:12, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

The obvious starting point is Michael Azerrad's Come As You Are. You realy don't need any other Nirvana biography, because they all more or draw from this, which was originally written in 1993, and none of the others (even the Cobain bio Heavier Than Heaven) has its depth of coverage. It's an official bio in all but name, because the band wanted to give Azerrad freedom to write. It really is an invaluable resource, as it features extensive interviews with the band and all those involved with them as the band was at its peak, and it tells you an insane amount about the band's lives, the making of the albums, the stories behind songs, the arc of the band's career up til the completion of In Utero, really everything. Its main flaw is that it doesn't go beyond August 1993 in its coverage, aside from a bonus chapter about Kurt's death. For the albums, go for the Classic Rock Albums book on Nevermind by Charles Cross and Jim Berkenstadt, and the 33 1/3 series book on In Utero by Gillian Gaar. The former is probably out of print but still shows up in stores, while the latter is easy to obtain (you can get all 33 1/3 books on Amazon.com, but the quality of content in the series is wildly erratic; if you're interested in any other books in the series, make sure you read the summary so you know what its scope of coverage is). Also, get the Classic Albums DVD on Nevermind. You may have come across random Nirvana documentary videos in stores, but this is the only one that's worth your time, as its part of a BBC documentary series (meaning there's actual professionalism behind it, and it's not a cheapo cash grab), and it goes in-depth into the recording via 2001 interviews with every major person involved (aside from Kurt, obviously), including Krist, Dave, Butch Vig, and various people at Geffen. Finally, track down the collection The Nirvana Companion. This reprints articles from various sources, ranging from regional papers like The Rocket to important pieces by Melody Maker, Spin, and Billboard, all from different periods of the band's career. This one is most likely out of print, but it's invaluable if you want to see what the contemporary press wrote about Nirvana (in particular, the three-page Billboard article about the release of In Utero is a very interesting period snapshot of Geffen's promotion the album's release right before it came out; it even discusses how "Heart-Shaped Box" was doing on radio at the moment). Those are the best Nirvana sources. WesleyDodds (talk) 13:03, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah, Dave Grohl also does harmonies on "Something in the Way". WesleyDodds (talk) 00:35, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Charlize Theron

Did you see the change I made? I changed it to "South African" and then noted in the lead that she became an American citizen in 2007. That reflects her nationality at the time that she became notable, then includes becoming American. Personally, I think that reflects the standard regarding nationality accurately and also includes her later citizenship. This issue comes up once in a while with persons who later become citizens and this seems to be the most agreeable way to present the information. Wildhartlivie (talk) 00:32, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Glad to settle it! Thanks. Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:31, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Edit war

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Janeane Garofalo. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Consensus has not been reached. The discussion is ongoing and other methods including could also be used. Cptnono (talk) 20:51, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it was premature at all. It doesn't take 3rr to be an edit war. I gave the other editor a heads up so it was appropriate to do it to you.Cptnono (talk) 21:13, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

No problem. As I mentioned on the talk, I'm thinking you are right. just want it to be smooth and not see needless blocks. And the obnoxios bolding was the template and not me.Cptnono (talk) 21:16, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Religion

Hello User:

Look at the articles about Al Franken, Bruno Kreisky and Corazon Aquino for e. g.. You will find out something! -- 119.94.195.50 (talk) 12:08, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Kurt Cobain Edit

Could you stop removing Drums from Kurt Cobain's Instrumens section. I have a realiable sorce and video footage Megabar09 (talk) 22:30, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Levineps and categorisation

Re your post at User talk:Levineps: see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Levineps_and_categorisation. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 06:53, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

America

Thanks for your sage advice. I think I'll let this go. Though I still can't understand why the primary use of the word/noun America cannot be listed in a manner that reflects the most common way it is used in English. C'est la guerre. Ozdaren (talk) 10:00, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: Category:English-language albums

Just replied to your message on my talk page. Alex (talk) 21:43, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Hey

I used to live in Seattle do you know a singer named Sarey Savy? Over there? He's good! (R&B and Pop (talk) 20:26, 1 May 2010 (UTC))

Epeefleche mass reverts

Regarding his mass deletion of FAIR from wikipedia, shouldn't there be some punishement for something like this. It's very vandal like. If so is there a board or committe to report him to. annoynmous 07:17, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

No. At worst he was being overly bold in interpreting a comment from Jimbo, and given that he stopped and discussed the issue when others objected, this is a no-harm-no-foul matter as far as I'm concerned. --CAVincent (talk) 07:18, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Mudhoney and Skip Spence tribute album contribution

I agree with you that the single song contribution looked out of place in the main article text. I have reinstated the contribution in an abbreviated footnote, which I hope is considered reasonable. There's also the relevance of the Jim Dickinson production connection both here and in relation to their other recording activities at the time. One problem with the Mudhoney article is the surprising (at least to me) lack of referencing. While their involvement with the Spence tribute is significant (being in the same company as Beck, Tom Waits and...Robert Plant...), even referenced as a footnote, it becomes but one of three such footnotes to the entire article.

