User talk:Yopienso/Archive 6

Error notice on article Pakistan

Thank you for attempting to fix the error notice on Pakistan. Unfortunately you didn't fix it, as it had not been created by my edit, but a week ago by contributor Fahaddar65. I have now corrected it, I believe.
To make sure we are both talking about the same error, please check that I have removed it and let me know, if not.
Apuldram (talk) 21:18, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes, that's it. Funny--what I did got rid of the red notice, to my surprise. I couldn't find the actual error. Thanks! YoPienso (talk) 02:08, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thank you for the kind message! I'm sorry it took me so long to reply.

P.S. -- I am also a Christ-follower. Have a blessed day!

LewistonMan (talk) 23:08, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! Sorry I've not been maintaining this page. Merry Christmas! YoPienso (talk) 21:17, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

May I have your opinion?

Humour in the Bible. We should have that article, right? The closest I can find is Printers have persecuted me without a cause and that´s different. I´ve collected a few sources at [1]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:45, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Maybe. I hadn't thought about it. Would have to see draft of article. I guess I sound humorless?? YoPienso (talk) 17:08, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

I´ll take that strong and definite maybe. I´ll be back, maybe. Conservapedia has it [2], but I think we can do better. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:17, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Fiat Pagina: The Bible and humor. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:36, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

For that Joseph Ellis TJ article link

	Thank you
	In case you're wondering "why this cat?" - no particular reason, just that this little grey cat is one of my favorite images on Commons. Shearonink (talk) 03:14, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Oh--thank you! (a little late) It's nice working with you. Because we're cool cats. ;} YoPienso (talk) 21:15, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Yopienso. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Andrew Jackson

We have worked together in the past on presidents’ articles and I thought you’d like to know that this article is up for promotion to Featured Article. I would be grateful if you would take a look at the article to see if you might like to support it for promotion. Hoppyh (talk) 23:01, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation. I'm pretty busy right now but will look. YoPienso (talk) 20:08, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Canterbury Cathedral

Hi Yopienso. Just a courtesy note to let you know I've reverted your change choir screen -> rood screen. Please see the article talk page for my reasons and feel free to disagree there. :-) Regards, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:02, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi! I see you're right. Thanks for the note. YoPienso (talk) 03:08, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Three years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:41, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, Gerda. YoPienso (talk) 03:09, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

... and four! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:10, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks

I am appreciative of your collaborative approach, and your christian devotion. I saw a reflection this am and just thought you’d like it, from Fr. Richard Rohr about the mirror...”The mirror is without ego and without judgement. In the mirror, everything is revealed as it really is. There is no dis­criminating mind or self-consciousness on the part of the mirror. If something comes, the mirror reflects it; if the object moves on, the mirror lets it move on. The mirror is always empty of itself and therefore able to receive the other. The mirror has no pre­conditions for entry or acceptance. It receives and reflects back what is there, nothing more and nothing less. The mirror is perfect love and perfect contemplation.” Cheers! Hoppyh (talk) 15:02, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

That's good. Thanks and blessings! YoPienso (talk) 03:10, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Need help at Nero Claudius Drusus

After all this time here, I have no idea who to go to to lock an article that an IP is vandalizing. I found instructions to warn him on his talkpage, but he doesn't have one. YoPienso (talk) 00:24, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

not an admin You looking for Wikipedia:Requests for page protection? Oshwah's blocked the most recent vandal has been blocked for 36 hours (2001:48F8:2A:159B:F5CF:9A3:3994:1BD8 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • blacklist hits • AbuseLog • what links to user page • COIBot • Spamcheck • count • block log • x-wiki • Edit filter search • WHOIS • robtex.com • Google)). Their talk paged should be linked there, too - that one had been warned thrice and blocked accordingly. Good luck with the vandals (Vandals?), Rotideypoc41352 (talk) 03:51, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Frankly, I have better luck with burgundy. YoPienso (talk) 03:59, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

For future reference: you can go to WP:ANI to report incidents to administrators (ie it's the Administrators' Notice board for Incidents). An admin will then look at the case and take any action he deems appropriate. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 22:08, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you! I'm going to request the page be protected because we have a different IP # (possibly the same human) doing the same thing again. YoPienso (talk) 16:27, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

