User talk:Random Passer-by

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
If you post a comment here then I'll usually reply here, unless you specifically ask me to post a reply elsewhere, because I find it easier to keep track of a conversation when it's in one place (so you might want to watch this page temporarily). If I've posted a comment on your talk page then you can decide whether to reply here or after my original comment on your talk page and, unless you specifically ask me to post a reply elsewhere, I'll reply on your talk page. :-)

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Random Passer-by, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  - Darwinek 10:54, 19 December 2006 (UTC) Specifically what content provided by me is slanted. Perhaps your lack of knowledge on the subject is the problem.

[edit] Copyedit

Hey, thanks for your copyedit on the AC/DC article, it's very apreciated. I hope an editor on the LoCE comes soon. Thanks again. No-Bullet (Talk • Contribs) 01:19, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

It was a pleasure. I never would have read AC/DC if I hadn't edited it and I found the article informative and interesting. Good luck with further developments. Random Passer-by 19:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
It's much better, Random, but still has a ways to go. I hope you didn't feel I was singling you out: I don't think FACs should rely on LoCE to bail them out; rather, they should seek out good copyeditors before approaching FAC, and you had a tough roe to how. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:02, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
I certainly think it could be better but I don't do large rewrites on articles unless I know the subject well. I didn't feel you were "singling me out" and I'm interested in other people's editing notes. I enjoy wikipedia as a co-operative enterprise. Random Passer-by 19:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
PS, not sure if you've seen Tony's page, User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:04, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. I'll take a look at that out of curiosity but I doubt I'll ever feel motivated to go beyond basic copy editing and into full rewrites. I know the limitations of my patience. :-) Random Passer-by 19:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Moron (psychology)

Hi. Thanks for the heads up on that. To be honest, I don't know whether that link is a breach of copyright or not. I guess I assumed it was hosted on the Google site with the owner's permission but I couldn't find any confirmation of it, so I've removed the link and just left it as a text reference. Cheers. SilentC 00:01, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Cheers. I did a bit of research and found out who made the film and when and have updated the cite. I now know more about the subject than I ever thought I needed to! SilentC 02:06, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Huh?? What drugs are you taking? :) I got the details of that doco from http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0399704/. I created the page by moving it from Moron which I made a disambiguation page but I didn't author the contents of it. I've only ever removed vandalism from it. Why do you think the ref is bogus? SilentC 03:04, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps you're confused by the location of Canada. I believe the BBC referred to is BBC Canada: http://www.bbccanada.com/ SilentC
Thanks for the advice. Yes I usually do provide an edit summary, unfortunately I have neglected to do so on more than one occasion - not because I'm unaware of the importance of doing so, rather because I am often somewhat absent-minded. A tip for you to show that I'm a giving kind of person too: if you ever suspect someone of being a hoaxer or similar, view their contributions and you'll pretty soon see what type of contributor they are. Saves all sorts of angst as people often get the wrong end of the stick in these matters. SilentC 22:28, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Joseph Waters

Happy New Year to you. Just wanted to let you know I put a hang-on on the artical Joseph Waters that you cited for deletion. I understand that it is poorly written, however I do belive the orginal author could make a case for noability just based on Mr. Waters founding of the organization. Thanks Shoessss 17:46, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you that an article on Joseph Waters could have a place on Wikipedia but that article had a long history of problems including spam and an attack on a living person so perhaps it might be better to start a new one. I see an admin has now speedy deleted it anyway. Random Passer-by 17:57, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

Thank you so much for the Barnstar! You've truly made my day. :-) -Severa (!!!) 22:26, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ShopUnitedNetworks.com

We believe our content for shopunitednetworks.com to be informative rather than advertising. The only objects that could be considered advertising are the links to the site, which are fundamental to any online post.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Unitednetworks (talk • contribs) 18:34, 20 January 2007.

Two editors and at least one admin believed it was WP:SPAM, however, so it has been deleted. Random Passer-by 18:59, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Aviatrix

No problem, the formatting looks great. Where in the US are you? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 01:43, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Do you concentrate on French aviators? I hope we can collaborate on a few news ones, let me know.
  • Damn, who knew about the spelling of License vs. License! Thanks

[edit] Binghampton NY

ATTN USER RANDOM PASSER-BY.

