User talk:HangingCurve/Archive 12

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Swango

Where do we get a free image of Michael Swango? I can't find one anywhere. The picture I posted is a screencap from a totally obscure Youtube video promoting a totally obscure TV movie about Swango, and is a low resolution image besides - I don't think anyone would be in hot water for using it on this page. This is also the most intimidating photo of Swango I have ever seen - he looks incredibly menacing, especially with the tinted glasses. Golden Hound (talk) 04:53, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Drswango.jpg

Troubled

I am both puzzled and troubled by your assertion that the information you recently removed from the "Scott Bourne" entry was unsupported. The information -- particularly the information about his 2003 bankruptcy -- was derived from public sources (citations to which were included), and is very relevant to Mr. Bourne's current endeavors which relate principally to educating others about succeeding in the business of photography. The connection is so plain that your deletion raises questions about whether you are just as interested in portraying Mr. Bourne in a positive light as you have accused others of trying to portray him in a negative light. Did you win one of his little Twitter contests recently? Phildorocke (talk) 20:58, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

You apparently haven't actually read the underlying source (the docket and petition in Case No. 03-bk-31349 (W.D. Wash) (Tacoma Division)), because it's pretty clear that it does, in fact, relate to the same Scott Bourne at issue in this article. Turns out you have to read the sources. Little wonder that journalism degree of yours is gathering dust. Phildorocke (talk) 21:30, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

The heading of this section remains apropos because I am now further troubled (1) that you do not think that a United States Bankruptcy Court is a verifiable source; (2) that you believe such court cannot be readily identified and located without remedial assistance; and (3) that you reasonably believe that users are just as incapable of identifying and locating the source as you appear to be. I take it you didn't concentrate on investigative journalism during your tenure at UNC. Phildorocke (talk) 22:41, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Moreover, notwithstanding the bankruptcy point, the InfoWorld article that the other user (though I recognize you do not believe we are separate users) cited to support the felon claims contained a photograph of that Mr. Bourne which bears a striking resemblance to the photograph on Mr. Bourne's own web site, to which the article also properly cited. I am, thus, forced back to my earlier point that it seems you have some sort of interest in holding Mr. Bourne out in a positive light. Phildorocke (talk) 23:04, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your speedy action on the outing attempt. I thought it best to leave the posting there until the account was blocked so as not to draw attention to it. Richerman (talk) 07:20, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

What was all that about then? Parrot of Doom 20:09, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

P.J. Moonie

Hello. I'm probably missing something obvious, but why was this tagged as G3 (hoax)? The reference provided is to a what looks like a legit .gov.au website which supports at least part of the article. Suffusion of Yellow (talk)

A search for this guy on Google and Yahoo revealed only Wikipedia and Wikipedia mirrors--making it extremely unlikely this guy even exists. Blueboy96 13:28, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

What about the reference that was in the article, and GNIS one that I added? Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 20:48, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm ... well taken ... just a bit troubling that there isn't more verification out there. Blueboy96 20:59, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

I trimmed out all the unverifiable personal details. What's left is verified by the sources given. I suspect that any significant expansion of the article would require access to this, but unfortunately I live on the wrong continent. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 21:18, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Morgan-Manning House

Hi --- I'm not sure if you are aware of this, but your reverts are re-adding specious information to Morgan-Manning House. Tka a look at the various versions of this article and you'll see that that specious information was originally introduced by User:69.14.19.51 and repeatedly corrected by a number of well meaning editors. The best version was the one you just reverted. --Pubdog (talk) 10:14, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

ABC in Montgomery

In the editing note you left in WTVM, you mentioned that WSLA (WAKA) was the ABC affiliate in Montgomery. However, at the time, Montgomery proper had what is now WNCF, which was ABC ever since it signed on in 1954, and for good reason -- WSLA's signal, despite being on VHF channel 8, was practically limited to Selma and did not reach Montgomery, due to its tower height and measly 3000 watts of power -- it did not reach Montgomery until 1984, when it finally got an upgrade after lengthy legal battles (and a fire). -- azumanga (talk) 01:01, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Commercial vs. non-commercial FMs