@Rotideypoc41352:@Martin of Sheffield: Well, so much for that. Wikipedia:Requests for page protection says I have to paste in pagelinks, and I can't find out what that is. (I put "pagelinks" into the search engine and got nothing.) Way too complicated. The article needs to be locked so only registered users can edit it. YoPienso (talk) 16:35, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

What is required is the name of the page. In this particular case you would need to add:

=== [[Nero Claudius Drusus]] ===
* {{pagelinks|Nero Claudius Drusus}}
'''Semi-protection:''' High level of IP vandalism. ~~~~

This though is only if there are multiple threats to the page. If there is just a single nuisance use WP:ANI to get the user blocked. I note that the two IPs you have been concerned about, 2001:48F8:2A:159B:EC72:1317:8582:8750 and 2001:48F8:2A:159B:F5CF:9A3:3994:1BD8 have both now been blocked by user:Oshwah. Both addresses are traceable to Midco, and ISP covering around 1.2 million people in Minnesota, Kansas and Wisconsin. Getting further back than that isn't possible for a mere pleb like me! Martin of Sheffield (talk) 19:47, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

My response at Leo Tolstoy

Please see my response to your recent comment about your research and the links you provided. My work, and its findings and assertions concerning the activities of James Bevel, has been criticized in the discussion. From my point-of-view this criticism comes from editors who know little or nothing about the subject that they are talking about. And that's fine, as most of it, if not all of it, was done in good faith. But this last thing was so off-the-mark that maybe you can consider making it right. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 17:47, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi! I'm really kind of lost in the thickets of that discussion. I'm sorry that I don't know what you're referring to by "this last thing was so off-the-mark."

The last thing I did was amend my statement per Snow Rise's comment that Bevel shouldn't be in the lead with Tolstoy and Gandhi, but perhaps farther down in the article.

Just before that, I changed the wording from demonstrated to reminded, since you kept asking what we'd demonstrated. After thinking about it, I realized we hadn't demonstrated--provided arguments and sources--but simply reminded you about historical facts you surely must know.

Before that, I fixed a duplicate link.

I truly have no idea how I've offended you.

The paper of yours I can't find online is "James L. Bevel, the Strategist of the 1960s Civil Rights Movement." You say it's from 1984, so maybe Google books is wrong to say it's from 1964. I found the title, but can't access the text.

The paper of yours I linked to is on the Middlebury College website and says nothing about Tolstoy, so is irrelevant to the discussion on the Tolstoy talk page.

I wish you well, and feel that I'm being fair and polite. I really don't want to continue to argue forever, though. Your arguments support having a stand-alone article on Bevel, which we have. No one is suggesting we delete or reduce it. No one is detracting from Bevel's achievements. YoPienso (talk) 04:42, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

To say it simpler, you say in the discussion comment that you cannot find my 1984 paper, and then you link to it in the same sentence. Yes, Google books is incorrect. The link you provided is from the paper's reprint in the Garrow book, including the paper's historically important 1988 addendum, which Garrow allowed. I'm just asking that once you realize you linked to the paper in the same sentence that you say you couldn't find it, you perhaps may consider striking and editing some of that comment. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:46, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

You're so confusing. The mysterious link you say I provided--which is it?

This one, that shows only the title and no text?

This one--that doesn't even mention Tolstoy?

This one or this one in Garrow's book--which call Bevel an aide, advisor, and lieutenant, and which you didn't write?

Please post a link to your paper right here. Thank you. YoPienso (talk) 13:38, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

The one you say I didn't write (good grief). What I didn't write was the quote you used and attributed to David Garrow, which was written by neither of us but is from a feature article taken as a source from the Chicago Reader. You already posted it, so you can now read the entire paper. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:08, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Please post the link to the text of your paper right here or stay off my talk page. YoPienso (talk) 14:09, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

You already posted a link to it a couple inches above, the paper you say I didn't write. But you know, staying off your talk page isn't a bad idea. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:20, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

I posted four links, none of which go to the text of a paper you wrote showing Tolstoy's influence on James Bevel or that Bevel was a pivotal 20th-century figure like Tolstoy and Gandhi.

My only possible interpretation of your refusal to post a link to your paper is that you are simply being disruptive. YoPienso (talk) 14:23, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Capitalization in the Thomas Jefferson article

In my edit summary I specified the reason for changing the capitalization – that is, to conform to MOS:JOBTITLES. Even though you were provided the link, it appears that you did not take a minute to read and understand the MoS. Please do so now, and then undo the damage. Chris the speller ^yack 02:55, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Chris.

