User talk:Escape Orbit

Please leave a new message.

Escape Orbit	Archive
	Archive 1
	Archive 2
	Archive 3

Acne

I agree that "cracknee" and "necknee" were very silly, and added sometime after the initial entry about bacne. That term, though colloquial, is quite common and, if you type bacne in the search box, it will take you to the article on Acne vulgaris, unlike with its silly counterparts. As such, I think I'll re-add the part about bacne. -24.149.196.112 (talk) 08:53, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Powersurge

An article that you have been involved in editing, Powersurge, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Powersurge. Thank you. Welt^anschaunng 08:32, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bay of Fundy

OK, I've spent a few minutes reviewing the articles, my knowledge of Polio, and Franklin D. Roosevelt's paralytic illness (a very poorly sourced article). There is no way that a fall into the Bay of Fundy led to polio, if that is in fact what the man had. Polio is a virus transmitted from person-to-person, not a fall into chilly water. The sources in the article do not indicate that fall was causal, because it couldn't be (unless the Bay is filled with polio virus, which is improbable). So, I stand by my reversion, and now will have to clean up the FDR article, which I guess is a good thing. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 22:02, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Qais al-khonji

Hi Escape Orbit:

I saw your talk page note. Anyone that busy dating, marrying, advising the wealthy, and so on, is too busy and probably too exhausted to edit Wikipedia.

Cheers, Wanderer57 (talk) 18:08, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Musa Qala

It seems you were editing over the top of me whilst I was further reverting the anon users edit. Nearly gave me Palpitations when my save page did not work, I will adjust my edit and try again. :o) Richard Harvey (talk) 15:14, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalisam

Were you montioring my user page for vandalism? :-) I saw that someone posted the threat, but hadn't had time to look into it. Thanks for removing! Wallstreethotrod (talk) 19:45, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Er...

Are you sure that User talk:KesslerRonald is THE Ronald Kessler, and not just someone registered as such? I'd take it to UAA, but I figgered since you've edited his article several times, you might know...

(And for that matter, where's his freakin' {{wikipedian-bio}}?) Two One Six Five Five ^τ_ʃ 20:48, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mariah Carey

I removed the fact tags, because in the REFERENCES list is a source for all the statements!!!Reidlos (talk) 22:14, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I cited the sources like you wanted it, but the fact tags for the sentences about the top five position of I Know What You Want and the chart position for U Make Me Wanna are senseless, because in the reference list are thousand sites, where you can easily look them up.Reidlos (talk) 15:02, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Green Day Wikiproject

Hi, I've seen you frequently around the article Green Day and other related articles. Please consider joining the Green Day WikiProject, an effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage and detail regarding Green Day.

If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks that you can help with. Thank you for your time.

LukeTheSpook (talk) 21:39, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Iain Lee

How can this page have been edited so much, yet not have a single cite?

Answer: Most of the edits are vandalism and reversion of vandalism. Such usually tends to preserve inferior versions of articles as everyone is in defence rather than development mode. Good work on the changes btw :) Orderinchaos 20:12, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another One Bites The Dust - Rocky 3

I googled this stuff and I came up with a couple possible verifications: http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/united-artists/rocky-iii-790755.html?r=RSS - This one is from a newspaper & http://www.jimpeterik.com/btseot2006.htm - This one is from Jim Peterik's website (he is the songwriter of eye of the tiger) Here are the blurbs from each website respectively if you don't want to skim through all the articles.

  1. Before settling on the film's signature song of "Eye of the Tiger" by Survivor, Sylvester Stallone wanted to use the already hit song "Another One Bites the Dust" by Queen.#
  2. We were immediately knocked out by the power of the quick-cut visuals. We were also struck with how well the action worked with the temp music they had supplied - "Another One Bites The Dust" by Queen. I remember shaking my head and saying, "How are we ever going to beat that one?"#

If you think this is enough information please cite these as references and add them to the articles. Alas, I don't know how to cite facts myself. By the way, thanks for checking on this regularly. 78.69.235.75 (talk) 17:39, 22 March 2008 (UTC)Jerry Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Another_One_Bites_the_Dust" Categories: Start-Class Queen articles | High-importance Queen articles | WikiProject Songs articles | Start-

I've already posted this on the Another One Bites the Dust Discussion page but you haven't checked it out. What do you think about this? This is from Jerry (I can't find those wavy things on this computer).

