User talk:Mcelite

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] African American-Native American marriage

Thanks for the compliment on the Black Indians article. I do not yet know of any specific contemporary books dealing with this direct issue; most work on African-Native American interaction deals with historical intermarriage and associations between the two groups (e.g. William Loren Katz). In the case of African American-Native American marriage, African Americans with Native American ancestry tend marry other Black Indians of similar ancestry rather than a full-blooded Native person. This can add to the complexity. (See http://www.mixedheritagecenter.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1210&Itemid=34 for that discussion.) I am sure there is some literature dealing with modern discussion on the issue; I just haven't found it yet. If you need anything else, please leave another message. Best of luck on your article. Let me know if you have any ideas for any of my work. Until next time! Mappychris (talk) 17:00, 9 January 2008 (UTC)mappychris


[edit] One-drop rule

Please review Wikipedia's policies concerning verifiability, original research, and reliable sources.

The information you are adding to One-drop rule is not based on reliable sources. Self-published books, blogs, advertisements for films, and messages to e-mail lists are not reliable sources. Furthermore, none of the sources have anything to say about "Damage Caused in African American Families", the title under which you have added this information.

In accordance with the policies cited above, information that cannot be supported by reliable sources will be removed from the article. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 05:45, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Please read WP:OR, particularly Synthesis of published material serving to advance a position:
Editors often make the mistake of thinking that if A is published by a reliable source, and B is published by a reliable source, then A and B can be joined together in an article to advance position C. However, this would be an example of a new synthesis of published material serving to advance a position, and as such it would constitute original research. "A and B, therefore C" is acceptable only if a reliable source has published this argument in relation to the topic of the article.
Writing a paragraph that consists of sentences, each of which may be true, for the purpose of creating an argument ("The one-drop rule causes damage in African-American families") that has not been published in reliable sources is considered original research.
Also, a book published by Lulu Press is "self-published". describes itself as the "#1 Self Publishing Website". Wikipedia policy does not accept self-published books as sources. That doesn't mean that you wrote the book. It simply means that the author's manuscript wasn't subject to the editing and fact-checking that is typical of mainstream publishing companies.
If your argument, that the one-drop rule causes damage in African-American families, is widely accepted, it shouldn't be hard to find sources that satisfy Wikipedia's policies concerning reliable sources to cite it properly. If you have any questions, please ask at Talk:One-drop rule or User talk:Malik Shabazz. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 17:34, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
PS - To be 100% honest, I don't think you're writing about damage caused in African-American families by the one-drop rule. I think you're writing about the Native American heritage many African-Americans have but aren't aware of, and the new census category of "Multiracial". You may want to think about what it is that you're trying to communicate and give it a more descriptive title, and consider whether it belongs in One-drop rule, African American, or Multiracial. — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 17:34, 26 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Dinosaur size changes

Hi Mcelite,

Why are you adjusting the respective sizes of Spinosaurus, Giganotosaurus, and Tyrannosaurus? We get a lot of editors who switch the already-referenced numbers around, but the references in Dinosaur size confirm that Tyrannosaurus was neither the longest nor the most massive theropod. These are only estimates, but they are based mostly on peer-reviewed papers and studies of the fossils. Best wishes and happy editing, Firsfron of Ronchester 07:53, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

here is the link to the T. rex third finger discovery. Best, Firsfron of Ronchester 08:34, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, it was pretty surprising to everyone. Firsfron of Ronchester 23:50, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dinosaur sizes

