User talk:Epicgenius/Archive/2013/Nov

Rollback

If I spot you using rollback to edit war at Malkin Tower one more time, I will remove it. Stop messing around at that article, please. Bencherlite^Talk 14:33, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Show me one instance where I have used it. Besides, I use Wikipedia:Twinkle to roll back edits that are not really constructive (for example, why do you need a table of contents for an article with just four sections? Is the reader too lazy to scroll down or something?). Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 14:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

I was coming here to caution you that unhelpful use of Twinkle (as demonstrated at Malkin Tower will result in you being prohibited from using the Twinkle software in future, but I see another administrator has issued the same warning, so consider this an additional little warning. Nick (talk) 14:45, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

So, what am I supposed to do? Press "undo"? That would get me blocked. Should I just pressed "Edit" then inserted it manually? That takes too much time. Any ideas? Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 14:46, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Stop edit-warring, perhaps? Start discussions before, rather than after, the page has to be given full edit protection because of your instance on minor formatting changes? Hmmm.... Bencherlite^Talk 14:49, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

There is nothing to edit war about. It is quite obvious that the article does not need a TOC. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 14:51, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

"It is quite obvious that the article does not need a TOC." "Quite obvious" to you, it may well be, but when it's disputed, discuss it, don't just plough on regardless as if you're magically entitled to edit-war. Bencherlite^Talk 14:54, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

"'It is quite obvious that the article does not need a TOC.' "Quite obvious" to you, it may well be"
Count how many sections the article has. Then measure the article's length. Do you really think that such a short article needs a table of contents? Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 14:56, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Don't change the subject. I'm not here to discuss that issue with you. I'm here to point out you're edit-warring, and "I'm in the right" isn't a defence here. If I see you edit-warring again, whatever tool or process you use to do it, I will block you. Understood? Bencherlite^Talk 15:00, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay... Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 15:04, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand why the page was protected at 14:35 yet your first edit to the talk page was at 14:40, could you possibly explain why that is ? The Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle has collapsed in a heap for some reason, I'd like to know why.

I'm also interested in why it would have taken too much time to enter the revision manually with a meaningful edit summary instead of (1) no edit summary (2) no table of contents needed and (3) no edit summary beyond TW's automatic one, I wasn't aware it was necessary to make edits within a second, as if this is some sort of game.

Finally, I'm mystified as to why you care about the Table of Contents, you might not find it useful, what about other users though, don't they get consideration or a say in the matter ? Nick (talk) 15:01, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Usually, I post my concerns on talk pages, but this time, my edits got reverted so quickly that I did not have a chance to talk. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 15:04, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Alvechurch page message

Hi EpicGenius,

Thank you for your message. If I can explain, I wanted to incude the Alvechurch Grammar School Charitable Trust in the Alvechuch Wiki page as it is a significant institution in Alvechurch. It has been going for over 200 years and has helped countless local children in the Alvechurch area. As such, IMHO, it deserves to be part of the Alvechurch page. It is verifiable, bona fide and is the subject of Articles in the Village magazine, which is already mentioned on the Alvechurch Wiki page (http://villageonline.ehclients.com/village/features/feature/trust_ready_to_help_out/), although unfortunately its web presence only dates to this year.

What do you need me to do to allow this to be included?

Many thanks, Peter CandooWeb — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.156.87.70 (talk) 16:50, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi, and thanks for actually posting your concern on my talk page. My concern was that the content was uncited and that it sounded a little like advertising. Feel free to revert my edit if you think that this is not so. Also, please edit with your CandooWeb account; otherwise admins might not think you are reverting to your own edits and will revert you instead. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 19:28, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Welcoming Me

Hey. Thanks for welcoming me to Wikipedia. GMTV World (talk) 10:00, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

No problem Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 23:05, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi,

I feel the price of admission is relevant to the article, just like other historical facts in that article.

Regards, (Tri47 (talk)). —Preceding undated comment added 06:17, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:LUL Platform Layout Metropolitan/side/Amersham and Chesham

Template:LUL Platform Layout Metropolitan/side/Amersham and Chesham has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thryduulf (talk) 11:33, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

About your WP:RM proposal for 7 World Trade Center

There has been a discussion started at Talk:Four World Trade Center that seems to relate to your move request on Talk:7 World Trade Center. I thought you might want to know. Steel1943 (talk) 23:01, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 23:04, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

The Long Water

Hello, Epicgenius/Archive/2013, and thank you for your contributions!

An article you worked on The Long Water, appears to be directly copied from http://www.openwaterpedia.com/index.php?title=Serpentine. Please take a minute to make sure that the text is freely licensed and properly attributed as a reference, otherwise the article may be deleted.

It's entirely possible that this bot made a mistake, so please feel free to remove this notice and the tag it placed on The Long Water if necessary. MadmanBot (talk) 23:44, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Reverted edit for software version in infobox.

Hey, I'm new here and was wondering if I had stepped out of line changing the infobox on a wiki page that you reverted. Specifically, I'm referring to this edit:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=TrueCrypt&diff=580057978&oldid=580040922.

I ask because I thought I was doing good by standardizing this page across other infoboxes that also have the latest software versions tied to Template/LSR subpages.

Examples:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spotify
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT

Also, there was no information lost with my contribution. Both the current version and the date the latest version went live remained.

I really am new and would like some input.

Thanks.

• The problem here is that the infobox doesn't support the parameter, so that what you typed in won't display on the page. Thanks for trying to clarify the situation, though. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 02:41, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

• Ah, is there a way to do it so that it would show up? I looked around the documentation for a while and looked at the differences between other software infoboxes for a while as well and didn't see an obvious way to do it. Thanks for getting back to me.Bin ed (talk) 02:46, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

• After looking at the infobox, I think that you would have to change the entire infobox (and edit all of its transclusions) in order to get your parameter supported. All the parameters are as follows: {{Infobox software | name = | title = | logo = <!-- Image name is enough --> | logo caption = | logo_size = | logo_alt = | screenshot = <!-- Image name is enough --> | caption = | screenshot_size = | screenshot_alt = | collapsible = | author = | developer = | released = <!-- {{Start date and age|YYYY|MM|DD|df=yes/no}} --> | discontinued = | latest release version = | latest release date = <!-- {{Start date and age|YYYY|MM|DD|df=yes/no}} --> | latest preview version = | latest preview date = <!-- {{Start date and age|YYYY|MM|DD|df=yes/no}} --> | frequently updated = <!-- DO NOT include this parameter unless you know what it does --> | status = | programming language = | operating system = | platform = | size = | language = | language count = <!-- DO NOT include this parameter unless you know what it does --> | language footnote = | genre = | license = | alexa = | website = {{URL|example.org}} | standard = | AsOf = }} Whereas the parameter you added, | frequently updated = is not supported in the infobox. Secondly, it is template-protected, so you would need a template editor or an administrator to do the changes. Thanks. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 12:57, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

• Sorry it's taken so long to get back to you, I don't think I marked this conversation as "watch". I don't think you need to revise the entire infobox. If you were to undo the latest edit to the infobox and click "preview" the stable release and release date still appear, only it's pulled from a template page instead. "Stable release 7.1a (February 7, 2012; 20 months ago[1]) [±]". I made sure that when I saved my change to the infobox that the software version still appeared where it had been. Moreover I noticed that other software infoboxes went about displaying it's software versions in the same way. I noticed truecrypt didn't follow this model when I tried to use the wikipedia API to get a list of software versions. It follows it now since I've added a template page (see: Template:Latest_stable_software_release/TrueCrypt), in that I can pull the version using the API now, but if Truecrypt were to ever update then no one would change the template page if the infobox already has the newest version, making any api call to the template page out of date.Bin ed (talk) 17:55, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

• Okay, so just undo my edit, if you are confident that the template will not be broken. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 16:56, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

• Changed, thank you for your help. Bin ed (talk) 17:55, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Yissachar Dov Rokeach (I)

Hi, I just saw you moved this page to Yissachar Dov Rokeach I. Why did you do this? There is no such thing as "the first," the "second," or even "junior" in Judaism. The parenthetical Roman numeral was only placed on Hasidic dynasty pages to differentiate the different Rebbes who have the same name. The Roman numeral should not be looked at as part of their name. Yoninah (talk) 16:54, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, so can there be Yissachar Dov Rokeach (first), Yissachar Dov Rokeach (second), etc. rather than the confusing Roman numerals? The "I" can be confused with a lowercase "L" or even a pipe "|". Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 16:58, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

That looks kinda strange, doesn't it? The system has really been working fine as it is, with Shlomo Halberstam (I) and Shlomo Halberstam (II), Shmuel Bornsztain (I) and Shmuel Bornsztain (II), and Aharon of Karlin (I) and Aharon of Karlin (II). Yoninah (talk) 17:50, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, so change all of them. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 17:50, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

You mean revert what you did? The only other thing I can think of is to expand the title, e.g.: Yissachar Dov Rokeach, third Belzer rebbe, Yissachar Dov Rokeach, fifth Belzer rebbe, Shmuel Bornsztain, second Sochatchover Rebbe, Shmuel Bornsztain, fifth Sochatchover Rebbe. Yoninah (talk) 17:54, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

No, I meant to do what I did. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 17:54, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