Dreadarthur (talk) 21:41, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Grunge

Re: one of your edit comments in the page history: Yeah, I actually did stop watching the page because I was busy off-wiki for the last few months. I'm watching it again now, though. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:52, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

A bit rich?

Hi there. Please see this. Thank you! -- Hoary (talk) 04:18, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to look at edits on IQ reference chart

I see the article IQ reference chart has been tagged for expert review since October 2012. As part of a process of drafting a revision of that article in my user sandbox, I am contacting all Wikipedians who have edited that article since early 2009 for whom I can find a user talk page.

I have read all the diffs of all the edits committed to the article since the beginning of 2009 (since before I started editing Wikipedia). I see the great majority of edits over that span have been vandalism (often by I.P. editors, presumably teenagers, inserting the names of their classmates in charts of IQ classifications) and reversions of vandalism (sometimes automatically by ClueBot). Just a few editors have referred to and cited published reliable sources on the topic of IQ classification. It is dismaying to see that the number of reliable sources cited in the article has actually declined over the last few years. To help the process of finding reliable sources for articles on psychology and related topics, I have been compiling a source list on intelligence since I became a Wikipedian in 2010, and I invite you to make use of those sources as you revise articles on Wikipedia and to suggest further sources for the source on the talk pages of the source list and its subpages. Because the IQ reference chart article has been tagged as needing expert attention for more than half a year, I have opened discussion on the article's talk page about how to fix the article, and I welcome you to join the discussion. The draft I have in my user sandbox shows my current thinking about a reader-friendly, well sourced way to update and improve the article. I invite your comments and especially your suggestions of reliable sources as the updating process proceeds. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 20:23, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, CAVincent. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Lords of the New Church edit

The source was copied to be the Wikipedia article, not vice versa. https://www.bang-records.net/bands/lords-of-the-new-church/ That company is the record company that currently owns the Lords of the New Church license. They would know better than anyone if it's a Goth band or not. What is your proof that you can not only take off Goth as the band's primary genre, but completely excise it as a genre description from the band as you did on the wiki page?! Do you have a hatred of the Goth Rock music genre for some reason?

---

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.234.66.73 (talk) 08:13, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

List of Seattle musicians

Hello CAVincent! I see you removed my addition of Melvins because they're not from Seattle, which is true, and not significantly associated with Seattle. I will have to disagree with the latter. They were featured on the Deep Six compilation, recorded their debut release in Seattle, undoubtedly played many gigs in Seattle venues and influenced pretty much every grunge band on the Seattle scene during that phenomenon.

On the subject of inclusion, in reviewing your edits I cannot help but notice that the preponderance of them are deletions on the grounds that they are not from Seattle and/or not significantly associated with same or not notable. I submit that any artist from or significantly associated with the Seattle Area who has a supporting Wikipedia article should be included, the supporting article being the benchmark for "notable" status. Further, as noted above, I would expand the list to include the Greater Seattle Area, as any artist from Olympia to Aberdeen to Bellingham to Ellensburg worth their salt would play gigs in Seattle, the musical Mecca of Western Washington.

There should definitely be some protocols established for this page.

Looking forward to your response. IdiotSavantii (talk) 01:21, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

In further review I had to agree that Ernestine Anderson doesn't really belong. I overlooked that she didn't come to Seattle until she was 16 and was gone at 18 never to return. However, she is a big name in a genre that is not rock. I'm OK with leaving her on if you are.

A big thanks for cleaning up the parathenses!!

I know I expanded the list quite a bit today. It seems to me that the list isn't for those familiar with Seattle but for those who are not. They should be able to explore the width and breadth of Seattle music, from high brow to lo-fi. IdiotSavantii (talk) 03:29, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Naked Raygun

Regarding your recent edit to the Big Black article, did you consider calling Naked Raygun a "punk" band? -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 22:41, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

HIMARS numbers

Here is a source for another batch which says the total is 20. Is this reliable?

https://www.rferl.org/a/us-270-million-military-aid-four-himars-ukraine/31955837.html America789 (talk) 22:32, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with the source and WP:RSP doesn't mention it. I have a suspicion that two announcements of the same four HIMARS are causing a double count. My guess is that this will be clearer in the next couple days - if there really is a total of 20 from the US, that's a big enough story that a major organization like the BBC, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, etc. would surely report it. CAVincent (talk) 22:45, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Which is to say, I think I'll take a 24-48 hour break from editing on the issue, and see what turns up. Cheers. CAVincent (talk) 22:47, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Understanding where the English Language came from