Longstanding consensus is to capitalize the title President of the United States in the lead of the articles on American presidents. If you check the article titles of List of Presidents of the United States and List of Vice Presidents of the United States, you will see that President and Vice President are capitalized. There has been some discussion on exactly this point, and the consensus was to capitalize. Please check here, specially the comments of the closer, Enric Naval.

I noticed your edit because I watch Thomas Jefferson. After finding your note here, I checked your recent contributions and found you've "corrected" many such capitalizations across the encyclopedia. Please do not change the capitalization in the biographies of the American presidents; they are all uniformly capitalized and don't require adjustments. Thanks. YoPienso (talk) 05:14, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

What was settled one way 6 years ago is now settled in a different way. The current consensus is to use lower case for "president" when "president" is modified: The MoS says "Nixon was the 37th president of the United States." That is why you see the capitalization changing. Now that you know, you can do the right thing. Chris the speller ^yack 21:09, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Besides that, there is no reason at all for upper case in "he took office as president," and similar cases. And no reason to use upper case for "the society"; the proper, full uppercased name of that society has already been mentioned. This is clearly covered in MOS:INSTITUTIONS. Since all my changes were valid, and since the vast majority of them are (or should be) uncontested, I will restore them and we can proceed from there. Chris the speller ^yack 21:17, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Re: your punctuation edit to George Washington

In this edit you changed a variety of quotation marks usage. Some of your changes, so far as I can tell, are in error - at least according to the Chicago Manual of Style and commonly-accepted grammar & punctuation practices. If I am referring to someone's title, and the title is rendered as "Mr President", then the trailing punctuation - the period, the comma, etc. - is outside the title as it is set off with the quotation marks. If I am writing down a conversation and it is.... She said "Well, I want my sandwich." then the punctuation is part of the conversation...the commas, the periods....and the marks go outside the trailing punctuation. If I am not explaining this very well, then maybe take a look at Quotation marks in English. Anyway, appreciate all your work on the article, seems like it's been a hard slog lately.... I think those changes should be changed back, at least the ones concerned with a title.
For example:

His incumbency established many precedents still in use today, such as the Cabinet system, the inaugural address, and the title "Mr. President."

should be

His incumbency established many precedents still in use today, such as the Cabinet system, the inaugural address, and the title "Mr. President".

Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 07:00, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your thoughtful comments and request. I'm going to copy this to the article talk page. YoPienso (talk) 08:28, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

rest of answer not relevant to the specific article

Hi, in response to the question you asked at polar amplification, at that talk page I provided the part of the answer that is based on RS and content in the article. As you have (or will) see, I explained why the text was off topic. Another RS based criticism is that the text did a poor job, in my opinion, of explaining what the RS was trying to say. But since it was off topic I saw no point in trying to polish the off topic rough text. The main reason to add this note at user talk is to talk about user behavior. It is unclear if you wanted to know what called my attention to that text, but in case that is indeed what you wanted to know, then FYI.... I saw another editor complain about that section, in a way which I took to be complaint about the lousy framing. When I reviewed it myself I realized it was simply off topic, in my opinion. The comment thread to which I refer can be found here. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:33, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I've replied briefly with a query on the article talk page. Dr. Connolley and I do best when we are far from each other, but I've enjoyed collaborating with you on various science and history articles.

Please note AR5 states on p. 982-83 that "the projected warming in wintertime shows a pronounced polar amplification in the NH"--not the SH. Then, "Most studies argue that changes in sea ice are central to the polar amplification." I draw two points from this:

1. Polar amplification is a feature in the Arctic but not the Antarctic.
2. Anything to do with ice at either pole has to do with polar amplification.

Why don't we cover both poles in that article? YoPienso (talk) 21:19, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

They are - presently - of different magnitudes/intensities/whatever but amplification does exist in the antarctic too, and sure there is an ice connection of some sort. See sentence 1 of the abstract here. I'm not well read on this and would welcome well-written text that explains the context in which it is relevant. But I suppose this is a really a comment for the article talk page and I'll look in there to see what you wrote next. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 21:35, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

OK. I'm going off-line now for several hours. YoPienso (talk) 21:37, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

"Page size"...

