User talk:Frosty/archive6

New Zealand Police

Hi, I just needed to revision delete one of your reversions to the changes to the New Zealand Police article to hide the violations of WP:BLP you had been removing. I've also blocked that editor. Thanks for keeping an eye on the article! Nick-D (talk) 06:22, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Not a problem and thanks :) —Frosty ☃ 06:48, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

The Balls

Sir, I performed the edit you so flippantly reverted at the behest of ReynTime, as they are temporarily without internet access. Kindly restore it. 162.219.179.92 (talk) 07:15, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

No I don't think so, please don't vandalize and please don't pretend that you didn't. Both are just wasting your time. —Frosty ☃ 07:26, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Wasn't me

this isn't me someone else is signed into my account — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.72.50.223 (talk • contribs)

I'm confused, do you mean edits made anonymously? (via your IP address) In which case that it because you are using a shared IP, so I would recommend creating an account to avoid confusing messages. Or do you mean somebody has gained access to your account? In which case I strongly advise you to change your password immediately. Can you please give me a more detailed description of what you mean? It will help me to help you :) —Frosty ☃ 10:56, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Please check Non-Summit for vandalism again

Hi Mr. Frosty! The vandal patrol has struck again, and I don't want to get into edit wars! --Bonnielou2013 (talk) 22:24, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

I took a look and I'm not sure there is actually any vandalism. If you look at the diff between the last time I reverted on that page and the current revision, I did not notice any instances of vandalism that were similar to the ones before. There was large chunk of text removed, but I'm no expert on the topic so I'm not sure if that was a necessary paragraph. Anyway, I suggest you have a look at the diff and compare the version I reverted to yesterday and the current one, if there is anything wrong then feel free to correct it. —Frosty ☃ 22:43, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for looking. Yes, there was a missing paragraph (with no discussion on Talk pages as to why it was deleted) - and a missing cast member, and the charts were messed up. I'm actually neutral on the scandal that is upsetting everyone, and today's seemed to be from the opposite side! Anyway, I left a message on the IP user's page and reverted the edits. Hopefully they will talk to me if they want to make changes again. Thanks for looking it over! You're a busy bee! I mean catfish! (p.s. catfish is one of my favorite delectibles!)--Bonnielou2013 (talk) 23:52, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Cool and you're welcome :) —Frosty ☃ 00:17, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Question

why did you delete my edit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RMGB17 (talk • contribs)

Because the question part you added seemed kind of unnecessary and silly, you also (be accident perhaps?) added some code further down the page that would have caused issues with the page markup. —Frosty ☃ 22:32, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 December 2014

• Op-ed: Who edits health-related content on Wikipedia and why?

• In the media: Embroidery and cheese

• Featured content: ABCD: Any Body Can Dance!

• Traffic report: Turkey and a movie

• WikiProject report: Today on the island

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:30, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

December vandalism

Ugh, sorry about that. Roommate thought he was being funny by changing "birth" to "birf" on the December article. I mean, I guess it's sort of funny? I would have laughed if I'd read that myself randomly reading the page, but wasn't a fan of it being done on my computer. Again... my apologies! Keep doing what you're doing :-). --64.22.236.163 (talk) 07:51, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

It's ok. —Frosty ☃ 09:59, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Pirate party

Not quite sure why you reverted my edit to the Wisconsin Pirate party. Is it because the page endorsed a specific candidate? It's interesting that the previous political party page simply points to the new page as "new website." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.198.112.250 (talk) 00:23, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

It appears I made a mistake, I meant to mark your edit as "good" but accidentally reverted it, I have restored your version of the page. Sorry about that. —Frosty ☃ 00:27, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Nice to see someone else on Huggle that isn't Cluebot NG for a change. Keep it up! A Wild Abigail Appears! Capture me. Moves. 06:09, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Wheeeeeeee thanks :) —Frosty ☃ 09:43, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Prove me wrong

You say you deal with facts - prove to me in fact that my edit is incorrect. You have no right to remove a valid post. Prove to me that fact or quit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.176.90.55 (talk) 02:22, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