Hey Mcelite. I'm not sure what you mean when you frequently refer to people "declaring officially" the largest theropod. These things are not declared, estimates are given in various studies based on fossil evidence. All studies since its discovery have recognized Giganotosaurus as larger than Tyrannosaurus. Period. Some specimens that might be larger have been found. However, when these have been actually studied and published on, they were not found to be even as large as Sue. Some, like C-Rex, might be larger, but might not. We won't know until the finds are prepared and studied, and it's not our job as an encyclopedia to speculate about or discuss these finds until the real scientists are able and willing to give official opinions. Spinosaurus was usually ignored when saying which was biggest, but as the article states, it was known to be longer than 45ft even as far back as the 1960s. The new finds in the last three years have simply confirmed this. Every study since has found Spinosaurus to be the largest theropod. Unless new evidence comes to light to disprove this (maybe it had no tail, or was full of helium?), this must be considered official by any serious encylcopedia. Of course there's room for speculation and criticism of these studies, but that must be done on personal web sites, not on Wikipedia. The cites are our foundation. Changing the numbers for information that is backed up by a published source, as it seems you've done, is unethical at best. If you have data points that you think contradict what's in the articles, that's great, but please discuss them before you make changes. Dinoguy2 (talk) 01:42, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Mcelite,
I'm going to back up Dinoguy's comment above and give you the statistics:
  • Spinosaurus: estimates suggest that it was around 16 to 18 meters in length (52.5 to 59.1 ft) and 9 tonnes (9.9 tons) in weight. The paper is: dal Sasso, C.; Maganuco, S.; Buffetaut, E.; and Mendez, M.A. (2005). "New information on the skull of the enigmatic theropod Spinosaurus, with remarks on its sizes and affinities". Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 25 (4): 888-896. doi:10.1671/0272-4634(2005)025%5B0888:NIOTSO%5D2.0.CO;2.
  • Giganotosaurus: The largest specimen is estimated to represent an individual 13.2 m (43.3ft) long, that weighed 6.2 tons. The estimate comes from Mortimer, M. (2004), "Carnosauria", The Theropod Database, viewed September 17, 2007. http://home.myuw.net/eoraptor/.
  • Carcharodontosaurus: Grew to an estimated 11.1-13.5 meters (36-44 feet) and weighed up to 2.9 metric tons. The sources are Mortimer, M. (2003), "And the Largest Theropod Is....", discussion group, The Dinosaur Mailing List, viewed July 21, 2003. http://dml.cmnh.org/ and Bervoets, F. (2007), "DinoData", viewed September 17, 2007. http://www.dinodata.org/.
  • Deltadromeus: measured an estimated 8.1-~13.3 m (26.5-~43.6 ft) long. The source is Mortimer, M. (2004), "Carnosauria", The Theropod Database, viewed September 17, 2007. http://home.myuw.net/eoraptor/.
  • Tyrannotitan: up to 13.7 metres or 45.6 feet long. The source is: Novas, de Valais, Vickers-Rich and Rich. (2005). "A large Cretaceous theropod from Patagonia, Argentina, and the evolution of carcharodontosaurids." Naturwissenschaften.
  • Tyrannosaurus: grew up to 12-13 m (39.3-42.6 ft) long and weighed 6-8 tons. The papers are: Brochu, C.R. 2003. Osteology of Tyrannosaurus rex: insights from a nearly complete skeleton and high-resolution computed tomographic analysis of the skull. Memoirs of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology. 7: 1-138, Christiansen, P. & Fariña, R.A. 2004. "Mass prediction in theropod dinosaurs." Historical Biology 16: 85-92, and Henderson, D.M. 1999. "Estimating the masses and centers of mass of extinct animals by 3-D mathematical slicing". Paleobiology 25: 88–106.
These estimates indicate that Spinosaurus was both the longest and most massive theropod dinosaur known, and that Tyrannosaurus was only the third longest and sixth most massive theropod. These numbers are listed at Dinosaur size, with the sources in place. New sources may come out which give different figures. Until they do, these are the numbers we've got. When possible, we try to use papers published in peer-reviewed scientific journals so that the numbers are as accurate as possible. Few of the skeletons are complete, but we're going with numbers published outside of Wikipedia.
When you change the numbers around, or begin to speculate on which ones could be larger, you go from being an encyclopedia editor to an adder of speculative material. This may be fine on a personal website, but cannot be used on Wikipedia because of the no original research policy.
If you have better sources for the sizes (preferably from peer-reviewed journals), please provide them, either here or on talk:Dinosaur size. It should be our goal to provide the best sources of information for our readers, and none of these numbers is set in stone. But none of these estimates were published by Wikipedia editors, which is why your changes have been continually reverted: it appears the material added is your own speculation. Firsfron of Ronchester 08:59, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Hey Mcelite, no worries. As far as I know, Gig and the largest known T. rex were about the same hip height, 3-3.5m, but nobody really publishes these kind of estimates because height depends entirely on the posture of the legs and back, which of course was incredibly variable (that is, nobody knows what stance was 'neutral' for these animals). I agree that there's no good evidence Gig was more massive than Rex, but we need to report the full range of published estimates... which happen to be exactly the same for each species. Various good studies have posited between 6 and 8 tonnes max size for both, so that's what we report. Dinoguy2 (talk) 02:14, 26 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Re:Notability

Articles on Wikipedia must be notable, or in short, they must have been the subject of several reliable, verifiable secondary sources. For instance, an article on Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrow is notable since it has been the subject of several secondary sources (interviews concerning development, reviews from several video game publications). Conversely, an article on my old dog is not notable, as he hasn't been the subject of any significant type of secondary sources. There are some specific notability requirements for certain types of articles (books, people, organizations and companies), and for your purposes, this is Wikipedia:Notability (fiction). To avoid a confusing diatribe on the matter, in short, if you can find information on Kishimoto's conception and development of Ino (why he created the character, what thought went into appearance, personality, abilities, whatever) or reception from other sources (critical reception on her specifically, merchandise released), then you would have a much stronger case for having an article on her. If any of this is confusing, as it inevitably is, feel free to ask me for clarification on my talk page. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 05:51, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