As I mentioned, this is an unacceptable naming convention in Judaism. Shall we move this discussion to the WP:Wikiproject Judaism page to get consensus from other editors? Yoninah (talk) 17:58, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, let's try that. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 18:04, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, the discussion is taking place at Talk:Yissachar Dov Rokeach I#Page rename. IZAK (talk) 11:19, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Sorry it took so long for me to respond; I was traveling. I will check it out. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:08, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Trouted

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: Helping fishy people keep their smell of wikipedia.—CKY2250 ^ταικ 19:43, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

173.81.105.226

Hello, I'm 173.81.105.226. I noticed that you made a change to an article, West Eighth Street – New York Aquarium (New York City Subway), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. 173.81.105.226 (talk) 21:49, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

You should report this IP to WP:AIV, can't now I am off to school. —CKY2250 ^ταικ 22:40, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

The IP does not seem to be disruptive—the only thing he/she is doing is removing the font colour, which actually should not be used in text. It is only used in the layout at all because the layout is not part of the prose. However, ,what I will do is to first try to resolve this discussion civilly, then if all fails, go to WP:ANI. --Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 00:11, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

If the IP continues to revert three revert rule so the fourth one is a block, so just don't let it get that far.—CKY2250 ^ταικ 01:09, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the reminder. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:19, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

I noticed that an anonymous editor removed a section from the West Eighth Street – New York Aquarium (New York City Subway) article, noting in the edit comment (correctly) that it was unsourced. You restored the section with no explanation. If you're going to restore disputed text, you should add sources supporting the described layout. Just because the editor chooses not to create an account does not mean that the edits are any less valid. Pburka (talk) 01:39, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Never did I say that the edits were invalid. I only said that the removal was unjustified. I am now going to add source. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:43, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps it wasn't your intention, but using the revert tool without an edit comment implies that you are reverting vandalism. Please explain your edits in edit comments so that other editors can understand your intentions. Remember that Wikipedia is a collaborative effort, not a competition. Pburka (talk) 01:47, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

I knew that, but there is no quick way to just undo and leave comments. Next time, I will leave an explanatory comment for the IP. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:50, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

http://nycsubway.org is NOT a reliable source. It's a wiki for train enthusiasts. Please find a reliable source, restore the warning, or remove the section. Pburka (talk) 01:53, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

And so we get into the discussion about WP:OR again. The discussion here is no less confusing. I will replace the source. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:55, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

MBTA Blue Line Platform Layout

Are you sure it is really necessary to display the MBTA Blue Line Platform Layout this way. The Blue Line can be very distracting and unlike the New York City Subway or Washington Metro, the MBTA subway stations do not have more than one line serving a platform, so, I think it might be better just to have the "Northbound" written in the color of the line. Mysteryman557 (talk) 03:37, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

It would be nice to have the link to the line, but maybe it could be just a plain link, like this: "Blue Line". Otherwise it may go against WP:COLOR. The highlight is only there so that it contrasts against the rest of the layout. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 12:47, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dundalk, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rugby (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:57, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

West Eighth Street – New York Aquarium (New York City Subway)

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from West Eighth Street – New York Aquarium (New York City Subway). When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. "It looks bad" is not a valid reason to remove a maintenance template. The template belongs in the section it applies to. Moving it into a subsection is misleading. Stop edit warring and improve the article. Pburka (talk) 18:15, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Tell me, exactly why does a station layout need references? What purpose do references serve when the description of the station, and all its levels, is right there in the article? Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 18:18, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

It needs references because we're trying to build an encyclopedia. We're not collecting facts which we know to be true, but collecting information which is verifiable. This is one of the key principles of Wikipedia. The station layout is not described elsewhere in the article—the section provides detailed (possibly to the point of WP:INDISCRIMINATE) information which cannot be found elsewhere. In order to demonstrate that the information is correct, you need to provide references in WP:reliable sources which support it. If you can't find such sources, it suggests that authors of reliable sources have not felt that this information was important enough for their works, so it probably doesn't belong in Wikipedia either. Pburka (talk) 18:26, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

No, but it says that there are four side platforms, four tracks, and three levels to the station in the article. Is that WP:OR as well? Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 18:28, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

How do you know it has four side platforms, four tracks, and three levels? Pburka (talk) 18:30, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Look at the infobox. Yes, ground level is also a level. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 18:30, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

That's not what I mean. How do we know that the infobox is correct? It's not referenced, so it's not verifiable. Pburka (talk) 18:33, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Are you going to say that for all of the NYC Subway infoboxes? Also, look at the pictures, then look at what the NYC Subway 'fan sites', which you removed from the article, say. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 18:37, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I will say that for all the infoboxes. You need to review WP:V and WP:TRUTH. Just because you know something to be true does not mean you can add it to Wikipedia. The addition of unverifiable information (even information you know to be true from personal experience!) harms the project. Surely the MTA has detailed information about the station layouts which you could use to reference these sections; spend some time to find that! Pburka (talk) 18:43, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

I looked the MTA website over many times previously. They don't even have facts about the stations themselves, much less any detailed descriptions! Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 18:44, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Consider looking for paper sources. Try the NYPL. Until then, please stop adding original research and unverifiable information to articles. Pburka (talk) 18:48, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

What does the NYPL have to do with it? Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 18:58, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

The NYPL (New York Public Library) has an extensive collection of reference works on paper. You could spend some time there looking for reliable sources describing the layout of MTA stations. If you can't find any reliable sources, ask yourself why the information needs to be in Wikipedia if no-one else has deemed it sufficiently important to publish. Pburka (talk) 19:03, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

I know what NYPL stands for (even despite the fact that I use the Queens Library more often). I just can't go to the library for NYCS station layouts because the only things that the NY Public Library has is books about the system, not the individual stations. In fact, Wikipedia has a better collection of articles about NYCS stations than the library does about books on the same topic, ironically. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 20:39, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations from STiki!

		The Bronze STiki Barnstar of Merit
		Congratulations, Epicgenius! You're receiving this barnstar of merit because you recently crossed the 5,000 classification threshold using STiki. We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool. We hope you continue your ascent up the leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (developer) and Pratyya (Hello!) 05:18, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 13:11, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Your edit to Scout Promise

I am not happy about your edit here, but have not reverted it, preferring to discuss it further with you. First, the links to articles about each association is the only way that the reader can get information about the association from reading about the Scout Promise. Second, while I realise that links in headers is not ideal, I do not see that WP:OVERLINK actually says that they must be removed. They have been there I think for quite a while. --Bduke (Discussion) 21:23, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

You are not happy? Let's see the policy, shall we? According to WP:LINKSTYLE, "Section headings should not themselves contain links; instead, a {{main}} or {{seealso}} template should be placed immediately after the heading." If you want, you can put the links within the {{Main}} template. However, please DON'T add links to headings, as they go against WP:MOS. Admins shouldn't even do that. You, being one, definitely shouldn't. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 21:29, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Hang on, mate. Do not take such a heavy line. First, I did not, if I recall correctly, add any of these links. Second, WP:LINKSTYLE is a guideline, not a policy. There are exceptions. I think this is one of them. Adding the "Main" template is more verbose and is not quite strictly correct. It might be better to add something like "Members of Scouts Australia use the following promises", in each case, but this is also over verbose, while the link in the sub heading serves the purpose splendidly. Are you just applying the guideline, or have you thought about this case? --Bduke (Discussion) 02:54, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

I agree, but links just look awkward with the section heading:

==Scouts Australia==

rather than:

==Scouts Australia==

Main article: Scouts Australia

or your suggestion above. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 02:59, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

We just disagree. I see nothing awkward in any way about the linked section heading, while the other alternatives look awkward. However, I know I am probably in a minority. I am busy coding right now and coming to my watchlist briefly only while large compiles or test runs are going on. I will raise the issue at the Scouting Project sometime, but give a fair deal to all three choices and point out that the guidelines at least discourages the section link. --Bduke (Discussion) 04:07, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 04:08, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

FIFA U-17 World Cup

Yes of course im sure, the 2013 edition ended with Nigeria defeating titleholders Mexico 3-0 in the Final – [1]. --Resiiwhk (talk) 01:17, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, then. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:24, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Troy Dorsey may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• left|{{flagicon|USA}} [[Jesse James Leija]] || [[HemisFair Arena]] || [[San Antonio, Texas]], USA]|| TKO (retirement) || 5 || 3:00 || 13-6-4

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:46, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Pelham Bay Park (IRT Pelham Line) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• toward Brooklyn Bridge – City Hall <small>(Buhre Avenue)</small><br><small>No service: Parkchester)</small>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:34, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ararat Center for Strategic Research may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• #Making its analyses available to decision makers as well as the Armenian public at large {cn}}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:04, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Alamo Quarry Market may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• }}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:53, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Fanno Creek may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• {[refend}}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:52, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Maurice Leyland may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• {[refbegin}}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:59, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Louise Erdrich may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• One sister, Heidi, is a poet who also lives in Minnesota and publishes under the name[Heid E. Erdrich. Another sister, Lise Erdrich, has written children's books and collections of

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:11, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Please remove the "speedy deletion" tag from the TorSearch page I created

Hello, Epicgenius. You have new messages at Amcallister's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Bryant Park

Excuse me, what was the idea of this move? What is the source of "the real name" as you say? Vcohen (talk) 14:26, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

• The IND Sixth Avenue Line's station is named 42nd Street – Bryant Park. The IRT Flushing Line's station is named Fifth Avenue. Hence, 42nd Street – Bryant Park / Fifth Avenue. It complies with the naming convention of WP:NYCPT, doesn't it? Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 14:27, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

You are right, I am sorry. Vcohen (talk) 16:03, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

It's all right. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 16:04, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:S-line/NYCS right/Second

A tag has been placed on Template:S-line/NYCS right/Second requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it must be substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{substituted}}</noinclude>).