Just now caught an erroneous edit you made to CBLA-FM last year, so I just wanted to let you know: Canada doesn't do the US-style distinction between "non-commercial" frequencies at the left end of the FM dial and "commercial" ones at the right. Up here any station, whether commercial or non-commercial, campus or public or hot AC or religious or whatever, can be licensed to broadcast on absolutely any frequency that's available for allocation in its market, regardless of which end of the dial it's on. (The tradeoff is that the CRTC is much stricter about how many stations it licenses in any given market in the first place, so there's zero chance of commercial stations gobbling up the entire dial before non-commercial stations can get in — and in some markets, the CBC has even been allowed to reserve a frequency for future expansion anyway.) Just so you know. Bearcat (talk) 05:30, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Comeback Season

Hello, you might be interested in the discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 June 18#Comeback Season II. I'd also like to ask if you think Comeback Season should be created as a redirect to Comeback season, (since you SALTed it), of course leaving it indefinitely fully protected. 117Avenue (talk) 22:47, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Fianna Fail History

Thanks for some of the changes there to the article. It needed to be done. Exiledone (talk) 12:54, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Hello, HangingCurve. You have new messages at JohnCD's talk page.
Message added 10:11, 13 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

August 2011

I apologize for not specifying what I edited, I accidentally pushed the enter button on my keyboard and the page ended up submitting the changes by accident. I will do my best to avoid the mistake in the future. Thanks for notifying me.

/* Death penalty (NCAA) */

Hi BB - I think your addition referencing Baylor at the end of the SMU section works really well to highlight with source what may happen in the future. I hope you understand my opposition to putting anything in about Miami - yet. Several of us have had to fight to keep this article factual and not inferential, and the article deals with the only times so far that this penalty has been invoked. Besides, there is already a Wiki article on the Miami situation where I am sure people can speculate away to their hearts' content. regards, Sensei48 (talk) 23:53, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Cross posted to the named article: I admire the care taken by User:Blueboy96 and User:Cmadler carefully to source their additions to the article with WP:RS. I still don't like the speculative feel to it all (what happens, for example, if in the extreme Shapiro is making most of it up?), but a) I guess that this article on a current issue is the proper place for this kind of material, and b) I'm outvoted 2 to 1 here. I would, however, appreciate it if this recentist material would be kept out of the articles on the death penalty and on Miami football until something much more substantive appears. regards, Sensei48 (talk) 20:12, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brandon Wong (ice hockey)

As it turns out, Wong actually was ECAC Co-Rookie of the Year for 2006–07 (he was the national runner-up). He also was the BCHL MVP and won the top scorer award (Brett Hull Trophy) while with the Merritt Centennials for 2005–06, all of which should have been sufficient to meet WP:NHOCKEY. Shame I was late to the party.  Cjmclark ^(Contact) 04:56, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

I've asked User:Joe Decker (the closing admin) to undelete (or at least userify) the article so I can add the appropriate material and sources.  Cjmclark ^(Contact) 05:02, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for 2011 University of Miami athletics scandal

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:04, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Michael Corleone

Good day - while your edits and contributions to the Michael Corleone article are certainly improving the article from a literary and prose perspective, I think it would be better at this time to add references. Part of the problem with a number of your most recent edits (and with the entire article, actually) is that there are little to no cites as to where you are gathering your information. Many of the edits are a combination of the films and the Puzo novels, but who can tell what comes from where? Unless one knows each independently, it's anyone's guess at this point as to what's fact (from the novels and films) and what's literary license. Please don't misunderstand me -- I'm not saying that you are making your additions to the article up from whole cloth, however, as it all stands now, the novelistic and literary element you have introduced to the article makes the article itself to appear more along the lines of a biolgraphical novel rather than an encylopedic article. Could you please take the time to start referencing your edits rather than just adding more and more prose to the article? It's really the Wikipedia way, after all.......... :-) Lhb1239 (talk) 21:54, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Godfather II