If such information was easily found, then she would have an article right now. Merchandise can be found by checking Viz Media's site, or Amazon.com. Critical reception can be found from a variety of sources, so long as the source satisfies WP:RS and WP:V. For instance, you can use an article from the Los Angeles Times or IGN, but not one from a Naruto fansite. Anyhow, it would be best if you created the article in your userspace, and then inquire at Talk:List of major Naruto characters or another related page whether your efforts are enough to satisfy Wikipedia:Notability (fiction). As for the userspace issue, start the page at User:Mcelite/Sandbox. There, you can work at the page at your leisure: consider it your personal workspace for making the article until it's ready. Best of luck. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 00:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
No problem. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 03:42, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Ino Yamanaka

I made some edits and added some references in the text. I would grateful if you help me with sorting them and editing source code! U is for Uppermind (talk) 05:21, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Americans of Native American descent

Please read Wikipedia's policies concerning verifiability and reliable sources. You can't put articles into categories, including Category:Americans of Native American descent, without reliable sources that indicate the the categorization is accurate. Whether the categorization is "negative, positive, or just questionable", it is supposed to be removed from articles about living people. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 06:05, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I saw that you added Rosa Parks and James Earl Jones a few days ago. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 08:41, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm very sorry. You're right, their articles do discuss their Native heritage. Sorry. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 08:47, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome

Five pillars|The five pillars of Wikipedia]]

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on [[Wikipedia:talk page|discusWelcome!

Hello, Mcelite, 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:

  • Wikipediasion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Kla’quot (talk | contribs) 07:08, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Tired of Crazy Edits" :)

Hi Mcelite,

FYI, adding a {{pp-semi-protected|small=yes}} tag to an article does not do anything to prevent vandalism. If you think an article should be semi-protected so that only established users can edit it, please make a request at Wikipedia: Requests for page protection. If an administrator agrees with you that semi-protection is needed then they will semi-protect the page and add the tag. Cheers, Kla’quot (talk | contribs) 07:11, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Aaliyah

Hi! It's nearly impossible to get unregistered user to stop fiddling with record sales figures. I don't know what it is, but just about every record article has that problem. Anyway, I only found two sources. They appear to be reliable so you can take your pick.

They don't seem to be scraped from Wikipedia so they might be ok to use. I suggest throwing the word "approximate" in there. Figures change all the time which is why it's so hard to find a concrete source for that. Hope that helps! :) Pinkadelica (talk) 16:57, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Race" vandal

This user...User:ELNUMERO1...is a problem, as addressed by me in this on his or her talk page. Keep a look out for this vandal, who has a serious "race" issue. I know that you've come across this vandal before. If he or she strikes one more time, I'm definitely seeking out to get this vandal blocked. But I really feel that this one needs to be banned. Flyer22 (talk) 09:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Just letting you know that this vandal was finally permanently blocked. Flyer22 (talk) 17:08, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Alexa Woods

I only gave it a very brief rewrite. It had too many fair-use images for such a short article, and only one was really needed. Plus the one where she is killing an Alien was from the making-of, not the movie. I plan to go through and dicect the plot and add a little more about her.LordJesseD (talk) 15:23, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 23:05, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Courage Running for his life.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Courage Running for his life.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:10, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Eustace and Courage scared.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Eustace and Courage scared.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:10, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Eustace scares Courage.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Eustace scares Courage.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:10, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Edit summaries

Hi - I notice you're using "undo" quite a bit and not adding anything to the default edit summary, e.g. most of your recent edits to Native Americans in the United States. When using "undo", especially for changes that are not obviously vandalism, can you please add some words about what you're doing to the edit summary? Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 15:55, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Native Americans in the United States. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. I've started a thread on the list of related ethnic groups in the infobox, please discuss this issue there rather than continuing to revert to your preferred version. -- Rick Block (talk) 03:57, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Minor edit marking

Please remember to mark your edits as minor if (and only if) they genuinely are minor edits (see Help:Minor edit). Marking a major change as a minor one is considered poor etiquette. The rule of thumb is that only an edit that consists solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearranging of text without modifying content should be flagged as a 'minor edit.' Thank you. --Matilda talk 01:07, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Plese review your preference settings and change them from marking all edits as minor when they quite clearly are not.--Matilda talk 23:38, 10 June 2008 (UTC)