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page's talk page, where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. —CKY2250 ^ταικ 17:45, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:S-line/NYCS left/Flushing

A tag has been placed on Template:S-line/NYCS left/Flushing requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it must be substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{substituted}}</noinclude>).

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page's talk page, where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. —CKY2250 ^ταικ 17:45, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Epicgenius. You have new messages at Cky2250's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Epicgenius. You have new messages at Cky2250's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Standard, High Line

You reverted your question on my talk page, but just in case, 2 problems:

• You forgot to put in the unit to convert to;

• In general, don't eliminate the blank line between section titles and section text. They don't display on screen, and some people -- especially those with visual problems -- find them helpful in the editing process. I used to do this regularly, until someone explained the situation, and I still find myself automatically doing it sometimes and have to go back and fix it when I realize my mistake. Beyond My Ken (talk) 15:24, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for explaining the problem to me. I was using an automated program that did the line breaks for me; I added the conversion templates manually. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 18:06, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Ron Erhardt

My name is Sally Erhardt knoche. We have edited my fathers page Ronald Peter Erhardt pro football coach numerous times and someone keeps changing it back. This is what it should say at the bottom of the page. Also survived by first wife with his biological children. Rhoda and children Ed, Liz, Jane and Sally. Ed and wife Laurie have two children Brett and Colin. Liz and husband Gregg have 2 children Justine and Julie. Justine and her husband Andrew just gave birth to Ron's first biological great-granddaughter, Mallory! Jane and her husband Rob have two children Amanda and Alex. Sally and her husband Ron have two children Brianne and Aryka.

I don't know who you are or why you keep changing it back. I was told we could add this to his page. I don't need to prove this is real. I wouldn't even know what you need to do that and once again don't know who you are. If you are doing this for the Jesse family they are not his real family and we want this in his legacy. They took out father away from us 40 years ago but they are not taking away that he had four children and keeping it a secret so they don't have to explain that he had other children with his first wife.

Sally Erhardt knoche — Preceding unsigned comment added by Briaryk (talk • contribs) 19:18, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, three things. First, reverting others' edits more than three times is liable to get you reported or even blocked. Second, unverifiable content should be removed. As I said in the e-mail, provide a verifiable source that proves that you are really his daughter, as it goes against policy. Third, what's the point of adding the paragraph? If it is to get the facts out, then however right you are, the paragraph will be removed without a source.

Imagine that I am a Joe Schmoe. I am reading the Ron Erhardt article and then I just see an irrelevant paragraph about his family. Then, I wonder, "Who is this user 'Briaryk' who keeps adding unverifiable information about this guy's family? WHY does it matter?" You have to convince people for why this information is important to Wikipedia; otherwise, more experienced editors than I will remove the paragraph without looking back. Again, what are you benefiting from adding this information? It seems that you are losing out rather than gaining anything – see WP:PROUD and WP:YAMB. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 19:30, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Hey there. For starters I didn't know anything about your policies etc. all I know is someone pointed this out to me and we would like our family to be acknowledged also. As far as what I am gaining from this really has nothing to do with you. It is what my family wants on his page after we saw it. I thought you want the truth and the real information on each page. Please tell me what I need to give you for verification?? If you look up Ron Erhardt in Fargo ND you will see that he lived their For 10 years as coach of NDSU. That is where we all lived. Do you need my birth certificate. Lol. I really don't understand again why you are changing this. People put things on pages all if the time since we found out about wikepedia and I don't see people changing it over and over. My mother put this information up and linked it to the Erhardt family web page and you still changed it back. Let me know what you want because I think this us ridiculous and I don't want to waste my time any more.

Sally

Again, like I said, if there's no sources, even if it's just a paragraph about an illegitimate family in a person's Wikipedia article, then the content should not belong on Wikipedia. You should probably provide a family connection from a website like https://familysearch.org/ . Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:46, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Here is a link to my brother who works for ESPN. Is this good enough??

People and Pop Culture - SportsBusiness Daily ...

www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2012/03/22/...

... died yesterday at the ... ERHARDT died yesterday at the age of 80 in Boca Raton, Fla. Erhardt is the father of ESPN President of Customer Marketing & Sales ED ...
Sally Erhardt Knoche

Please post in this section next time. Thanks. Additionally, the source that you just posted is verifiable, http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2012/03/22/People-and-Pop-Culture/Names.aspx?hl=erhardt%20died&sc=0 , but only for the fact that he died. If you want, post the exact URL of the page that mentions that you are his child, and I will check to see if that is verifiable. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 02:58, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

I don't know if there is an article for each of my sisters and myself. This is ridiculous. Why do you care what is put on my dad's page? Are there certain people in charge of this? How can I not waste any more if my time? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Briaryk (talk • contribs) 05:16, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

I don't know if there is an article for you and your siblings (I am thinking that there isn't, based on your inability to provide a reliable source even for your dad's article), but adding unsourced text to a biography of a (formerly living) person is generally not allowed. Also, it might a conflict of interest for you to edit your dad's article. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 12:52, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Korean translation

Hello Epic. Amazing user and talk page you have. I noticed you speak som Korean. Are you able to translate 성범죄 피해자이기도 했던 한 탈퇴자는 "성상납 대기조 '상록수' 회원이 1천여 명에 이르며, 옥중에서도 미성년자를 포함한 여신도들을 관리하고 있다"고 폭로했다. for us? Or point me to a fellow editor who can? Thanks. Sam Sailor ^Sing 20:23, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Here is a list of Wikipedians who speak Korean natively. Sorry, I only speak a little bit of Korean and may not be able to translate this correctly. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 20:44, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

By the way, where did you find this text? Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 20:49, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks. The text is a quote from a source in Jung Myung Seok. Do add it to your watchlist, if you will. It is one of those new religious movement articles that gets some very biased editing. We do have what I believe is a reliable translation of the whole newspaper article from which the quote stems. The COI/SPA editors however try to twist and turn every other little word and cast doubt about everything that is not according to their agenda. A second and third translation would be fine. Best, Sam Sailor ^Sing 22:28, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I'll be sure to watchlist it. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 22:32, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Chelsea Manning

Please realize that Wikipedia:Gender identity says that trans women are supposed to be treated like women. Except in direct quotes, we're not supposed to use phrases implying that trans women were men (not only as opposed to women in general, but as opposed to women in the wrong body) before their bodies are corrected with surgery. Georgia guy (talk) 01:03, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Please see your talk page, and note that I said "BEFORE she was a woman". The picture is NOT of a girl. Whether she is trans or not, Manning's picture's caption deserves to be correct. Thanks, Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:07, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

You're arguing that trans women whose bodies haven't been changed with surgeries yet are men. The phrase "Before she was a woman" uses the point of view that trans women actually were men (as opposed to women trapped in men's bodies) before their bodies are corrected with surgery. What did I get wrong?? Georgia guy (talk) 01:09, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Well yes—she had male genitals. Therefore, her sex was a man, before her sex reassignment. Her gender was always female. Gender is the person's decision about whether they want to be a man or a woman, whereas sex is whether the person has a penis or a vagina. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:13, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia's manual of style says that gender is the correct way to decide which terms to use with transgender people. Georgia guy (talk) 01:15, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

You're getting off topic here. The discussion was about the picture. I correctly stated that the picture was of Manning when her sex was male. It's not the other way around, where her gender is male, which we both know is not true. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:17, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Now, which does Wikipedia:Gender identity say is the correct rule to use in determining when to use gender terms for people, gender or sex?? The answer is gender. "As a male" thus implies that Chelsea was a man at the time of the image, not only as opposed to a woman in general, but as opposed to a woman trapped in a man's body. Why do you deny this?? Georgia guy (talk) 01:21, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Her SEX was male at the time of the picture. There is no denying that at the time, people did not know that she looked like a woman because she obviously didn't. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:25, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia:Manual of style, when are gender-specific terms supposed to be used to refer to sex rather than gender?? Please answer with the general category that your "as a male" phrase belongs to. Georgia guy (talk) 01:27, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

I really do not know what WP:MOS says about matters like this. Should we get some other editors' input on this discussion? Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:29, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Gender identity. Georgia guy (talk) 01:31, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Seriously? Now you are saying that she never was a male, despite the apparent presence of a penis on her body prior to August 2013? Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:46, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Correct. That's the educated way to think of a transgender woman. She was born with a male body, but she has always had her female brain. This is a trans woman's gender identity, and this is how Wikipedia is supposed to treat trans women. Georgia guy (talk) 01:43, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Are you kidding me? She was once a male physically, and that will always apply because she once had a penis. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:46, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Also, stop Canvassing people, as you did here. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:49, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

You should work for the olympics, identifying contestants' gender just be looking at them; it would be so much more efficient then the way they do it now. RS report this individual as a women, we must do the same. Sepsis II (talk) 01:33, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Yep, that's the way I roll, people with penises are men and people with vaginas are women. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:48, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm sure you don't mean to offend, but that last statement is demeaning to transgendered people. Gender and gender expression are not nearly as simple you propose. I encourage you to do a bit of research to understand the kind of discrimination and hate which transgendered people face. Once you educate yourself, I hope that you will demonstrate more sensitivity around issues which you do not understand. Pburka (talk) 02:11, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