I don't want to argue with you about "divine intervention" being existent or not. It can be neither proven nor disproven, however to be quoted as valid in the context you were giving it, it must be proven. Please don't re-add it. —Frosty ☃ 04:48, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

hey

You have to actually listen to people sometimes and not say there not telling the truth. Which by the way is extremely rude and I'm sure everyone hates it. -awesomemee854 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awesomemee854 (talk • contribs) 04:38, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

If you are referring to your edits that I reverted, I did so because you added irrelevant information as well as wording that would be considered as an opinion/not neutral. Please read WP:NPOV, thanks. —Frosty ☃ 05:43, 10 December 2014 (UTC

Moscrop

hey, why did you remove my edits to the moscrop page? I actually go there an my edits are 100% valid — Preceding unsigned comment added by CMLSislove (talk • contribs)

Because they aren't correct. —Frosty ☃ 00:11, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Sir do you go to moscrop? Because I do — Preceding unsigned comment added by CMLSislove (talk • contribs) 00:17, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

You claimed it was controlled by bikies. I highly doubt that. —Frosty ☃ 00:21, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

I put that as a joke to screenshot and send to my friends and intended to remove it, my apologies but the rest was 100% accurate — Preceding unsigned comment added by CMLSislove (talk • contribs) 00:22, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 December 2014

• Op-ed: It's GLAM up North!

• In the media: Wikipedia is "a rancorous, sexist, elitist, stupidly bureaucratic mess"

• Traffic report: Dead Black Men and Science Fiction

• Featured content: Honour him, love and obey? Good idea with military leaders.

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:51, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Car Rental

You just deleted a link I posted on a car rental page. It's a car rental company. As you'll see Hertz and all of the other major companies are listed on this page. Is there a reason a smaller rental co shouldn't be allowed to list just the same? Please restore the link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rebeltraveler (talk • contribs) 09:46, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Verve Car Rentrals fails Wikipedia:Notability. For example, it does not have it's own Wikipedia page (you'll note Hertz does) and it also only operates within Nevada, meaning someone like me (an Australia) would never even heard of these people. Please only reference major/extremely notable car rental companies if you feel the need to. —Frosty ☃ 09:53, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Again, aparently you feel the need to suppress smaller car rental companies. Just because you don't live in the region Verve Car Rentals services doesn't mean it shouldn't appear on the website. I guarantee that there are other companies listed on that page that aren't in your country, are you going to delete them too? If that's your criteria, then be fair about it across the board. People deserve to hear about small companies also as reference points that show variations within the rentals industry. Notable cash car rentals which Verve offers and this is a variation that the "giants" don't offer. So, it's a valid point of reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rebeltraveler (talk • contribs) 10:17, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

If this car rental company was included, what about the dozens of other small rental companies it doesn't? Wouldn't they also be equally worth a mention? The thing is, there is simply far too many in existence to list them all. Second of all, Wikipedia's article on Car Rental should be about what it is, not where people can rent a car from on one small part of the planet, that kind of information can be found through Yellow Pages. —Frosty ☃ 21:53, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry

Mr.Frosty, I am pretty much fine with you deleting one of my nonconstructive errors. I apologize to you and the Wikipedia creators, as it was done out of obnoxiousness. I will not commit such an act again and I will make sure that I won't. Thank you for your courtesy, and I hope that no one will be offended in any way by this error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shreyas2604 (talk • contribs)

Eh, thats ok. —Frosty ☃ 03:38, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

H3

Hi Frosty, you have done well the Iranians DID NOT lose any aircrafts during the attack, they also had no time or equipment in their jets to photograph the amount of the destruction they claim, also H3 is far from the Iranian airbases that it's impossible to have it on a reconnaissance mission due to the long distance and the Iraqi AAs across the boarder.

also I don't know where to explain why ( sorry I'm a newbie ) thanks for your time and effort. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sammir005 (talk • contribs)