Please don't add text to this, or any other, article with the edit summary "add ref". Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:46, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Why not? Lhb1239 (talk) 04:56, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Because it's not an accurate edit summary. It says that what he did was to add a ref, when what he did was to add text. Since several editors have reverted some of his previous text edits, this could be interpreted as an attempt to avoid inspection of his edits. It's easy enough to write "added text with ref" or even "+ w/ ref". Edit summaries should be accurate. not potentially misleading. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:08, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Roy Spencer

Hi Blueboy96,

Discussing what should go in Spencer's bio here Talk:Roy_Spencer_(scientist)#Spencer_.26_Braswell_2011.--IanOfNorwich (talk) 09:12, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

September 2011

Hello, Blueboy,

I responded to your message on the "Worst Films" talk page.

Freshh (talk) 00:12, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Marshallsumter and Wikiversity

You mentioned over at AN/I that "[MS's] behavior at Wikiversity could put the WMF in great legal danger." Could you elaborate ? If this is indeed the case, some pretty urgent action should be taken over there. --S Larctia (talk) 15:27, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

What would be the best way to get Wikiversity to make a suitable response ? There must be some sane custodians or 'crats over there... --S Larctia (talk) 21:26, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism4im tag at User talk:Bigpopp96

A "4im" tag seems rather bitey for two instances of what appear to be rather stoopid test edits. Is something else going on here, for instance is Bigpopp96 having a go at Blueboy96? Tonywalton ^Talk 23:20, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Bears watching, certainly. But is saying "Black people" necessarily racist? Assuming good faith I can't really agree with you. I'll be watching Bigpopp96's edits with interest, though. Cheers, Tonywalton ^Talk 23:29, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

There you go, you parsed "hippo" and I parsed "hip". As I say, that editor bears watching (and frankly my gut feeling is that 3/4 edits down the line they may well be indef blocked as a VOA, but I don't think that can be assumed at the outset. That's my reading of AGF, anyway). As for "ability to use the tools" I'm not a man with a clipboard marking down demerits - if I see anyone with a clipboard I tend to take them into the woods and stifle them. Regards, Tonywalton ^Talk 23:39, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

WTTG

They are also still carried on basic cable in Charlottesville, even though they have their own FOX station, WAHU-CD. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:06, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Just checked, WAHU is on Comcast cable channel 9, while WTTG is on cable channel 18. Comcast is the only cable provider for the Shenandoah Valley, by the way. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:08, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Unblock request of Jerruy

Hello Blueboy96. Jerruy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards, m.o.p 07:00, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Addition of unsourced material at Mike McQueary?

I did not see what you added[1] to the article in the source cited at Mike McQueary. Jesanj (talk) 18:25, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

WMMT

HC, I've re-linkified your attempt at owned-and-operated station in WMMT. --Chaswmsday (talk) 16:16, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

PTEN

Your KCOP-TV edit regarding PTEN was not a correction of "some inaccuracies". PTEN status as a network was discussed multiple times at WikiProject Television Stations:

• 22 November 2006-8 December 2006
• 21 September 2007-2 October 2007
• 15 August 2008-22 August 2008

These all concluded that PTEN was a minor network that colapsed into a syndicator. Spshu (talk) 21:26, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Newt Gingrich

The following needs sourcing. Is it verifiable? Can you add it? Thanks. Skywriter (talk) 06:02, 24 November 2011 (UTC) You wrote: n 1974, Gingrich made his first bid for political office as the Republican candidate in Georgia's 6th congressional district, which stretched from the southern Atlanta suburbs]] to the Alabama state line. He nearly defeated 20-year incumbent Democrat Jack Flynt, losing by only 2,770 votes. This came as a considerable shock on two fronts. Flynt had never faced a serious challenger--indeed, Gingrich was only the second Republican to even run against him. Additionally, 1974 was a disastrous year for Republicans nationally due to fallout from Watergate. Gingrich sought a rematch in 1976, this time losing by only 5,100 votes even as Jimmy Carter swept every county in the state in his successful bid for the presidency.