So, are you assuming that I am not educated? That's actually kind of obvious—the sex of a trans man whose gender is a woman, is not actually the sex of a woman until he/she gets female parts. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 02:30, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

I apologize if I my assumption was incorrect. Perhaps you are being intentionally offensive. Pburka (talk) 02:37, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

No, I am not being intentionally offensive. WHy would you think that? Do women have penises? Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 02:54, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

You seem to be focused on Ms. Manning's genitalia, which, I note, do not appear in the photograph in question. You are conflating sex and gender; Manning's gender identification is female, regardless of visible or hidden primary and secondary sex characteristics. Your suggestion that women are primarily defined by their genitalia is offensive to transwomen in particular and women in general. I hope that this was unintended. WP:MOS, a guideline, instructs us to use terms which reflect that person's latest expressed gender self-identification. As you may have noticed, there are cadres of transphobic trolls who vandalize the articles of trans-identified individuals. Please don't support their bullying. Pburka (talk) 00:03, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

No, I am NOT focused on Ms Manning's genitalia, I am concerned about her sex prior to August 2013. Besides, I have a no-tolerance attitude towards transphobic and homophobic trolls. In fact, I will rollback their edits on sight. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 00:13, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Her sex is irrelevant. That's a private medical matter. The shape of Manning's genitalia is not important to this article. Rather than her sex, we report her gender identity, which is female (and likely was before August 2013), so we refer to her using female or neutral language. Pburka (talk) 00:27, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

The picture of her as a soldier is obviously when she still had male genitalia. That's the only reason why we went off topic to discuss transgender genitalia. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 00:29, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

It's not at all obvious from the photograph! The picture of her as a soldier demonstrates secondary male sex characteristics such as an adam's apple and stubble. It also shows her in male dress and hairstyle. Many ciswomen demonstrate some of the same secondary sex characteristics, but you wouldn't describe them as male in photographs. In the same vein, Manning now demonstrates secondary female sex characteristics and prefers to present herself in female dress and hairstyles, but we don't know (and shouldn't care) if she has had sex reassignment surgery. Sex reassignment surgery is not a prerequisite for identifying as a woman. Her genitalia are not our business. Pburka (talk) 00:45, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't talking about her genitalia in the first place! I was remarking that Ms Manning's picture looked like that of a male—because physically, she was still a male. That is what I have been trying to say in the photo caption all along. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:03, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Chelsea Manning shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Bbb23 (talk) 01:48, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

What edit war? We are having a civil discussion right here. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:50, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

You have reverted three times in an article that is subject to discretionary sanctions and particularly about the gender issue itself. You are having an edit war. If you want to discuss the caption, fine, but rather than changing and reverting each other's edits, leave the article alone until you have obtained a consensus on what the wording should be.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:56, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Epicgenius, the argument you are making here is incoherent. There is no precedent for referring to trans women as "male" on Wikipedia. Also, it's bizarre you are talking about Manning's genitals and how they were a certain way up until August 2013 (up until? lol) .I'm pretty sure her genitals are the same now as they've always been. And yet nowhere in the article is she referred to as male, genitals notwithstanding. So I think the point you are actually making is you think she looks like a dude in that picture (a picture of her face). And that's fine. That's your personal opinion. It's an opinion no doubt shared by many, but nonetheless, it is still your POV. It is wholly unnecessary to include such a POV in the caption of the picture. Let's show people the picture and allow them to make up their own minds as to whether Manning looks "male" or not. Rebecca Weaver (talk) 08:11, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

I respect her gender identity, but the argument here is kind of a paradox. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 12:47, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Talk page stalker comment: Since Georgia guy is repeatedly referring to WP:Gender identity in this discussion as if it was a rule that must be followed, I want to point out that it is only an essay expressing the opinions of one or more editors, not a WP rule or even a guideline. And since that has been pointed out to Georgia guy before (in the move discussions on Bradley/Chelsea Manning) I see his actions as trying to deliberately mislead another editor. Thomas.W ^{talk to me} 08:59, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for commenting about Georgia guy. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 12:47, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions warning

The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions (information on which is at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions) on any editor who is active on pages broadly related to transgender issues and paraphilia classification (e.g. hebephilia). Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, satisfy any standard of behavior, or follow any normal editorial process. If you inappropriately edit pages relating to this topic, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The Committee's full decision can be read at the "Final decision" section of the decision page.

Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions, with the appropriate sections of Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures, and with the case decision page before making any further edits to the pages in question. This notice is given by an uninvolved administrator and will be logged on the case decision, pursuant to the conditions of the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions system.

--Bbb23 (talk) 02:59, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

John A Coleman high school

Why did you undo my edit here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_A._Coleman_Catholic_High_School

Someone keeps going in and maliciously removing text. I am replacing that text. I believe it to be a disgruntled ex-student or parent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PR12477 (talk • contribs) 05:08, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

You claim that the school is known for its 'academic excellence' but never provided a source. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 12:55, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Why do you revert my edits?

The article Türks is under construction and I'm trying to ass a Nation template. If you keep reverting my edit I cannot proceed. --Shamans of Tengri 13:41, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Why did you intentionally blank over half of the page? Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 13:43, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

As said in edit summary, those part I removed are relocated in Turkic Khaganate. I'm rewriting these two articles but first I have to separate information about the people and the khaganate. --Shamans of Tengri 14:37, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, then use the {{under construction}} template. This will notify people that you are working on the article so that they will not revert your edits. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 14:42, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! --Shamans of Tengri 14:50, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Mordicai

Just stopping by to say hello. mordicai. (talk) 14:48, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Good day to you too, and you have a nice user page picture. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 14:49, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Chelsea "Throughout..."

Hi, I noticed your edit at Chelsea[2] and I don't think it works well. 1) You might check whether the part "throughout her early life" is supported by the source. 2) Her early life doesn't extend up to her time in the army. 3) She may have also been known as Breanna sometimes. 4) I don't think she has been discharged yet. 5) The edit loses the info that the diagnosis of GID was made while in the Army, rather than earlier. All in all, you might consider self-reverting back to the original version. --Bob K31416 (talk) 15:09, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, so here's some answers about Chelsea Manning: 1) She was a male up until August. 2) She's not that old—she's twenty-f***ing-five. 3) But people still called her by her given name, Bradley, till August. Then she was called as Chelsea, because she had a sex change. 4) I really think she has. 5) Yeah, I'll go fix that right now. All in all, I should not revert it as it is fine the way it is, except the minor change mentioned in #5. Thanks, Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 15:16, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the improvement. --Bob K31416 (talk) 16:13, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

History of the New York City Subway

Per this edit, please read WP:LEAD re: "The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview." The current lead in that article is not overview at all, it is the first paragraphs of a history section about "steam-powered elevated railroads". Needed but it is not a LEAD. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 16:30, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

It may not be a legitimate lead, but it is still a lead section. I am going to fix it right now. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 16:58, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

North Shore Scenic Railroad (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Soo Line

Sheridan (CTA station) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Addison (CTA station)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Reverting my edit

Hello! I corrected 2 typos and you reverted [3] my edit. May I ask you why? Publicolis (talk) 18:10, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, here's the problem. Whenever possible, don't eliminate the blank line between section titles and section text. See #Standard, High Line, point number 2, above for an explanation. Also, feel free to undo my edit (but don't remove the blank line). Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 18:12, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism at Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla

Thanks for catching this, but it most definitely was not good faith editing. Yours, Quis separabit? 18:34, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, and I will leave it at that. If the vandal returns, I will rollback their edits. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 18:35, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

I didn't screw up wiki

Asa Butterfield's real name is Asa Bopp Farr Butterfield; he said so on his verified twitter (@asabfb); hence his initials ABFB! You deleted my changes to that and the word "pajamas". I'm not vandalizing wiki; it was a dare that I put my friend's name listed as his fiancé on wiki! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrs. Asa Butterfield (talk • contribs) 21:27, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

I did not say that you were vandalising the page. I meant to revert your good faith edits, but I pressed the wrong button on the STiki interface. I'll fix that now. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 00:21, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about my vandalism

hey sorry about that, i was just testing, didint know about the sandbox. Thanks

No problem, it's at WP:SANDBOX. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 16:36, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Epicgenius. You have new messages at EuroCarGT's talk page.
Message added 01:29, 14 November 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

///EuroCarGT 01:29, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Huggle 3

Hey Epicgenius! I am Petrb, one of core developers of Huggle, the antivandalism tool, which you are beta testing (according to https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Huggle/Members#Beta_testers). I am happy to announce that Huggle 3 is ready for some testing. You can read more about it at WP:Huggle/Huggle3_Beta. Please keep in mind that this is a development version and it is not ready for regular use. That means you must:

• Watch your contribs - when anything happens you didn't want, fix it and report a bug
• Frequently checkout source code and build latest version, we change it a lot

If you find any problem with a feature that is supposed to work perfectly, please let us know. Some features are not ready yet, it is listed in known problems on Huggle3 beta page, you don't need to report these - we know it! So, that's it. Have fun testing and please let us know about any problems, either using bugzilla @ http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/ or #huggle ^connect. Please respond to my talk page, I am not going to watch your talk page. Thank you Petrb (talk) 10:57, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Huggle 3