You can simply explain with an edit summary or on the talk page. I'd also recommend instead of simply blanking the text you believe to be inaccurate, you correct it and reference it. Like so --> <ref>insert a website/other source here</ref> —Frosty ☃ 04:28, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Post deletion

Why you delete my Post?- KoalaKommander (talk) 04:15, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

You know why. Please do not re-add what you said, it is not appropriate for Wikipedia. —Frosty ☃ 04:29, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Bradley Fletcher

Hey Frosty, I made a revision on Bradley Fletcher's page which I Believe to be entirely ture. lease do not refrain me from my personal actions as it impedes on my rights. Thanks!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.245.60.12 (talk) 06:11, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

I can revert you if your edits are not constructive and constitute edit warring. Both of which were the case. —Frosty ☃ 09:44, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Elephants

the population of elephants has tripled — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.71.239.15 (talk • contribs)

Ok, why are you telling me this? —Frosty ☃ 06:39, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 December 2014

• Arbitration report: Arbitration Committee election results

• Featured content: Tripping hither, tripping thither, Nobody knows why or whither; We must dance and we must sing, Round about our fairy ring!

• In the media: Wikipedia's year in review video; Checking in with Wikipedia's founders

• Traffic report: A December Lull

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:08, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hey Frosty,

I've read your article about the turkish daily yeni safak, the problem is that there is so much disinformation inside it and it is portraying one of the most liberal dailies in the turkish press as an islamist and bigoted newspapers. The newspapers still have a huge number of left-wing columnist. I suggest tat you read this article http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/make-muhammad-the-smiling-prophet-again.aspx?pageID=449&nID=76680&NewsCatID=515

Also,I would like to make the article less biased and more balanced ( like honestly if yeni safak in antisemite and bigoted what are you going to say about newspapers like yeni akit for example).Yeni safak are very moderate and it is one of the few remaining newspapers where actual leftist and right wing columnists can still work together. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.122.64.60 (talk) 07:20, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi Frosty,

Thanks for the message. Yes that edit was did by mistake. I was about to add a new company information and I liked the style Blue Fountain Media Created the page. I was confused with the options so I stopped editing the page. I am really sorry for the mistake.

Thanks, Kranthi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kranthi4u (talk • contribs) 06:34, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

That's ok, not a problem :) —Frosty ☃ 06:54, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

PCSO-524

Why Frosty, why? Why did you restore the old version of the information for PCSO-524, which is outdated, has a couple of points that could be more accurate and is long and rambling? The version that I posted has been scrutinised by a panel of consultant medical and scientific experts, most of whom have PhDs and some of whom are professors of medicine. By restoring the old version, you went down the road of inaccuracy. Do you profess to know more than PhDs who have done the research into PCSO-524, or are you motivated by malice? Please, look up the references that are provided. Every statement is referenced. Do you perchance know Mr Shymanski? - Carl Thompson — Preceding unsigned comment added by CarlThompson (talk • contribs) 12:05, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Mainly because it removed all the wiki links and made it look very un-encyclopedic. If you want your version to stay up, I suggest that you add some wiki links to other articles. —Frosty ☃ 23:25, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

@CarlThompson: You have been told "twice" prior to your last reinsertion (and now "four' times) why your material is being deleted from the article. Wikipedia does not accept promotional material (read: advertising) from accounts related to any company involved with any article's subject. Further, Wikipedia does not accept editors who are paid to edit in a topic area without proper disclosure and acceptance (and even then any contributions must be proposed on the talk page and not edited in directly). As you are now aware, the administrators have been made aware of the continued conflict of interest of which you have been made aware and of which you continue to refuse to abide. It does not matter that your company has approved the material that you continue to insert, it is not acceptable here. If you conttnue to reinsert your unwanted promotional material, the result will almost certainly be that your account is blocked from any further editing on Wikipedia. DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 19:27, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 2014

• From the editor: Looking for new editors-in-chief

• In the media: Wales on GamerGate

• Featured content: Still quoting Iolanthe, apparently.