Please pay attention to your page history before you incorrectly accuse me of vandalism on the Binghamton Page.

By properly looking at the history you will see that my ip is 67.188.205.170 and that my edits on 18 Jan 07 were in the Trivia section, any and all information placed there is factual per my knowledge studied while at Binghamton University.

You will notice that the vandalism which was removed was placed with the ip 66.24.109.1, clearly quite different than mine. Not to mention that this vandalism was om the history and famous peoples section.

I do not choose to set up a username, I will continue to use my IP address.

I do not appreciate being blamed for vandalism which is clearly not my fault.

If I see one problem which is continuing to evolve on Wikipedia since its inception is the empowerment of members who feel that their word is the word of an 'editor' and therefor is almighty and correct in all cases.

Just so you know, Binghamton was in fact the regional headquarters of the KKK at one point in time. Should I also add that there was a very large profile case in which many nationally known mafia bosses were arrested then released in the 1950s? But I wouldn't want to place any information which might be controversial... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.188.205.170 (talk) 03:42, 22 January 2007 (UTC).

I mistakenly issued a vandal warning to this IP so I have removed the warning and apologised on this IP's talk page. The Wikipedia editor who used this IP to edit Binghamton, New York has my most sincere appologies. I'm sorry. The vandal warning for vandalism on that article was intended for IP 66.24.109.1 (I have issued over 150 vandal warnings and this is, as far as I know, my first error.) I'm not sure why you're taking me to task about the KKK information because I restored it to the article, despite the fact that it's unsourced, when I reverted the other vandalism to the article. Random Passer-by 13:25, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Susana Reche

Just wanted to point out that SmokeyTheCat recreated it. I'm going to AfD it, and if you want to up that to speedy, feel free. Shorelander 04:54, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External links to MMM Commentaries (on .mp3 files)

I see you have been through the Doctor Who episode areas and removed references to an online review/alternate commentary for many DW eps - how is the work of MMM less valid than reviews at other websites? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.9.186.134 (talk • contribs) 00:26, 24 January 2007.

I didn't remove your external links because they are "less valid". I removed them because they are against Wikipedia policy (see WP:EL e.g. WP:EL#Rich_media). Random Passer-by 00:37, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Nothing I can see on those pages warrants the removal of the link of the review of the episodes. I'm not linking to rich media and the links are directly relevant - as relevant as reviews of the episodes on the other sites. Tell me how the MMM review links differs from the review links for other sites. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.9.186.134 (talk • contribs) 03:04, 24 January 2007.
The links I removed were links to .mp3 "commentaries" added with no edit summaries or, in my opinion, justification per WP:EL. I suggest you read the policy again. If you have a problem per WP:EL with other links on those pages then you can edit them out although I suggest you discuss it on the talk page of Wikipedia: WikiProject Doctor Who first. I also suggest that you should discuss adding links en masse to Doctor Who related Wikipedia articles, which might be considered WP:SPAM by some editors, on the talk page of the same project before you do it again. Please sign your comments on Wikipedia talk pages as the message on your talk page requests. Random Passer-by 13:40, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I also note that I wasn't the only editor to revert one of your links as Science4sail removed one from the Blake's 7 article. Random Passer-by 16:26, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Unsigned comments magically signed

It's easy to mark unsigned comments. Just add {{unsigned|name of user who didn't sign}} at the end of the comment. Kamope · talk · contributions 00:53, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Happy Valentines Day!

 I wish you and your family have a wonderful Valentines Day!