Hey Epicgenius! I am Petrb, one of core developers of Huggle, the antivandalism tool, which you are beta testing (according to https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Huggle/Members#Beta_testers). I am happy to announce that Huggle 3 is ready for some testing. You can read more about it at WP:Huggle/Huggle3_Beta. Please keep in mind that this is a development version and it is not ready for regular use. That means you must:

• Watch your contribs - when anything happens you didn't want, fix it and report a bug
• Frequently checkout source code and build latest version, we change it a lot

If you find any problem with a feature that is supposed to work perfectly, please let us know. Some features are not ready yet, it is listed in known problems on Huggle3 beta page, you don't need to report these - we know it! So, that's it. Have fun testing and please let us know about any problems, either using bugzilla @ http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/ or #huggle ^connect. Please respond to my talk page, I am not going to watch your talk page. Thank you Petrb (talk) 10:58, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Checkmate

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Checkmate you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of TonyTheTiger -- TonyTheTiger (talk) 22:20, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

pope john xxiii

I graduated form Pope John XXIII Regional high school in 2011, the same year as Malvin Santa; or Lloyd Solo as you see him on the page-. I- am not "vandalizing" the page, merely making a revision that I deem as necessary. If you could help me in my endeavor by telling me how to turn off the alert so that I do not have to waste your time or another Wikipedia user's time by having to go change something that there is no problem with. Many Thanks!

pope john xxiii

I graduated form Pope John XXIII Regional high school in 2011, the same year as Malvin Santa; or Lloyd Solo as you see him on the page-. I- am not "vandalizing" the page, merely making a revision that I deem as necessary. If you could help me in my endeavor by telling me how to turn off the alert so that I do not have to waste your time or another Wikipedia user's time by having to go change something that there is no problem with. Many Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobdolepresident (talk • contribs) 23:59, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

accidentalism

Hi. I´m trying to put some more information about accidentalism art scene. The page already exists in portuguese because accidentalism in Portugal has a manifest and a strong artistic community. I realize that you remove my entry. I would like to know what was wrong with the text and what can I do to include the accidentalism art scene and some of his history at wikipedia accidentalism.

Thank you so much for your attention,

--Brunosimon (talk) 15:54, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

If you want to make a new entry, create a new article and then link it to the disambiguation page. The disambiguation page isn't exactly the right page to put a poorly translated, 10-paragraph entry about the art form named accidentalism. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 15:56, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for the poor translation. Can I do it again with all the links and references and put it again on your accidentalism page? Is there any option that I can previously send it to you for your approval? Thanks!
--Brunosimon (talk) 16:02, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

You can create an article in your sandbox first, and then when you feel that it's ready to be a real Wikipedia article, create a new page like Accidentalism (art form) or something similar. You don't need my approval, however, but I will look over it if you request me to. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 16:05, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

thank you so much for your attention. I just thought, as you refer an accidentalistic artist (a musician) on your page, that I could improve and add more information about accidentalistic artists. Let me know your thoughts.
Cheers
--Brunosimon (talk) 16:35, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

No problem! Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 16:37, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Break

Stop

You were asked to stop posting on BMK's talkpage - as per WP:UP, you should not be posting there. Further such posting can be considered harassment and could lead to a block ES&L 01:24, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Ask me to stop? He's the one harassing me. He is being uncooperative, not agreeing to any of the compromises that I have put forth. He has even gone so far as to accuse me of harrassment, so I will not harass him anymore. I will instead just assume that he has bad faith. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:27, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hrs for continuing to post on an editor's talkpage after being advised to stop / edit-warring to keep that post on their talkpage against their wishes. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  (✉→BWilkins←✎) 01:28, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Epicgenius/Archive/2013 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Could you block Beyond My Ken as well? He's being uncooperative and not agreeing to any suggestions that I have put forth. Additionally, he is assuming bad faith and edit-warring rather than having a civil discussion. I am not requesting an unblock, I am just requesting that he be blocked for edit-warring and contentious editing. Thanks, Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:32, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Please don't use unblock requests for things other than requesting unblock. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 01:35, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Epicgenius/Archive/2013 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I have edited civilly on all other terms today, having reported vandalism. Additionally, I have tried and failed to get BMK's attention; he keeps deleting my messages and reminders to compromise. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:42, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  1. understand what you have been blocked for,
  2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Kuru (talk) 01:58, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Sorry mate, looks like trolls can get away with stuff on wikipedia. I personally feel like stopping from editing myself, who needs wikipedia when it is full of bureaucrats that think they are gods.—CKY2250 ^ταικ 02:15, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

It's OK, at least I will get unblocked tomorrow and I promise not to be disorderly anymore regarding matters like this. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 03:04, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Now because of a misunderstanding about alternative accounts, I will be unblocked in one week if nothing else happens. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 18:16, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

I am sorry you were blocked Epicgenius. I think the Admin's message is simply that sometimes you have to let go of conflicts and move on to other areas. I know it's frustrating. But the only other alternative is to go lock horns and endure an extended conflict resolution process that is pretty dysfunctional. When editors ask to be left alone it's best to try to respect that. People can get pretty upset and feel provoked by comments in what is, metaphysically at least, something of a personal space. Your disagreements with the other editor aren't over critically important issues so I suggest just giving each other space if that's possible. Take care, good luck and have fun whenever possible. Candleabracadabra (talk) 03:33, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I'll let go of this one for now. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 13:28, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Block evasion

Block extended to 1 week for block evasion with another account, Ef alt. Canterbury Tail talk 16:50, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Declined block requests

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Epicgenius/Archive/2013 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: Please, please, unblock me. The Ef alt account was used for school projects. I had to use that account in order to make a Wikipedia presentation for my class, as I could not use this account. You can block that other account, I don't care. But I really need to complete a school project and I couldn't edit using this account, so I used Ef alt instead. My teacher warned me that if I didn't do my work (i.e. edit my sandbox), I would be penalized. Additionally, I admit that I am addicted to editing Wikipedia (that stray Ef alt edit on the Toontown page was a mistake that I regret very deeply, but I couldn't help myself). I am also sorry for posting on Beyond My Ken's talk page against his wishes; I just wanted to talk things out with him. I will not disrupt him any longer because it seems that he is angry at me, so I will leave him alone I promise that if I need to have an interaction ban with BMK, so be it. But I don't want to be blocked for this long, especially on both of my accounts. In conclusion, this was not block evasion, but rather, a need to do my homework on a school account. If you wish, when I get unblocked on this account, I will only do the edits for the school project for one week, just to be on the safe side. I would really like to keep contributing to Wikipedia rather than be blocked over a petty issue. I also promise to cease sockpuppetry and to never do it again. Epicgenius(give him tirade • check out damage) 17:28, 19 November 2013 (UTC) Decline reason: Your account does not hold up with what happened. Since your block on your main account your alt never edited the sandbox, as you claim. The only edits were to remove links from an article, to pretend on this user's userpage that the accounts were not the same user. None of these edits support your claim that you're using it and the sandbox to do school work, as you made no such attempt. The only reason Ef alt hasn't been indeffed and the extension is only by a week is because you declared the account as an alternative account. Additionally looking at the last edit you did make to your sandbox shows that you are not in fact using your sandbox for school work (this edit.) Canterbury Tail talk 19:30, 19 November 2013 (UTC) If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked. This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Epicgenius/Archive/2013 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: I am sorry for disturbing Beyond My Ken, and I promise not to do this anymore. I will also stop using sockpuppet accounts from now on. If unblocked, I will continue to revert vandalism on articles unrelated to those that Beyond My Ken edited, which I was in the middle of doing before I was blocked. Epicgenius(give him tirade • check out damage) 7:42 pm, 19 November 2013, last Tuesday (2 days ago) (UTC+0) Decline reason: "I will also stop using sockpuppet accounts from now on" rings a little hollow when you were caught socking only yesterday. Sit the week out - it's a remarkably generous block, given the circumstances. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:59, 21 November 2013 (UTC) If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked. Sit the week out - it's a remarkably generous block, given the circumstances — No it's not, it's a harsh block. I am prevented from doing something that I like. Blocking people is just preventing more new editors from coming. Epicgenius(give him tirade • check out damage) 16:11, 21 November 2013 (UTC) Given the circumstances getting blocked for just one week is very generous. Your comments also show that you really do need to get away from Wikipedia for a while, for your own sanity's sake, so find something else to do for a while, serve your time, and then play by the rules when you get back from your forced vacation. Thomas.W talk to me 16:26, 21 November 2013 (UTC) I don't really enjoy this, but OK... Epicgenius(give him tirade • check out damage) 16:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

• I'm not going to decide on this. I was considering unblocking you and then I started looking around; I still might have if it hadn't been for the "I'm not you" and "crack in my ass" shenanigans, both of which are signs of considerable immaturity. But perhaps the worst is this one—someone gives you the best advice you could possibly be given and you tell them to not fuck around. And "Please do not post here again unless you want to discuss something with this user account only" is just completely illogical, never mind that BMK has asked you to stay off their user page, which you never did.