• WikiProject report: Microsoft does The Signpost

• Traffic report: North Korea is not pleased

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:26, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

invincible/ Michael jackson

hi im interested in changing the first sentence in Michael Jackson invincible album, to "was his final album", then in his second sentence put "tenth studio album",but I have run into some opposition, can you help? thanks do you think you have a minute to look at this--65.8.187.212 (talk) 11:49, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Try bringing it up on the talk page. I don't know much about his music and whether what you say is correct or what the article says is correct. —Frosty ☃ 22:07, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Nicole Baukus

Hi - why did you undo an edit? the page is clearly designed to be slanderous and libelous to the person and is being used as a sounding board of assassination of character. Please explain whey you undid the page blank. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PageEditor90210 (talk • contribs) 08:09, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

If you consider a page on a notable person to be slanderous, you should try and make it so the page reads better, you don't have to just blank the whole thing to do this. Full page blanking is considered to be vandalism. —Frosty ☃ 08:46, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I understand exactly what you are saying. Please tell me the process to have the current image replaced with one that we actually have rights to and will be more representative. [[1]]show that it is being used 1. No free equivalent. Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose. Contextual significance. 8. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. The picture linked and displayed is not representative of the person at all. How do we ask for it to be removed and replaced now that a proper image can be uploaded? — Preceding unsigned comment added by PageEditor90210 (talk • contribs) 09:34, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

I think no image would be for the best here. Most articles about living people who are only notable through crimes committed have no photo. I will remove it for you. —Frosty ☃ 10:08, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Fake information

Dear Frosty, Saw the message of yours. I have removed & edited some of the contents of the page Highest Grossing tamil movies because it's all giving a fake box-office records of movies. So please raise a question to the admin of the page. Sorry for my act but what are going to do when these type of people create false reports... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clement jacob (talk • contribs) 18:28, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Pages don't have people that own them. What you can do is start a discussion on the article's talk page if you believe there is incorrect information. —Frosty ☃ 23:11, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Reporting a mistake.

	Reporting a mistake.
	Hi Frosty. I just received a message from you for having made some changes in the Female Condom page. But I didn't make any such change. I think it was a mistake. Bidyabrata Majumdar (talk) 09:33, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

I assume this was sent to an anonymous IP? If so, then maybe somebody else editing under your IP made the edit. —Frosty ☃ 01:50, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 December 2014

• News and notes: The next big step for Wikidata—forming a hub for researchers

• In the media: Study tour controversy; class tackles the gender gap

• Traffic report: Surfin' the Yuletide

• Op-ed: My issues with the Wiki Education Foundation

• Featured content: A bit fruity

• Recent research: Wikipedia in higher education; gender-driven talk page conflicts; disease forecasting

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:11, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

The unblanking of Mark Tan Wei Jie

I saw that you unblanked Mark Tan Wei Jie, and I understand that reaction to seeing an article blanked. However, an author blanking an article that he created is understood here to be a request for deletion of the page - you can see that described in WP:G7. In this case, the article was an apparent autobiography (editor with the same name as the topic), the article had been PRODded (by me) and a standard template note about creating autobiographies had been placed on the user's talk page, so it seems clear that he saw that what he had done was outside our guidelines and sought to undo it.

I have reblanked the page, and tagged it for speedy deletion. --Nat Gertler (talk) 08:19, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, thats all cool/I know all that. Chances are I was using huggle and didn't notice that it was the page creator that blanked it. My mistake. —Frosty ☃ 05:28, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 January 2015

• In the media: ISIL propaganda video; AirAsia complaints

• Interview: Interview with Jakob, one of Wikipedia's more prolific waterway contributors

• Featured content: Kock up

• Traffic report: Auld Lang Syne

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:39, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 January 2015

• Op-ed: Articles for creation needs you

• WikiProject report: Articles for creation: the inside story

• News and notes: Erasmus Prize recognizes the global Wikipedia community

• In the media: Wikipedia's birthday brings tributes, app, award; Castro death rumors

• Featured content: Citations are needed

• Traffic report: Wikipédia sommes Charlie

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:27, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 January 2015