I THINK YOU'VE GENUINE PROBLEM IN UNDERSTANDING ENGLISH —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.3.118.72 (talk) 17:51, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Wikipedia policy on verifiable cites here. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:55, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sensored info on cassie (singer) disc page

WP:BLP

You asked for help on this. One of the first lines of WP:BLP states;

Editors must take particular care adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page.

Note the emphasis on any. I don't know the content of the removed material, but if it fails WP:BLP, it shouldn't be on a talk page the same as it shouldn't be on an article page. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:08, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You. The content doesnt fail. The contest was various things: [redacted] info on her risque oral sex inuendo music vid ( she did ). So why is sensoring this true info allowed? 70.108.103.64 (talk) 17:12, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have no idea what that word even means. None of the redacted content was sourced. Find verifiable references from reliable sources and you can replace it, no problem. —Hello, Control ^{Hello, Tony} 17:24, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

red hair

Thanks for your changes of the picture. Gerriet42 (talk) 13:23, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

freckles in culture (short version)

Don't be so strict about finding references in that issue about freckles in culture. The attitude towards freckles really has changed in the last 30-40 years. (I would refer you to german music about freckles (sommersprossen) but I guess that wouldn't help. - I don't have any english examples for it, though.)

Why is it bad to refer to Luci Lu - I thought it was a nice example (not mine originally, though)Gerriet42 (talk) 13:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's bad because it is uncited and your (or some-one's) personal opinion. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 15:53, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kate Craig-Wood inclusion in list of transgendered

I had not finished submitting the detailed page, which is perhaps why you removed the entry.

It may seem a little arrogant to add oneself, but a quick google for "kate craig-wood" will show that I fit the criteria for a listing on that page. I am listed on Lynn Conway's TS successes page as well if that is any help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Khcw77 (talk • contribs) 21:19, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Celtic F.C.

Hi, thanks for your interest in Celtic F.C., although we have our disagreements about the level of citations needed. While scanning the tags you added, I noticed that you added a fact tag to something that was a patent falsehood - a reference to Kilmarnock beating Celtic 6-0, which just did not happen, so that's at least one good thing that came out of your work!

However, I stand by my comment on your overzealousness regarding "POV" and citations. Re-reading WP:CITE and WP:When to cite:

"When adding material that is challenged or likely to be challenged",

When a source may not be needed

"Subject-specific common knowledge – Material that anyone familiar with a topic, including laypersons, recognizes as true."

- I would say that knowing when not to cite is as important as when to cite, otherwise we get into a rather silly situation where ever single statement has to be cited.

For example, although it is undoubtedly a "POV" that the rivalry between Celtic and Rangers is one of the fiercest in world football, this "POV" is unlikely ever to be challenged - and never has been until now. Do a simple Google and you'll find page after page about this rivalry - the article even linked to Major football rivalries where you can find out more. It's like someone asking for a fact tag for the POV that Pele was one of the best footballers in the world.

You don't appear to have made any attempt to do any verification of your own before adding the fact tags. I would suggest that if you find something that looks debateable, you first do a simple Google, and if you either find a citation which contradicts a statement, or on the other hand, find nothing to back the statement up, then make a remark on the talk page, then add a fact tag if the issue is not resolved.

Some of your other "fact" tags were really quite strange - for example, a fact tag on whether Celtic won every competition they entered in 1967 - this is extremely easy to verify by reading 1966-67 in Scottish football, and has never until now been challenged.

A fact tag on "Celtic has traditionally been linked with its founding roots which originate from the Irish immigrant community in Glasgow.". Like asking for a fact tag on "The earth is the third planet from the sun".