I can set it up the "page size" tool on your vector.js page if you want. Shearonink (talk) 18:50, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

I would appreciate that; thank you very much. I also greatly appreciate your contributions and attitude at George Washington. YoPienso (talk) 04:47, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

you're welcome but turns out that's above my pay grade :(, you'll either have to do it yourself or get an admin to help. But if you go to User:Shearonink/vector.js & open up "View source", on line 17 you'll see the "prose-size" code:

importScript('User:Dr_pda/prosesize.js'); //[[User:Dr_pda/prosesize.js]]

set up on my vector page and that line of code is what enables the page-size tool to run for me on Wikipedia. Shearonink (talk) 05:33, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Hmm. Thanks for trying. I don't know what a vector page is. I know about a vector that's sort of (not very) like a tangent and a vector that carries a disease. This is the page I created that doesn't do anything. I'm busy now but maybe later will ask an admin for help. YoPienso (talk) 05:39, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Yopienso/vector.js is already set up, but I can't edit it because it's yours - but that's something an admin might be able to do. Shearonink (talk) 07:16, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Use of talk pages

Please refrain from using talk pages for general discussion of the topic or other unrelated topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you.Jytdog (talk) 03:08, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Good grief. I hadn't noticed this one. Get a grip. Forum or chat room--SMH. YoPienso (talk) 09:33, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Edit war warning

Your recent editing history at Talk:Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

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. Jytdog (talk) 03:08, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Do you refer to your insistence that I can't alert the community that ජපස and jps are the same person? You're overstepping here, and even removed his response, but I'm not going to the trouble of getting the help I need to restore it. YoPienso (talk) 03:49, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Yopienso. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi Yopienso! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 03:38, Monday, March 4, 2019 (UTC)

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

NO! I DIDN'T buy a ticket. I was just looking at them. I am not happy you've been stalking me and do not want to participate in this adventure. I resent the fact you've opened two new pages in my name. Please go away. YoPienso (talk) 14:38, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Marie Yovanovitch

Making you aware of errors in your page edit of, Title: Marie Yovanovitch URL: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Yovanovitch

Greetings,

I would like to bring to your attention, and for your consideration, the errors in the following article that has been written as though alleged events have already been proven to have occured.

Title: Marie Yovanovitch URL: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Yovanovitch

This article omits in several sentences the word "alleged" and treats as yet undertermined circumstaces as though they are foregone conclusions. For example, not one sentence in the following paragraph has been proven to be true and is therefore merely conjecture on the part of the author and/or editor; though presented in such a way as to appear that it is already history:

"While ambassador to Ukraine, Yovanovitch was subjected to a conspiracy-driven smear campaign, amplified by President Donald Trump and his allies. In May 2019, Trump abruptly recalled Yovanovitch from her post following claims by Trump surrogates that she was undermining Trump's efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate his political rival, former vice president and 2020 U.S. presidential election candidate Joe Biden. Yovanovitch's removal preceded a July 2019 phone call by Trump in which he attempted to pressure Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Biden. Following revelation of a whistleblower complaint about the phone call and attempts to cover it up, an impeachment inquiry against Trump was initiated by the House of Representatives. Yovanovitch testified in several House committee depositions in the inquiry."

My contention is that, in the very least, each statement sould include the word 'alleged' until such time as the facts have been proven. I could not make these changes myself as the artcle has been locked.

Thank you for considering this matter and I hope that you will act in a manner that will further the integrity of the Wikipedia ideal.

Regards
(Pasting in 2600:8804:8100:b84:9876:c489:880d:2866 19 Nov. 2019) (Contributions)

Happy New Year!

May you have 20/20 vision in the new year and perceive all things with crystal clarity and in good health! Viriditas (talk) 00:01, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Ulysses S. Grant

Thank you for finding the way to terminate the discussion without antagonizing the participants. It seems almost miraculous. I was reading WP:CIVIL to see if there was a way for me to intervene, but no, I was too close to being involved, and moreover, I hadn't read the discussion as carefully as you did. Bruce leverett (talk) 15:03, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome; we were lucky the editor dropped the issue, which s/he apparently didn't realize they could have done much earlier. I'm one of numerous editors who have nearly abandoned the presidential articles because of Gwillhicker's feistiness and Cmguy777's incoherence. YoPienso (talk) 19:31, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ellery Schempp, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bill of Rights (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 10:20, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

 Done YoPienso (talk) 22:22, 2 February 2020 (UTC)