• From the editor: Introducing your new editors-in-chief

• Anniversary: A decade of the Signpost

• Interview: WWII veteran honors shipmates through Wikipedia editing

• News and notes: Annual report released; Wikimania; steward elections

• Op-ed: Let's make WikiProjects better

• In the media: Johann Hari; bandishes and delicate flowers

• Featured content: Yachts, marmots, boat races, and a rocket engineer who attempted to birth a goddess

• Arbitration report: As one door closes, a (Gamer)Gate opens

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:14, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

It's a small interbutts after all

Was that you I spied reverting an edit on "Yo-yo"? --DSA510 Pls No AndN 05:28, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Maybe, idk? —Frosty ☃ 23:08, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 January 2015

• From the editor: An editorial board that includes you

• In focus: Thirteen editors sanctioned in mammoth GamerGate arbitration case

• In the media: A murderous week for Wikipedia

• Forum: Evaluating the Arbitration Committee's handling of GamerGate

• Traffic report: A sea of faces

• Recent research: Bot writes about theatre plays; "Renaissance editors" create better content

• Special report: Traffic in the fog—most-viewed articles of 2014 include death, Facebook, and Ebola

• Featured content: Like Jack Kerouac's On The Road, this week's issue was written on amphetamines

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:15, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Gypsey Race

You complained about my gypsey race facts but its true because I have family and history that lays in Bridlington — Preceding unsigned comment added by Katyperry27 (talk • contribs)

You had quite obviously made it up yourself. The info you added was neither accurate nor encyclopedic. —Frosty ☃ 00:27, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 February 2015

• News and notes: No men beyond this point: the proposal to create a no-men space on Wikipedia

• Op-ed: Is Wikipedia for sale?

• In the media: Gamergate and Muhammad controversies continue

• Traffic report: The American Heartland

• Featured content: It's raining men!

• Arbitration report: Slamming shut the GamerGate

• WikiProject report: Dicing with death – on Wikipedia?

• Technology report: Security issue fixed; VisualEditor changes

• Gallery: Langston Hughes

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Stefano Pessina

Do you work for this guy?

I guess not because you obviously have time to edit Wikipedia pages about a man that employs people on zero hour contracts, pays very little and then makes stupid comments paid for by a political parties whilst he collects money from the NHS he doesn't contribute anything too [its not just 'accusations'].

I have never felt the need to comment or edit anything on here but I am an optician and a respectable person whilst this man is an idiot and I don't see how you are in a better position to see if my comment was constructive or not when I have to work for this cretin.

nick, my real name 2.126.201.53 (talk) 14:15, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

No I do not. But whether or not this person is bad or not, you can't include slander. We deal in facts not opinions, no matter how relevant or accurate they may seem to you. This is true of all Wikipedia pages about people, not just him specifically. —Frosty ☃ 22:15, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Soccerumors

I am so sorry. That was a mistake on the accidental delete of the Caesar Cervin page. Please forgive me.I was trying to edit a line and went the wrong way. Thanks so much for restoring it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.101.106.23 (talk) 05:34, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Thats alright, happy editing. —Frosty ☃ 06:45, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Earthcore

hello Frosty

The claims made by Cyruss are based upon no actual evidence whatsoever, no media articles or anything other than defamatory and slanderous opinions of the writer.

These slanderous comments are based on no facts whatsoever and therefore do no belong on the page.

Look at the history of these trolls doing this in the past and these comments have been removed by people higher up in the Wiki chain

I will continue to delete this unsupported slander and by all means get a higher authority involved that will look at the talk history and support my actions

Also noted that Cyruss works for competiing festival organisation named Rainbow Serpent and his intentions are purely based on bringing his competiting organisation down (earthcore) for this organisation — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.37.151 (talk) 07:25, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Ok, please use an edit summary to explain future content removal. Even if you don't think it's necessary, it's helpful in making people realize you want to improve a page rather than blank for no reason. I see on your latest revision that you have. —Frosty ☃ 07:33, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Also read the lengthy talk section where higher up wiki editors have stepped in a dealt with this article trolling before. The reality is that Cyruss works for Rainbow Serpent festival which is a competiting event in the same region of Australia. A simple browser of his previous contributions proves his intent and bias. If anything I suggest you delete his personal intent slander instead of remotely entertaining the thought that it deserves to be considered of any merit whatsoever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.37.151 (talk) 07:43, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