A fact tag on whether Celtic have their own channel, Channel67 - what is in contention here? Like asking for a citation that Celtic play in green and white hoops...

A fact tag on whether Martin O'Neill left Celtic to care for his wife who had cancer - I went ahead and found a BBC news citation for that, but when was it ever in question?

A fact tag that Celtic beat Rangers seven times in a row a couple of seasons ago - so easy to prove by reading the relevant seasons report, with links to BBC reports of the games in question, and never, until now, been at all questioned...

etc.

In summary, please add fact tags if, after some attempt at verification, there is any doubt, otherwise we get into the ridiculous situation where every statement, even when it's "Subject-specific common knowledge" is required to have a citation.

Camillus (talk) 21:48, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks re. my page

Just a quick note to say thank you for tidying up my page and inserting the citations properly. I should have read the docs first... bit of a newbie. ;) Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Khcw77 (talk • contribs) 22:24, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Lady Princess Duchess RE: Bangor Grammar School edits

Excuse me, I was not trying to be humourous. Part of the ideology of the 'Banter Bus' is that we operate it like a court, those titles are confirmed parts of the society. I dont mind if the James Edwards edit is taken out as it is actually fun, although factually true. However, the Banter Bus is factually correct, it was not intended to be a joke, those titles are part of the club so if you would kindly allow me to add that to the society section i would be very grateful.

It was just so outdated

It discussed My Life as it was occurring and itgnored its subsequent life this winter. Your changes are fine except that Ryan';s shows shold be in chrinocle order (just a thought). —Preceding unsigned comment added by FosseTheCat (talk • contribs) 17:39, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, Yes the Site Does Say the Obama Girl Was Attending A Party that Evening. Read It Better.

In fact, when she was telling the press that she was sick, she WAS AT THE PARTY. Don't be one-sided.Kevin j (talk) 16:51, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, it is the facts. It was also reported on CNN that "while she was too sick to vote for Obama, she was well enough to attend a fundraiser party." If you are pro-Obama and want to hype the page like the Obama Girl made no mistakes, I suggest you give it up. Wikipedia is neutralKevin j (talk) 16:51, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Wikipedia policy on "good faith" and don't speculate about my motivation. Thanks. Your addition to the article clearly goes beyond the facts stated in the cite to draw your own conclusions. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:00, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your one sided opinions don't get to me in anyway. Like I said, WIKIPEDIA IS NEUTRAL. It is alright to support Obama, but you cannot make it so the page leaves out any reliable controversy about the Obama Girl as well. She was active at the party, and that is an indicator that it is very unlikely she was sick. I suggest you also read the NPOV policy yourself.Kevin j (talk) 17:02, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If there is "reliable controversy" about Amber Lee Ettinger then cite it. So far the only controversy we have is your inference from a fairly innocuous blog column. If it is "unlikely she was sick" then produce a cite that says this. Your opinion/conclusions on the matter don't count. State the facts and let the reader decide themselves without your prompting. If you have a reputable source that says "she was not ill/did not look ill" then please cite it and we can move on. Otherwise what you're adding is an uncited and controversial accusation that will be removed per WP:BLP.

My opinion only goes as far as;

your edit is an unsupported speculation.
you continue to question my good faith based on groundless speculation about my politics. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:28, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you're very questionable. Now you're trying to say it's a blog only. It was the New York Times for crying out loud. Only the paper's John McCain controversy was reported false in recent times. There is clear ground about you're political beliefs that YOU ARE BRINGING UP from you're messages. It's easy to estimate your bad faith opinions; Your opinion/conclusions on the matter don't count. I will continue to make sure it is written properly.Kevin j (talk) 18:06, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AN notice

There is now a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#A_user_is_violating_the_Good_Faith_Policy_and_blocking_My_Edits_on_the_Obama_Girl_Which_Are_Accurate about your edits. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 21:29, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove the fan site from the Andy Murray wiki page without discussing it in the appropriate section first. As decided by the editors and admins in 2006, the inclusion and removal of any fan sites need to be approved prior to any action. The fan site you keep removing was approved by the editors and admins.