On the talk of English-speaking world discussion, you said the United Kingdom is not the birth place of the English Language, I think you'll find that it is and I think this information might suggests otherwise, English is a West Germanic language of the Indo-European language family, with its earliest forms spoken by the inhabitants of early medieval England. It is named after the Angles, one of the ancient Germanic peoples that migrated to the island of Great Britain. And Great Britain is the island of the Country of the United Kingdom, and another piece of information I have found is, England and the Scottish Lowlands, countries of the United Kingdom, are the birthplace of the English language, and the modern form of the language has been being spread around the world since the 17th century, first by the worldwide influence of the United Kingdom, hope it makes things more clearer for you, So technically CAVincent, You're wrong and I have therefore deleted your comment 82.19.124.151 (talk) 09:46, 15 September 2022 (UTC) 82.19.124.151 (talk) 09:46, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Note about removal of 2 wars

I have noted you have removed 2 of my additions of Wars. Please do note that I have built a constructive argument in the talk page as well as replied to individual about their arguments. And no I will not stop because people deserve to know the truth regarding these 2 wars and the fact that they did exist and have gone largely unnoticed. These are true events that occurred in History. If you feel so otherwise, feel free to try and rebut to all the evidences I have given in the Talk page (I appreciate that you mentioned that page as some has ignorantly ignored). Also do read Ramayana, it helps. ParthNaik1605 (talk) 15:26, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Consensus

That was not me, who added it initially, but I agree with both your comment and edit, that looks much better. Btw, how did you notice about my edit had place (as it was not clear undo but edited)? If there was some notice to you about it - what was it based on? 85.238.103.38 (talk) 09:27, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Nirvana previous names

Hi CAVincent! Please can you explain why you reverted my edit on adding Nirvana's previous names - adding them to the info box and to the timeline? All edits were provided through the trusted sources. Plus added two live/session musicians who were playing at the early gigs - again, trusted sources provided. You said: "revert to last by Shhhnotsoloud; good faith edits, but not improvements". But actually it's a really helpful improvement - to reflect the name changes, especially on the timeline. Please can you help and answer here, how to add this info to the page then? Thank you in advance! Anton aka N-Devil (talk) 09:27, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello. I might not have reverted the edit's had Nirvana not already been a featured article. Unfortunately, featured articles have a tendency to degrade over time with well-intentioned additions of trivial and poorly sourced material, which is (at least in part) why grunge is no longer a featured article. The earlier band names are trivial. The brief mention given to them in the text is (in my opinion) sufficient, and adding them to either the infobox or timeline should probably have consensus to do so; I may be wrong, but I doubt that consensus would add them. As for the additional musicians who maybe practiced or played a few early shows: Nirvana's history is very well documented, and adding musicians at this point is going to need much better sources for inclusion than a fan page and an MTV fluff article. CAVincent (talk) 08:02, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Latino disambiguation page changes

Hello CAVicent! Please, I would like to know why did you undo the change I made in disambiguation page? I was born and raise, and currently living, in Latino American. I find extremely offesive, and i'm not the only one who feels like that, that the word "latino" is rapidly becoming exclusive for US American people who claim heritage from any country that are considered part of Latino America. We could argue on the semantics and the usage of the word in the English language. However, more often than not, the word "Latino" is used as a mark of cultural identity which tranforms the terminology into a completely different conversation that goes beyond semantics, especially in the United States. Even the article of the word in question says, very briefly and simplefied, some of the problematic reasons of the term for people in the United States. If you desire, I can provide you with articles on that. That is not the case in any corner in Latin America. We have develped during centuries a rich academic, cultural, and literary corpuses advocating and growing the Latino identity in Latino America since the Amerindian Oral tradition and Cuentos de caballerìa en el nuevo mundo until the groundbreaking Boom literario latinoamericano with collaboration from the Strait of Magellan to the Sonoran desert. It is a way to reaffirm our common history of demonation of foreing powers, mestizaje, culture, slavery and social norms throughout Latino America. Also, even Merriam-Webster dictionary has as first entry for Latino as "a native or inhabitant of Latin America" as the dicionary of la Real academia de la lengua española and others such as Académie Française and the Duden Wörterbuch.

I think I have laid out well enough why the word "Latino" should prioritize the sense of "The people or cultures of Latin America". So, I am curious why do you think it shouldn't be like that?