I really don't mind what you do, just as long as it isn't vandalism/blanking. If you are removing stuff, give a reason. I personally don't know anything about this person and probably won't edit the article again unless it gets vandalized. —Frosty ☃ 09:27, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Frosty common sense dictates that you need to research things like the talk pages and history to gather a clearer understanding about unsupported claims and personal opinions before acting on the behalf by maintaining these claims with rash decisions like the ones you attempted to impose. Is there some guidelines about over zealous revert editors like you ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.213.48.211 (talk) 01:13, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

If I looked into every revert I made when it came to pageblanking I would never get anything done. Please read this though it explains what I have just said about it being good editing practice to provide one, when making a substantial edit. Edit summary from you = 5 seconds, research and thorough detailed analysis from me = 5 minutes. It's just generally helpful to provide one. —Frosty ☃ 04:07, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 February 2015

• From the editors: We want to know what you think!

• News and notes: One editor faces likely ban for work on Wikipedia; Jimmy Wales awarded $1 million

• In the media: Is Wikipedia eating itself?

• Featured content: A grizzly bear, Operation Mascot, Freedom Planet & Liberty Island, cosmic dust clouds, a cricket five-wicket list, more fine art, & a terrible, terrible opera...

• Traffic report: Bowled over

• WikiProject report: Brand new WikiProjects profiled

• Gallery: Feel the love

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:44, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Valentine Greets!!!

Valentine Greets!!!

Hello Frosty, love is the language of hearts and is the feeling that joins two souls and brings two hearts together in a bond. Taking love to the level of Wikipedia, spread the WikiLove by wishing each other Happy Valentine's Day, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm love on the eve, Happy editing, --L235 (talk) As a courtesy, please ping me when replying. 01:10, 14 February 2015 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Valentine Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

No warning?

Hey, why didn't you warn the user who made this vandalistic edit? Just curious, because I see you've been warning other users. Thanks. -Newyorkadam (talk) 23:14, 16 February 2015 (UTC)Newyorkadam

There should have been one, sometimes it doesn't deliver messages for some reason. I wouldn't worry about it unless they do it again. —Frosty ☃ 03:30, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

edit 2/18/15

I removed a part a friend showed me about Chinese women showing affection for male babies by putting their lips around their penises. Basically that piece of information was false and so I removed it. He later said why I didn't removed the citations to that and so I went back and removed those.73.11.43.59 (talk) 08:36, 19 February 2015 (UTC)Nitroflame73.11.43.59 (talk) 08:36, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Yeah I saw, thanks for clearing it up. —Frosty ☃ 10:43, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 February 2015

• Editorial: Recent retirements typify problem of admin attrition

• In the media: Students' use and perception of Wikipedia

• Special report: Revision scoring as a service

• Gallery: Darwin Day

• Traffic report: February is for lovers

• Featured content: A load of bull-sized breakfast behind the restaurant, Koi feeding, a moray eel, Spaghetti Nebula and other fishy, fishy fish

• Arbitration report: We've built the nuclear reactor; now what colour should we paint the bikeshed?

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:24, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Editing

I am bad at editing stuff, so I'll try not to do big edits. I'm going to use the sandbox you told me about thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zatzamune (talk • contribs)

That's alright, you'll get better with practice. —Frosty ☃ 22:11, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Is there some sort of official tutorial out there on how Wikipedia works? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zatzamune (talk • contribs) 09:26, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes. I would recommend you start at Help:Editing and have a thorough read of it, it contains a lot of other helpful internal links to other relevant guides to wikipedia editing. —Frosty ☃ 10:14, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Frank Traynor