  In other words, I see some inconsistencies here, and you won't be unblocked until those are ironed out and acknowledged—see the declined unblock request above: admins don't like this kind of fucking around, to borrow your phrase. A promise to stay away from BMK is a good start, by the way, and as far as I'm concerned it's a minimum requirement. Drmies (talk) 00:14, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

• Okay, I'll promise to stay away from BMK whenever possible; even if he does something questionable, I will leave it for an admin or another user to decide. Also, about the "fucking around/this is not me" shenanigan – I am truly sorry about that. By the way, this happened all the time when I was younger: when I misbehaved, my father would give me punishment, and almost when I finished with my punishment, I got a more severe punishment because I did something that I wasn't supposed to. Do you have any other tips for me to stay out of trouble in situations like these? I would greatly appreciate it, as I do things that I regret seconds later. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 00:25, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

• Luke, I am not your father. I have enough children already. Look before you leap, that's all—same thing I tell these two idiots sitting across the kitchen table from me. Good luck, whatever happens. Drmies (talk) 00:27, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

• Who does the quote refer to? Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 00:31, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) At Wikipedia, to do something we might regret we have to click a button. We also, unfortunately, think we have to act or respond quickly. If you're ever in a controversial situation, stop and wait before you click the button. Reread multiple times what you wrote. Is there something in your words that the other person might not like (even if you think it's deserved)? If so, don't click the button. Take out the language. Or wait, even quite some time. You could save your text to another application if you don't want to lose it. Bottom line: slow down.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:37, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks, Bbb23, for the advice. Drmies advised me to take it. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 00:43, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

• Drmies likes to be pithy; I like to be wordy. :-) For the answer to your Luke question, see this, although I'm not a Star Wars nut and can't vouch for the website's accuracy.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:56, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

• Darth Vader? Oh, I get it now, thanks. ;) Additionally, you are one of the few admins here so far who have not reviewed or extended my block, so thank you. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:15, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Also I've now also blocked yet another of your accounts for 1 month for collusion in this block evasion of yours, having noticed that Epicfailure 2 is also one of your accounts. This is continuing block evasion on a massive scale, and there is no reason for you to have all these different accounts. I've decided not to increase your block on this account further as the edits were earlier today, but it's still block evasion to edit under other accounts while one is blocked. Canterbury Tail talk 00:31, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. This gives me a chance for a much needed Wikibreak. And thank you very much for not blocking the main account further. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 00:33, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

NYCS Platform layouts

Do you think there should be one central documentation? How many templates are there? Would it be more efficient to have just 1 documentation that links them together? —CKY2250 ^ταικ 16:56, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I was just categorising the documentations so all the different platform layouts are categorised into one page.Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 17:28, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Should both be done? At least the ones that are required for the same template should be. I really am out of my water on these templates.—CKY2250 ^ταικ 18:57, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Maybe later, but right now each template has different qualities, so their documentations are all different. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 19:00, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Bearded dragons

Is it not worth noting that these are generally solitary animals? Many people buy them in pairs and then only find it too late to realize they are meant to be kept on their own.--Windows66 (talk) 19:35, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for the mistake. I've reverted the edit. Thanks for telling me. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 21:29, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

No worries. I have only had beardies all my life and have found this is often the case, if there is any doubt about this edit there is plenty of references to back it up but is it really necessary to add a source?

No hard feelings neither (y).--Windows66 (talk) 10:29, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Psybient, psychill

Hello Epicgenius. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Psybient, psychill, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article is about a style of music, not a band, so it does not fall under A7. Thank you. —Darkwind (talk) 22:52, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 22:53, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 November 2013

• Traffic report: Google Doodlebugs bust the block

• Featured content: 1244 Chinese handscroll leads nine-strong picture contingent

• Special report: FDC staff raise the benchmarks for activities, impact, planning, and governance

• News and notes: Trademark at issue again with the Italian Wikipedia and wikipedia.it

• WikiProject report: The world of soap operas

• Discussion report: Commas, Draft namespace proposal, education updates, and more

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 11:11, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

The Bowery

I thought we had agreed that you would stop making edits involving "the Bowery"? I've reverted your spate of edits. Unless you'd like me to bring this issue to the attention of an admin, please stop. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:27, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

A reminder that AWB is only to be used for non-controversial edits. Making controversial edits with AWB can get your privileges revoked. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:33, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

What do you want now? I did make non-controversial edits—I changed "the Bowery" to "the Bowery", thus avoiding a redirect. But if you want redirects all over the place, fine. I am good with confusing readers over links. And no, the agreement was not to stop making edits involving the Bowery, it was to stop removing the word "the" from "the Bowery". Would you need a reminder to read Talk:Bowery again? And by extension, I can change "the Bronx" to "the Bronx", as no text is actually changed; the leftmost set of brackets is just moved. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 18:12, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

You need to read the discussion at Talk:Bowery again, because you clearly did not understand it. The name of the street is indeed "The Bowery", but like "The Bronx", the word "the" is not capitalized when used within a sentence. This was made perfectly clear in that discussion. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:09, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Then, why did you insist on reverting all of my edits, which eliminated redirects? Additionally, you are wrong about the "the" always being lowercase in the middle of a sentence as in "the Bowery" and "the Bronx"—while it's accepted that the "the" should be lowercase in the middle of a sentence as much as possible, there are instances where the "the" is capitalised in the middle of a sentence. If you buy the New York Post, you will see that very often, it will say "The Bronx" (with capital letters) in the middle of a sentence (e.g. "There was a fire in The Bronx"). However, I will change the Wikipedia articles so as to make the "the" in "the Bowery" lowercase wherever needed. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 21:16, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

I changed them because I was following WP:NOTBROKEN, which specifically says not to fix "broken" redirects which actually work. Please read the page and follow it. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:29, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Might not be broken, but usually the word "the" is not linked along with the other portion of the article's title (exceptions apply where the "the" is actually part of the article's title, like The Who). For example, you don't usually link the United States. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 21:32, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

My concern is twofold. First, you made a bulk edit which, given your past history regarding the Bowery, you should have known would be controversial. You could have avoided BMK's ire and reversions had you announced your intention on the Bowery article ahead of time. Secondly, you introduced inconsistent capitalization into the pages. We ended up with pages which say, e.g., "between the Upper East Side and The Bowery…". The reader is left to wonder what rule leads to one uppercase definite article and one lowercase definite article in the same sentence. The pages were not broken before your changes, but they were broken by your change. Pburka (talk) 00:01, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

The pages were not broken before your changes, but they were broken by your change. Which ones, do you say, were "broken"? Also, whoever wrote "between the Upper East Side and The Bowery… " to begin with is the one to blame, not me. I just changed "the Bowery" to "the Bowery" and "The Bowery" to "The Bowery", with the same capitalisation as the original text. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 00:05, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

It worries me that you consistently reply to messages on your talk page within minutes. I do not believe that you take sufficient time to read and understand the comments. I said that you changed the capitalization, which you deny, but I can't believe that you took the time to actually review your changes. See, for example, [4],[5], [6], and [7]. Following your damage, you then engaged in an edit war with BMK instead of engaging in a constructive discussion. If someone reverts your edit, please take the time to review the edits and try to understand what might have triggered the reversion. Your reflexive edit warring is destructive both to Wikipedia and to the community. Pburka (talk) 00:21, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I consistently reply to messages on my talk page within minutes because I have e-mail enabled, and a message is sent to my inbox within seconds of your making a comment on my talk page. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:08, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Ironically, you've missed my point. I'm concerned that you reply without taking time to properly read and consider the comment. You need to slow down and take time to think. Now, what about your claim that you didn't change capitalization? Pburka (talk) 01:25, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I did read your comment closely, and I've taken the time to think. The phrase's capitalization stays the same before and after my edit, at least according to the settings that I configured in AWB. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:57, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm a bit baffled by this comment. Have you reviewed your changes from this morning, including the diffs I linked to above? You clearly changed the case of the definite article. Pburka (talk) 03:31, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

The fixes are  Done Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 13:44, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand what that means. If it means that you've examined your changes and have fixed the problems you caused, I guess that's good. Is there anything I can do to help you avoid future problems like this? Pburka (talk) 01:45, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

By that, I mean that the capitalised "The" in "The Bowery" is no longer a problem in the articles that you have mentioned. I've been blocked now for one day for edit-warring with BMK, but I would like it if you notify me of any mistakes like this in the future. Thanks, Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:52, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm happy to. However I am concerned that, after BMK and I both pointed out the problem to you, you repeatedly denied, or refused to acknowledge, that there was a problem. It would have been much simpler if you had reviewed the changes yourself when the problem was first raised. Sometime it can be frustrating to discuss issues with you, and I think BMK's frustration has boiled over. I hope that in the future you will make a greater effort to review your changes when a problem is raised on your talk page, or when your changes are reverted. Pburka (talk) 02:09, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Please stop following me around

You've been editing articles immediately after I've edited them, which means to me — and will mean to any administrator who looks at our contribution histories — that you're following me around. Since you're not undoing vandalistic edits that I've made, this can be considered to be WP:HARASSMENT. I do not consider it to be harassment at this moment, but I will if you don't stop this behavior right now. Go do something productive that doesn't involve an article which I've just edited.