Kamope · talk · contributions 02:03, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you (although I'm fairly sure you're early). :-) Random Passer-by 16:28, 27 January 2007 (UTC)



[edit] From user "Samantha Dean"

STOP YOUR VANDALISM Please read the talkpage on Paternity Fraud. After all, you wanted me to use it. The section you keep providing is in violation of Wikipedia policy because it is unverifiable and is a link to paid content. Are you the person selling this linked content?Samantha Dean 02:01, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I have reported your repeated vandalism to the article Paternity fraud (removal of content and introduction of deliberate non-neutral point of view), which I arrived at on a recent changes patrol, and hope an administrator will deal with the problem. You seemed to have some interesting content to add and it's a pity you didn't add it without resorting to repeated vandalism. Random Passer-by 02:14, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

How do you justify to yourself, your removal of all the content I added which is well documented and factual. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Samantha Dean (talk • contribs) 02:26, 27 January 2007.

You are a vandal who has deliberately and repeatedly removed content from Wikipedia and deliberately rewritten an article to reflect your personal point of view. As the administrators appear to have decided to pretend you're not a vandal, there's nothing more I can do beyond ignoring your ridiculous behaviour and replacing the material you remove whenever I can be arsed to do so. If your leave further comments on my talk page for my amusement then please have the common courtesy to add them in the correct place and sign them per the Wikipedia "policy" you're so keen on deliberately misinterpreting. Random Passer-by 15:45, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for the barnstar! Kamope · talk · contributions 16:47, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

You earned it. Random Passer-by 02:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Content disputes

The problem is that WP:AIV is really for cases of obvious vandalism. While some things may be obvious to you, they aren't to an admin who is just looking at the content. I'm sorry, but when I looked at the user's edits, it wasn't a case of obvious vandalism. Even misinformation is hard to detect and requires more investigation, much more than "immediate response" pages like this one are supposed to handle. What if we end up blocking a well-intentioned user? WP:AIV is for one admin to look at something, judge that it is obvious vandalism, then block. For cases of content dispute, you should look at Wikipedia:Resolving disputes. For cases of "non-obvious vandalism", which you're apparently saying that yours is, I suggest you report it to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, where, if it requires more heavy investigation, admins can take the time to look at it and, if necessary, discuss it. --Deathphoenix ʕ 03:50, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd already listed the repeated content removal vandalism on the appropriate page but then noticed that page was undergoing an apparently successful Articles for Deletion process on the grounds that Admins don't check it or deal with any of the cases of complex vandalism. Thank you for this response though. Random Passer-by 02:32, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome

Welcome back Random Passer-by! How was your wikibreak? > Kamope < 23:25, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Peaceful. Thank you for asking. I hope your wikiediting is going well? I'll have to check what you've done to your user page since I last saw it. Random Passer-by 23:59, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
There has been a major change to my userpage... > Kamope < 00:07, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry about Tam Lin

Hello, I'm sorry about my incorrect edit in the article Tam Lin (novel). It's been a while since I've read it, and I remember an awful lot of references to The Revenger's Tragedy and other plays. I suppose I must have forgotten a lot too. I guess it would have helped if I had a copy of the novel at hand. Again, I'm sorry. --Kyoko 13:39, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

No apology necessary. Wikipedia is a co-operative enterprise. If that section is expanded, and it should be, then that link should definitely go in as part of a more specific discussion of particular quotations and allusions. :-) Random Passer-by 13:46, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Maybe when I eventually reread the book, then. Thanks. --Kyoko 13:52, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Updated DYK query On 19 March 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hilda Hewlett, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Carabinieri 17:12, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sea of Trolls

Thanks for adding a Novels template to the article. Just to note the official template is {{NovelsWikiProject}}. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 11:00, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll never remember all the different WikiProject tags and I've never found a good way of searching Wikipedia for that sort of information. I literally just keep trying different tag syntax until I find a tag which substitutes itself. Thank you for the reminder though. I can look here in future. :-) Random Passer-by 23:13, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "We hates the copyeditor, we does..."