Frosty,

I refer to you removing the link to the Frank Traynor's Folk and Jazz History Project. You obviously did not look at the site, or not very carefully, as the site features a section on Declan Affley,written by his widow, and is VERY RELEVANT as a reference to the Wikipedia entry. I do not know where you get the authority to remove links like this, but I think you should do your homework a little more carefully in future before doing stuff like this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.240.150.70 (talk) 11:47, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, the main reason I removed the link was because it seemed very randomly placed within the page. You are welcome to contribute relevant external links, but they should either be in a reference section or external link section at the bottom of the page. If I can refer you to the external links policy it says at the top of the page, that external links in the body of an article should generally be avoided. If they are relevant and you place them in the correct part of the article, then please feel free to add them. —Frosty ☃ 05:25, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Kilroy edit

It is a lot simpler to use the phrase "meme" than "popular culture expression". Everyone knows what a meme is, but "popular culture expression" can confuse people.2607:FB90:2504:909A:0:0:0:464 (talk) 00:02, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

I would have thought it more confusing simply because most people associate "meme" with popular culture expressions in an online context. Whilst it is true that a meme does not have to come from an online context, they are strongly associated. I personally would leave it as it is, but you are welcome to disagree. I guess it doesn't matter that much what expression is used in the article. —Frosty ☃ 00:49, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 February 2015

• News and notes: Questions raised over WMF partnership with research firm

• Op-ed: Text from Wikipedia good enough for Oxford University Press to claim as own

• In the media: WikiGnomes and Bigfoot

• Featured content: The Moon, Mars, Venus, and Saturn, in no particular order. Also, Kaiser Kong.

• Gallery: Far from home

• Traffic report: Fifty Shades of... self-denial?

• Recent research: Gender bias, SOPA blackout, and a student assignment that backfired

• WikiProject report: Be prepared... Scouts in the spotlight

• Blog: Join the Wikimedia strategy consultation

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:38, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 February 2015

• News and notes: Questions raised over WMF partnership with research firm

• Op-ed: Text from Wikipedia good enough for Oxford University Press to claim as own

• In the media: WikiGnomes and Bigfoot

• Featured content: The Moon, Mars, Venus, and Saturn, in no particular order. Also, Kaiser Kong.

• Gallery: Far from home

• Traffic report: Fifty Shades of... self-denial?

• Recent research: Gender bias, SOPA blackout, and a student assignment that backfired

• WikiProject report: Be prepared... Scouts in the spotlight

• Blog: Join the Wikimedia strategy consultation

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:00, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Vringo

If you're not going to fix the Vringo page, why make it more lopsided? 82.77.106.135 (talk) 11:17, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Adding the term "Patent troll" seemed to be part of a larger edit war that had been going for quite some time. I'd advise you discuss your change on the article's talkpage with other users rather than constantly changing it back and forth. I removed it because that was the way it was prior to this edit war. —Frosty ☃ 21:40, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Which users? Someone created the article some time ago, moved on, then someone else added the company's own glamorous description as the introduction to the article. I came much later, saw the article and added the "patent troll", which, if you'd bother to check, describes exactly the company's line of business. He/she/they are restoring the glamorous description every time. If you can't write a nice NPOV article there, maybe you could find someone else who will (since you're a moderator; and I'm not very familiar with Wikipedia's workings...)? And if not, let me have the edit war with them until someone fixes the article properly.82.77.106.135 (talk) 20:04, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

I was referring to recent history. In the past few months it has been switched constantly back and forth between your version and the version that doesn't use patent troll. I believed that the version without was the original, I am willing to accept I was wrong. I strongly advise you to discuss it with the users that are reverting you, as edit warring can result in blocking (not due to what you are adding, but because it is deemed disruptive). I don't tend to write article's much myself, I mainly fix things up like spelling/vandalism and in the case edit warring, sorry if you mistook me for somebody who is familiar with the topic, I was just reverting to a version I thought predated the edit war. —Frosty ☃ 22:08, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Well, I wrote on the talk page.82.77.106.135 (talk) 23:14, 2 March 2015 (UTC)