Thanks for reading Litofuentealba (talk) 06:24, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

A disambiguation page should list primary usages first. In English, the term "Latino" is primarily used by US Americans, and primarily refers to people with Latin American heritage who live in the US. I understand that this is not the only use of the word, and other frequent usages are also in the article very close to the top. I also understand that native Spanish speakers use the term differently than we do in the US. The article, and my edits to it, are not meant to disrespect the people of Latin America; they are just meant to help wikipedia users find the article that they are looking for.CAVincent (talk) 07:10, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Quite poor argumentation. Unfortantely, You do disrepect people from Latino America with you expression and preference for U.S American usage. That this article is in English doesn not mean that the United States and its citizens have a monopoly on the English Language and its usage, especially in the case of a word that denotes a specific cultural indentity and baggage. More than that, your whole answer defies the very intetion of Wikipedia itself as a plataform for democratizing knowlaged that should belong to everyone in the world regardless where they are and who they are and the idea of collective knowledge that Wikipedia advocates. If you really desire to go to the route of usage in the US, that why I care enough to mention Merriam-Webster dictionary, which is the largest and most consulted dictionary in the U.S, that compiles corpus linguistics with the exclusive English usage in the U.S to define the meanings in each entry. It is quite sad to see an editor of such a important and accesible page as Wikipedia to exercise American Imperialism and cultural bias openly. Since I believe that you do not attend to reasons and I can say with a high level of certainty that from your point of view that I cannot be reasoned with, this conversation is finished. Regardless of our different views, thank you reading and answer. Litofuentealba (talk) 16:53, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

From my point of view, you are a person who deserves respect, even if we disagree. Thank you, and be well. CAVincent (talk) 18:11, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Gringo

I don't understand your reversion of my constructive edit. The word is very much really an English word. One that is imported from Spanish as noted. That's why it exists in English dictionaries and that's what this English language wikipedia is for. Wikipedia is not a translation service. Please revert to my edits as they actually summarise the previous conversations on that talk as well as the meaning of the word from super reliable dictionary sources in a non controversial way. Interestingly I see your reply about Latino agrees with my line of reasoning completely, which only make your reversal of my contributions even more puzzling and inconsistent. 89.19.88.167 (talk) 20:04, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Chris Cornell

I was just noting something here about the Chris Cornell talk page. I came back to this later because it almost seemed like Serge... was trolling. I'm seriously not one of the same person(s) who posted those other comments requesting that something be done about the claim that Chris Cornell (or his mother) was Jewish on that page. You can see how someone might get the impression that he is Jewish, though. I think the reference at the bottom of the page should be removed about him being Jewish, and it proves that people interpret it that way. I think some people use those links at the bottom, too. I wish I would've gotten back to this earlier because I didn't know there was a time limit until the talk page became archived. At the very least, I think the statement in question here needs to be elucidated more. She could be religiously Jewish, too. So, if you came to that conclusion, I won't charge you on that account. But I was actually being generous there, too. 216.47.52.36 (talk) 05:34, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Nevermind. I don't know if it matters that much. 216.47.52.36 (talk) 14:11, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Re: LeftLion

I’m not the primary contributor who wrote the material you removed, but LeftLion meets the reliable source requirement, and the stolen frog was pretty notable in the music press. So, just a note to say I disagree with your removal. Viriditas (talk) 05:53, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

"LeftLion is put together by a range of creatives"? On the plus side, I see that "(m)ost of these contribute on a voluntary basis", so at least not all of the "creatives" are enslaved. Color me unconvinced. More directly to the point, some passing reference to one or more stolen frogs would need to be explained - were these pet frogs? Giant inflatable frogs? CAVincent (talk) 06:45, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

It’s not my battle, I’m just someone who helped the nom get the page through DYK. But I did want you know that I disagreed with your edits. That’s all. Viriditas (talk) 07:17, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

children's given names

hi fellow wikipedian, i daily scrupulously scrub wikipedia biographies of living persons of the given names of non notable offspring, as per long-standing policy. i noticed you politely disagreed, and referred to my proper application as somewhat clumsy.

i am going to double back and fix that for you, i remove hundreds of those given names yearly.

thanks again for helping keep my encyclopedia adroit, That'sHedley (talk) 07:37, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Bob Knight

Hi CAVincent! What do you think of the idea of opening a wp:move request on Talk:Bob Knight? ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 10:09, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

I think the move should happen, but it's probably not something I care enough about to spend time making the request myself. I've never edited that article and probably hadn't thought about Bobby Knight for a decade plus before coming across the article. CAVincent (talk) 00:11, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Sure, I understand. I'm going to ping the other users in that discussion to see what they think. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 14:14, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:28, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Insertion of the vídeo of WIKITONGUES - American English

There's a reason to keep that, to show how the American English sound like to a foreigner who doesn't speak it (I'm not even American, but I think it's useful) Tcygnus (talk) 00:57, 18 December 2023 (UTC)