Hiya! I picked up the "Malorie Blackman" article off the League of Copyeditors backlog but checked the history before going to work on it. I notice that you've spent time working on it very recently. Are you still at work?
I'm a fairly brutal editor, and off the bat I can see some things I'd like to do with this article but wanted to touch base with you first.
Please forgive all the baseball metaphors! Or are they cricket metaphors...
~ Otterpops 14:03, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I only tidied it up a bit and corrected/added some details. I still think it needs considerable work (although I moved the copyedit tag down to focus on the worst sections). I also think it desperately needs splitting but I was going to ask WikiProjectNovels about naming conventions before I split the Noughts and Crosses books off into a separate article. I love good copy editors. The only thing I'll interfere with is factual information. I dislike copy editors who introduce factual errors in their revisions and I've seen several editors from the League of Copyeditors do that to articles so I remain wary of overenthusiastic rewriters. In summary: I'm finished there apart from a possible split so go ahead and be bold! Random Passer-by 15:30, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Anything I put in will have citations and references, totally checkable. I looked at the outside links while waiting to hear from you and listened to a couple interviews with the woman. She's fairly impressive education-wise and intellectually, plus seems like an honestly nice person. I really hope she doesn't read this article before we can get a decent bio on it (speaking of racism). I think she'd be hurt and very angry.
My biggest snag right at the moment is that we're in the middle of moving! So I'm not going to be able to sit down and plow into it three or four hours each morning as I'd love to do. If you want to chop off the novel summaries and take them to spawn a new page, go for it - I've never created a new page before on my own. If you can't get to it, I will but it's going to take me some time.
Did you say there's a Project for Novels? That would be really good, give clear instructions about sections and format.
Okay, excellent! Here we go. Tap me if I put in any bad lies. :)
~ Otterpops 03:22, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm an admirer of both Malorie Blackman and her work. She's highly notable by any criteria and deserves a good wikipedia article. You've earned a barnstar for your tranformative work. I see you're encouraging me to split the article, which I will, and I'm assuming, as you've taken the inuse tag off, that I can edit it. Don't worry. Apart from the split I'll only be making minor edits and I'll try not to ruin your prose :-). 1) I'm going to Anglicise the spelling. 2) I'll standardise the section formatting to the standards set by WikiProject Biography and WikiProject Novels. 3) I'll add persondata if it's not already there (I haven't looked yet).

[edit] Oh my goodness! Thank you!

I'm so touched, I feel happy! I've only just started on the Blackman article and was thinking about what if she came along and read it late last night so I couldn't sleep.
Thank you so much. I've never gotten a barnstar before. :)
This morning I'm putting in references to the factuals I added last night, never fear.
~ Otterpops 16:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
P.S. What was the story with Imus Ranch? It sounds like you dashed in with your sword afire, trained tiger on a golden leash...

You earned that barnstar. I'm sorry if I was in your way over at the article. You inspired me to further action. Now it's your turn to edit it within an inch of its life again! I'll go and refresh my memory on wikipedia policy for splitting articles. (Imus Ranch was vandalised by one person with multiple accounts and, unfortunately, the vandalism wasn't noticed for over a week. Kamope indulges in random acts of kindness to make wikipedia a happier place and so she gave me a barnstar. I choose to see it as symbolic of all my other anti-vandalism work here.) Random Passer-by 18:38, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Haha!

You got sucked in. :)
While your Inuse is up I've been getting ISBNs and organizing titles on the bottom of my Talk page. Go look there if you want, so we're not both slaving over the same Amazon.com pages.
~ Otterpops 18:45, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blackman

On my page you wrote:

Second note of the day so I've indented it for clarity. Sorry if I was getting in your way over at Malorie Blackman. I hope you don't hate what I've done too much. I haven't touched the "to split" section yet but you'll probably want to go over what I've done in the top half and re-edit it with in an inch of its life. I'm not happy with the punctuation of this sentence but I can't manage to rephrase it better so you might want to look at it:
"Blackman has written more than fifty children's books, novels, short story collections, television scripts and a stage play, and won over twenty awards for them."
Random Passer-by 18:27, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Nope, you weren't in the way at all. Actually I was enjoying that we can work on it together, see what each other were doing (each time you saved things magically appeared here and there, another human at work...) and all without screaming! Sandbox is probably a better place for me to work on the notes, but then you couldn't see what I was doing.
You're right about that enormous sentence, it needs a treatment. We'll think of something. There are others in there too... For myself, I wanted to get some respectable facts in there fast, then work on overall structure (since a big part of it is going away) and then finally refine language.
OH! Do you love traditional footnote-style citations? I'm kind of into the Harvard reference system, which is approved by Wiki but looks a bit funky, it's where the citations look like this: (Carnegie 1962:51-53), and then if the reader wants to know more about the source s/he looks for the "Carnegie" listing in the Bibliography. That way a numbered footnote is clearly an additional comment from the writer or editor. I lean to the Harvard style but wouldn't fight for it to the death. We should pick one of the two styles and stick though.
I'm going to go see what you did today now...
~ Otterpops 08:00, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I generally prefer negotiation to screaming :-). Anyway I WANT my contributions improved! On long articles, such as Malorie Blackman, I like notes I can click on a wikilink to go to and return to my place because repeated scrolling is a waste of my time. I'll put a note on your talk page about this because I think it's important. Random Passer-by 17:45, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I did split it off, but all I did was cut and paste. Notice that the new article is under the name "Noughts & Crosses" rather than "Noughts and Crosses". I like the book covers, do we have permission to use them? Not sure what the legalities are on that. Talk to you soon.
~ Otterpops 10:36, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

When you split content it's a good idea to say that in your edit summaries so people who need to check the history can see what was going on. The legalese for the book covers is on their respective pages. Random Passer-by 17:45, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Psst...

I'm getting differences between list I got from the (3rd party) bio page and the Amazon.com listings. With no ISBN I can't leave that Doubleday publisher listing in. Trying to get these in some order, then I'm going to check against a link MB left on her site for the UK Amazon. ~ Otterpops 19:14, 24 March 2007 (UTC) Oops, good point about the split. Sorry. I can only defend myself by saying it was 3:00 a.m. ~ Otterpops 19:16, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

You already have the ISBN for the Doubleday edition. I've explained on your talk page. Random Passer-by 19:54, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blackman

Did you see that I copied the pertinent (non-personal) portions of our discussion to the MB Discussion page? People who come by and want to contribute should know we're here and what we're working on. I'm sure I got copies of your signature everywhere something you said was quoted. I only took the stuff from my UserPage though, I didn't mess with yours.
~ Otterpops 15:39, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I edited out some of the less relevant material so as not to spam the page. I hope you don't mind. I think they were mostly/all my comments anyway. :-) Random Passer-by (talk) 02:16, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I once read (maybe on Wikipedia!) about a woman who was not a pilot herself, but did some serious parachuting during WWII - she was working with the Maquis, the French resistance, getting supplies and information in and out of occupied France and Holland. I think she was not French. Her name was something like "Lily Vox" and she was very beautiful as well as being dangerous and brave. Someone gave her a Medal of Honor (???) if I remember correctly (I'm sorry, I read it so long ago). If you can get any leads on her from this you might like reading about her.
~ Otterpops 15:39, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

A surprisingly common story. Thanks for the tip. Sorry for the short answer but I'm tired. :-) Random Passer-by (talk) 02:16, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ISBN Doubleday

Good enough for me. Where are you getting good and complete publications histories? I'm going piecemeal through various booksellers' sites. ~ Otterpops 15:45, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

amazon.co.uk cross-checked with the British Library. If you ever do a similar marathon of U.S. first editions then you can cross-check amazon.com with the Library of Congress online, I think? That's where I look for public domain photos of early aviators too. Random Passer-by (talk) 02:16, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] We should

make a special time each night just to sit around the fire and congratulate each other for intelligence, insight, talent, hard work, literacy and general good-person-ness. I think we both deserve it.
And I did flinch every time I took out one of your ref's, I know you worked hard on that, and I wouldn't have known how to do that myself. What do you think? Did you already revert it? ~ Otterpops 05:07, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Of course I reverted it. Wikipedia requires citations. Random Passer-by (talk) 15:56, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
I had already left explanatory notes on the article talk page (and on your talk page but I see you've edited those out). Random Passer-by (talk) 16:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/a/n/User_talk%7ERandom_Passer-by_e9ae.html"