I hope this is clear. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page, as I stopped monitoring your some time ago. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:27, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

No, I am not following you around — see your talk. Also, we have a lot of articles that we edit in common, and a lot of articles that we don't edit in common. Let's look at the ones that we do edit in common, and we will see that there's not that many, alright? Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 02:29, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

No, your statement is not accurate. You're editing articles you either have never been to before, or which you haven't been to in a while, immediately after I do. Your denial is irrelevant, since the facts are in our contribution histories, so I'm not sure why you're bothering. Just stop, and there will be no further problem. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:35, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

• Flatiron Building
  • BMK: 16:14
  • Epicgenius 16:29
  • time between 0:15
  • last time Epicgenius edited - 11 May 2013

• Talk:Flatiron Building
  • BMK: 16:16
  • Epicgenius: 16:28
  • time between: 0:12
  • last time Epicgenius edited: never edited before

• Cooper Union financial crisis and tuition protests
  • BMK: 17:41
  • Epicgenius: 17:52
  • time between: 0:11
  • last time Epicgenius edited - never edited before

• User talk:Free Cooper Union
  • BMK: 17:49
  • Epicgenius 17:56
  • time between: 0:07
  • last time Epicgenius edited: never edited before (created by BMK)

• Peter Stuyvesant
  • BMK: 20:57
  • Epicgenius: 21:16
  • time between: 0:19
  • last time Epicgenius edited: never edited before

FIve pages is (while I admit, kind of creepy) not stalking. In fact, I think the only way that you could have found all this out was if you were looking through my user contributions. So I don't know who's following who around, but I'll stop editing the same pages within hours of you editing them, and consider it settled, okay? Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 13:18, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Oh you're done, are you? That's bullshit. I edited 70 Pine Street last night, and the very next edit on the article today is by you and you've never edited it before. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:53, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, that's because I was replacing the portal bar (not because I was following you). If you accuse me of following you one more time I will report you to WP:AN for harassment, which you seem to be doing right now, even as you accuse me of harassing you (which I am assuredly not doing). Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 16:59, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

• Epicgenius, merely looking through someone's contributions to see if there's anything going on is not stalking or hounding. But note what WP:HOUNDING says: "Wikihounding is the singling out of one or more editors, and joining discussions on multiple pages or topics they may edit or multiple debates where they contribute, in order to repeatedly confront or inhibit their work. This is with an apparent aim of creating irritation, annoyance or distress to the other editor." I do not, at this time, wish to delve so deeply into both of y'all's edits that I can figure out if there is something to BMK's complaint. Let me say this, then: the above thread (about the/The Bowery) suggests there's some bad blood here, and you would do well to not exacerbate the situation (on the other hand, BMK, this doesn't seem to be made to cause you annoyance). So I would suggest you make a bit of an effort to get out of BMK's admittedly thinning hair. Also, both of you, for reasons I can't fathom, seem to like NYC. Can't you please get along? Living there must be hard enough already. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 17:40, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

• Thank you, Drmies, for trying to work this out using dispute resolution. What BMK fails to mention is that: 1) For the Flatiron Building edit, he was restoring the edit of an editor who had messed up the page, while I did general fixes (not related). 2) For the Cooper Union financial crisis and tuition protests edit, he was adding info about the protests, while I was fixing the page's refs using Reflinks. Again, not related. 3) At User talk:Free Cooper Union, BMK was warning the user about the username, while I was just reporting it to WP:UAA, something that BMK had failed to do. 4) My edit at Talk:Flatiron Building was merely an agreement to a consensus. 5) At Peter Stuyvesant, he was adding info into the article, while I was fixing emdashes and adding the Circa template (non-related edits). 6) BMK believes that my adjusting of the portal links at 70 Pine Street was stalking. That was the last straw for him, so he blocked me from his talk page, despite my efforts to explain that my edits were unrelated to his. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 17:49, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

• Again, I don't want to be digging around. I hope you all can settle this one way or another and, mind you, when I suggested staying out of their hair, I wasn't suggesting that you climbed into it on purpose. At this moment, I don't want to lay blame on either side (I don't want to lay blame at all), and I'm hoping to stay out of this as much as possible (though I inserted myself a bit in the Stuyvesant dispute). Being involved with controversy is bad for my political career. Anyway, I appreciate your cooperation and good faith, and I hope BMK will massage his good-faith gland as well, if it needs any stimulation. Drmies (talk) 19:06, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

• I posted, on his talk page, possible solutions that I would want (resolution of our argument; his reading and acknowledging an edit that I had made to his talk page before he deleted it three times; or my reporting him to an administrator's noticeboard. He hasn't been online for hours now. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 20:51, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

• Unclear As a page stalker myself there is nothing wrong with what Epicgenius has done. The points you are making lack evidence of edit WP:3RR, vandalism, or disruptive editing. The links provided here Epicgenius has improved pages, only to be reverted by Beyond My Ken. —CKY2250 ^ταικ 18:00, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Well I don't know what I just got myself into. Beyond My Ken has broken the WP:3RR and I just pushed it one further not viewing the eniter revert history. I will be reporting this along with links to this discussion. —CKY2250 ^ταικ 18:11, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about that, Cky. I didn't mean to drag you in. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 18:12, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Well it is 100% my fault. You can fallow the discussion WP:AN3—CKY2250 ^ταικ 18:28, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi. please help in editing a article on wikipedia.

Hi Mate,

I am a intermediate user to Wikipedia, i would request you if you can extend your support and guidance in editing a article on Wikipedia.

would be a great help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anujsaxenawiki (talk • contribs) 13:31, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Hi Mate, I am a intermediate user to Wikipedia, i would request you if you can extend your support and guidance in editing a article on Wikipedia. would be a great help. Anujsaxenawiki (talk) 13:33, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I would be glad to help! Which articles do you need help with? Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 13:38, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

This guy has revealed personal information in the past. So if he does again, you should report it and have it removed.—CKY2250 ^ταικ 14:14, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the warning…I'll have the personal info suppressed when I see it. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 14:19, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

The section formerly named Stop

Main article: § Stop

Question about a reverted edit

Hi Epic, Just wondering why you reverted my edit on the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swarming_(honey_bee) page I added a high resolution picture of a swarm that occured yesterday and thought it'd be interesting for people to see it in high def. Sichy007 (talk) 06:17, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

That was probably a mistake. Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 11:24, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert revert :) Sichy007 (talk) 01:08, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

No problem Epicgenius^{(give him tirade • check out damage)} 01:18, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Addison (CTA Red Line station) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Belmont (CTA station)

Belmont (CTA North Side Main Line station) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Addison (CTA station)

Fullerton (CTA station) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Belmont (CTA station)

List of New York City Subway lines (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to IRT 42nd Street Line

Taft Union High School (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Pellet

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

VisualEditor newsletter for November 2013

Since the last newsletter, the VisualEditor team has worked on some feature changes, major infrastructure improvements to make the system more stable, dependable and extensible, some minor toolbar improvements, and fixing bugs.

A new form parsing library for language characters in Parsoid caused the corruption of pages containing diacritics for about an hour two weeks ago. Relatively few pages at the English Wikipedia were affected, but this created immediate problems at some other Wikipedias, sometimes affecting several dozen pages. The development teams for Parsoid and VisualEditor apologize for the serious disruption and thank the people who reported this emergency at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback and on the public IRC channel, #mediawiki-visualeditor.

There have been dozens of changes since the last newsletter. Here are some of the highlights:

• Accidental deletion of infoboxes and other items: You now need to press the Delete or ← Backspace key twice to delete a template, reference or image. The first time, the item becomes selected, and the second time, it is removed. The need to press the delete key twice should make it more obvious what you are doing and help avoid accidental removals of infoboxes and similar (bug 55336).
• Switch from VisualEditor to the wikitext editor: A new feature lets you make a direct, one-way editing interface change, which will preserve your changes without needing to save the page and re-open it in the wikitext editor (bug 50687). It is available in a new menu in the action buttons by the Cancel button (where the "Page Settings" button used to be). Note that this new feature is not currently working in Firefox.
• Categories and Languages are also now directly available in that menu. The category suggestions drop-down was appearing in the wrong place rather than below its input box, which is now fixed. An incompatibility between VisualEditor and the deployed Parsoid service that prevented editing categories and language links was fixed.
• File:, Help: and Category: namespaces: VisualEditor was enabled for these namespaces the on all wikis (bug 55968), the Portal: and Viquiprojecte: namespaces on the Catalan Wikipedia (bug 56000), and the Portal: and Book: namespaces on the English Wikipedia (bug 56001).
• Media item resizing: We improved how files are viewed in a few ways. First, inline media items can now be resized in the same way that has been possible with block ones (like thumbnails) before. When resizing a media item, you can see a live preview of how it will look as you drag it (bug 54298). While you are dragging an image to resize it, we now show a label with the current dimensions (bug 54297). Once you have resized it, we fetch a new, higher resolution image for the media item if necessary (bug 55697). Manual setting of media item sizes in their dialog is nearly complete and should be available next week. If you hold down the ⇧ Shift key whilst resizing an image, it will now snap to a 10 pixel grid instead of the normal free-hand sizing. The media item resize label now is centered while resizing regardless of which tool you use to resize it.
• Undo and redo: A number of improvements were made to the transactions system which make undoing and redoing more reliable during real-time collaboration (bug 53224).
• Save dialogue: The save page was re-written to use the same code as all other dialogs (bug 48566), and in the process fixed a number of issues. The save dialog is re-accessible if it loses focus (bug 50722), or if you review a null edit (bug 53313); its checkboxes for minor edit, watch the page, and flagged revisions options now layout much more cleanly (bug 52175), and the tab order of the buttons is now closer to what users will expect (bug 51918). There was a bug in the save dialog that caused it to crash if there was an error in loading the page from Parsoid, which is now fixed.
• Links to other articles or pages sometimes sent people to invalid pages. VisualEditor now keeps track of the context in which you loaded the page, which lets us fix up links in document to point to the correct place regardless of what entry point you launched the editor from—so the content of pages loaded through /wiki/Foobar?veaction=edit and /w/index.php?title=Foobar&veaction=edit both now have text links that work if triggered (bug 48915).
• Toolbar links: A bug that caused the toolbar's menus to get shorter or even blank when scrolled down the page in Firefox is now fixed (bug 55343).
• Numbered external links: VisualEditor now supports Parsoid's changed representation of numbered external links (bug 53505).
• Removed empty templates: We also fixed an issue that meant that completely empty templates became impossible to interact with inside VisualEditor, as they didn't show up (bug 55810).
• Mathematics formulae: If you would like to try the experimental LaTeX mathematics tool in VisualEditor, you will need to opt-in to Beta Features. This is currently available on Meta-wiki, Wikimedia Commons, and Mediawiki.org. It will be available on all other Wikimedia sites on 21 November.
• Browser testing support: If you are interested in technical details, the browser tests were expanded to cover some basic cursor operations, which uncovered an issue in our testing framework that doesn't work with cursoring in Firefox; the Chrome tests continue to fail due to a bug with the welcome message for that part of the testing framework.
• Load time: VisualEditor now uses content language when fetching Wikipedia:TemplateData information, so reducing bandwidth use, and users on multi-language or multi-script wikis now get TemplateData hinting for templates as they would expect (bug 50888).
• Reuse of VisualEditor: Work on spinning out the user experience (UX) framework from VisualEditor into oojs-ui, which lets other teams at Wikimedia (like Flow) and gadget authors re-use VisualEditor UX components, is now complete and is being moved to a shared code repository.
• Support for private wikis: If you maintain a private wiki at home or at work, VisualEditor now supports editing of private wikis, by forwarding the Cookie: HTTP header to Parsoid ($wgVisualEditorParsoidForwardCookies set to true) (bug 44483). (Most private wikis will also need to install Parsoid and node.js, as VisualEditor requires them.)

Looking ahead:

• VisualEditor will be released to some of the smaller Wikipedias on 02 December 2013. If you are active at one or more smaller Wikipedias where VisualEditor is not yet generally available, please see the list at VisualEditor/Rollouts.
• Public office hours on IRC to discuss VisualEditor with Product Manager James Forrester will be held on Monday, 2 December, at 1900 UTC and on Tuesday, 3 December, at 0100 UTC. Bring your questions. Logs will be posted on Meta after each office hour completes.
• In terms of feature improvements, one of the major infrastructure projects affects how inserting characters works, both using your computer's built-in Unicode input systems and through a planned character inserter tool for VisualEditor. The forthcoming rich copying and pasting feature was extended and greater testing is currently being done. Work continues to support the improved reference dialog to quickly add citations based on local templates.

If you have questions or suggestions for future improvements, or if you encounter problems, please let everyone know by posting a note at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback. Thank you! Whatamidoing (WMF) 22:04, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 November 2013

• From the editor: The Signpost needs your help

• Book review: Peter Burke's Social History of Knowledge—ambitious, fascinating, and exhaustive

• Featured content: Rockin' the featured pictures

• WikiProject report: Score! American football on Wikipedia

• News and notes: Foundation to Wiki-PR: cease and desist; Arbitration Committee elections starting

• Traffic report: Ill Winds

• Arbitration report: WMF opens the door for non-admin arbitrators

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 15:47, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Can ≠ must

Hey, Epicgenius! I saw your post on Bwilkins's talk page, and just wanted to float this at you: just because tools let you revert ten times a minute, doesn't mean you have to go that fast. Going slowly is often a good idea, even when going quickly is an option. After all, it's not a race; if someone beats you to a reversion, it's all good for the wiki, yeah? :) Take your time; quality over quantity and all that. You're not the only one patrolling, so don't let what seems like an unstoppable tide wash over you and make you hasty. Anyway, just a thought; happy editing! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:45, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the advice. I will take it. Epicgenius (talk) 00:13, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Truce?

Epicgenius:

I saw your post on Drmies' talk page, and I don't think we need Drmies or Bwilkins to act as a go-between. I am willing to return to the status quo ante, on the same terms as before - I'll explain on your talk page why I've reverted your edits if and when I feel it necessary to do so, and you will not automatically revert me back. Let's say that between us, we're going to hold strictly to WP:BRD: when a Bold edit is Reverted it's followed by Discussion and not by more reversions. Can we also say that you will avoid those topics which have been a cause of dissension between us, and, in return, I'll do my very best to see things your way, assume good faith, give you the benefit of the doubt, and let borderline things run off my back.

Just to be clear, this doesn't mean that we're best buds, WikiFriends Forever, just that we'll both work extra hard to keep things on an even keel between us.

If that is agreeable to you, then we can say that the dispute is over. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:33, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

@Beyond My Ken: Okay, I agree with that. I am so sorry for all the trouble I have caused. Epicgenius (talk) 00:13, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

I accept your apology, and apologize to you for losing my temper. I offer you my digital handshake. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:12, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

*virtually shakes hand* Epicgenius (talk) 00:13, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

OK, responding in kind. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:20, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Reversal of suggested Pigeonhole Principle changes

Please, at a minimum, reconsider the 'Sox' section change (note my change needs to be corrected in the last sentence to: n = 2). See my original note for why and if you do not agree, kindly explain. With respect to the 'Hair" section changes, I suggested them so it's logic flow parallels your general example approach of discussing n = m + 1 cases while introducing your new aspect of n being significantly > m. It is intended to help the reader. I am a newbie to suggesting change to Wikipedia so please excuse any rough edges. Your article is good and useful, keep up the good work.

Thank You, Tegangwer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tegangwer (talk • contribs) 15:40, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Epicgenius (talk) 00:13, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations from STiki!

		The Silver STiki Barnstar of Merit
		Congratulations, Epicgenius! You're receiving this barnstar of merit because you recently crossed the 10,000 classification threshold using STiki. We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool. We hope you continue your ascent up the leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (developer) and Pratyya (Hello!) 09:32, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Epicgenius (talk) 15:04, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

"Alleged"

Please do not edit out "alleged" from "alleged victims". It is improper without citation to claim these people are victims when there is no proven crime. It may be that the "victims" here are those that have been falsely accused of rape. We will not know until an offense has been proven to have taken place. Currently there is only speculation of offenses and no conviction nor even any charges laid. Therefore both the perpetrators and victims at this stage are only "alleged" 222.154.30.52 (talk) 19:52, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Please provide a link. Epicgenius (talk) 20:32, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Huggle 3 beta is out - and we need more feedback!

Hey Epicgenius, how are you? I am Petrb, one of huggle developers, and you are currently subscribed as a beta tester of huggle on meta (meta:Huggle/Members. You may not have noticed, but this week I released first beta precompiled installers for ubuntu and microsoft windows! Wikipedia:Huggle/Huggle3_Beta has all the links you need. So if you can, please download it, test it and report all bugs that is really what we need now. Don't forgot that as it's just a beta it's unstable and there are some known issues. Be carefull! Thank you for helping us with huggle Petrb (talk) 16:28, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Cooper Union crisis article

I'm sorry to have had to revert your edit to this article, since some of your re-writes kind of missed the point. Breaking up the compound sentence in the lede paragraph, for instance, made it seem as if the tuition protests were all that had attracted media attention, when it was the entire situation -- the financial crisis and the protests -- which had done so. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:54, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Epicgenius (talk) 16:55, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

One thing your edit did point out was the use of "mismanagement" was not good, so I changed it to "possible mismanagement" to render it more neutral. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:57, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes. However, it still maintains a slanted point of view, so it should probably be fixed soon. Epicgenius (talk) 17:01, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Frequent stops

Hello Epicgenius. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Frequent stops, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to movies or TV shows. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 20:03, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Epicgenius (talk) 20:04, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Epicgenius. You have new messages at Malik Shabazz's talk page.
Message added 20:09, 29 November 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

user talk:Jackson Peebles

Hey Epicgenius. You recently left a Barnstar on Jackson Peeble's talk page, which is great, however I think the last sentence is inappropriate to include. I would presume that if Jackson's family did not make it public on his obituary how he died, they may not want that information public. Other than that, your message was fine. Just something to consider. Best regards, -- Ross Hill • Talk • Need Help? • 23:35, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

I am sorry about that. Sometimes I poke my head into stuff that I am not allowed to look at. I'll remove the comment now. Thanks. Epicgenius (talk) 23:36, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

No worries. Regards, -- Ross Hill • Talk • Need Help? • 23:38, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Inserting unsourced information

Your recent editing history at Delancey Street – Essex Street (New York City Subway) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. 198.228.228.21 (talk) 02:25, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

…And yet you didn't even bother to tell me about the problem beforehand. You are an IP hopper so there's no way to talk to you on your talk page. You didn't post about the problem on the article's talk page until five minutes after you gave me the 3RR message. Epicgenius (talk) 14:12, 30 November 2013 (UTC)