User talk:NewEnglandYankee/Archive 2

Hi there!

Thank you for providing the additional explanation and information on my talk page. Makes a lot more sense with your input. NaturalMistic (talk) 03:02, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@NaturalMistic, you're welcome. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 18:26, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification

I was wondering why you reverted my edits as inappropriate on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_technology ?

Thanks Legaltechusa (talk) 00:48, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

—Preceding undated comment added 00:46, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks

... for rvv on my user page. amitch 06:21, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The thing I said about jerry jones not believing cte is caused by football is true just letting you know  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.218.40.246 (talk) 19:02, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the rvv on my user page. I'm not even sure what I did to offend this guy; he might be a sock puppet.

Have you considered joining the Recent changes patrol? -- DiegoTehMexican 04:32, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the revert on my talk page! --Fang Aili ^talk 04:38, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks For The Userpage Revert

Thanks. :) -WarthogDemon 21:27, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LOLz

I guess you're fixing vandalism too...

You always beat me to it...

Dark Ermac 15:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

roffel

Thank you for helping stop vandals and your rvv on New Richmond, WI

Thanks

Thanks for reverting my user page... ahh, the trials and travails of vandal patrol! :-) Hiberniantears 21:40, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[[Shoessss 15:40, 12 January 2007 (UTC)]]

Thank you for the quick revert on my talk page.Shoessss 15:40, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for your fix to vandalism on the Afrocentrism page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Soursop (talk • contribs) 19:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for catching my mistake

Thanks so much for catching the final bit of vandalism that I missed on the Tractor article. Vandal fighting is not my specialty, but I want to get a little taste of everything there is to do here. I'll check the page history more thoroughly in the future. Thanks again, -- Satori Son 15:46, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

125.25.190.22 - vandalism IP

Hi, caught your words on this vandals account. Simply LOVE your user page ! Superb ! Please feel free to comment on my similar opinions (though perhaps less tastefully done as you) at my page! Pedro1999a | Talk 20:30, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further, I loved your user page so much I've pinched a quote to put on my page! Hope you don't mind!Pedro1999a | Talk 09:17, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Georgia (U.S. state) article

I just wanted to drop a line to thank you for reverting the vandalism on the Georgia article page. I tried myself to fix the vandalism, but every time there'd be more. Thanks! Reb 20:40, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please be more careful

Please be more careful when reverting. You reverted over three legitimate edits on the Haley, which I have restored.[1] –Gunslinger47 18:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies; thanks for catching this. NewEnglandYankee 18:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's no problem. Thanks for reverting the vandalism that you did! :) –Gunslinger47 18:20, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Baseball fan?

You name is mysterious when it comes to a certain rivalry involving your area. BuickCenturyDriver 02:05, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Sorry for the bad edit summary, it was origially was under the header of a removed attack left by an unregistered (and upset) user. I usually leave a new comment by editing the last comment and posting a new one at the bottom.BuickCenturyDriver 02:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Try clicking the plus (+) tab at the top of the page to add a new conversation thread. It produces less confusing edit summaries and doesn't ever result in edit conflicts. –Gunslinger47 07:58, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am a baseball fan, as it happens ... a faithful Red Sox fan, from a tender age. The username is a cultural identifier, not a sportive one. I prepended "NewEngland," in fact, so that the Yankee monicker wouldn't be taken as referring to That Other Team. NewEnglandYankee 15:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm...I see. Just imagine if someone chose User:NewYorkSox as the opposite of your name. BuickCenturyDriver 21:07, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Helpful hints

I really like them. Keep it up!

(Mj92 09:20, 24 February 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Edit summary at Stuff

Please avoid using abusive edit summaries as per Wikipedia:Civility and Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Thanks and happy editing. --Steve Farrell 16:20, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The revert

Thanks for it! :) Acalamari 20:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edit to Clown (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. For future editing tests use the sandbox. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 03:03, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...

...for devandalizing my Talk page. - Eron ^Talk 01:22, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

... and for devandalizing my page and another 3 pages i've contributed to.Sergiogr 18:04, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

holy fucking

shit that was a fast reversion. Are you just sitting there pressing refresh on my contributions page you fag? Jesus liftchasing Christ. — John Stattic (talk) 01:43, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I thought about undoing this, but it's really rather flattering when you come to think about it. NewEnglandYankee 01:49, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Al Pacino

Thanks for the fast reversion on Al Pacino. Take care, Kudret abi^Talk 06:21, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article Koreans

Thanks for reverting that back farther. I don't think Twinkle caught it all, but you got back to it before I could! --Ioeth 17:47, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Someone vandalized my Userspace! But a little angel came along and fixed it! Thank you! You can thank others by using {{subst:Vangel}}! Nburden 19:23, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nburden 19:23, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! (looks like I'm not the first)

Just wanted to thank you for reverting my userpage, so, thanks. Looks like you've helped a lot of people out, keep it up! --Kyle_(talk) 00:22, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my User Page! --Chetblong^Talk_Sign 22:56, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

JANUARY 2008

Thank you. You appear to have netted another one of the b*ggers !. Thanks for the assist. nice to know you guys are out there.

The Stealth Ranger (talk) 10:30, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Hello NewEnglandYankee, I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck. Acalamari 19:39, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Always nice to be appreciated. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 21:03, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You're welcome! Acalamari 21:27, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - NewEnglandYankee, you're making helpful use of it from what I can see! -- House of Scandal (talk) 18:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

user talk:Hersfold

Accidental rollback click? Regards, Javért | ^Talk 04:38, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Same question. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:40, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, my bad. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 04:57, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for stopping vandalism on my page

NeoJustin has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Friendly note regarding talk page messages

Hello. As a recent editor to User talk:117.104.180.91, I wanted to leave a friendly reminder that as per WP:USER, editors may remove messages at will from their own talk pages. While we may prefer that comments be archived instead, policy does not prohibit users -including anonymous editors like this one- from deleting messages or warnings from their own talk pages. The only kinds of talk page messages that cannot be removed (as per WP:BLANKING) are declined unblock requests (but only while blocks are still in effect), confirmed sockpuppet notices, or shared IP header templates (for unregistered editors). However, it should be noted that these exceptions only exist in order to keep a user from potentially gaming the system. Thanks, — Kralizec! (talk) 00:02, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 00:06, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

For the revert on my user page. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff 20:48, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for that; it was an IRC joke. ceranthor 04:15, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...

for that. --Rrburke^ekrubrR 03:23, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 03:24, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for spotting what was clearly an error on my part and reverting it, here. I vaguely remember that, but don't recall the specifics which led up to it. I couldn't have been that badly confused, so I'm guessing that it was some sort of a mis-click. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 06:01, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We all do it. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 17:10, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles 05:25, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

February 2012

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to Typhon does not have an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! Dusty777 (talk) 19:32, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's a rollback. It doesn't leave an edit summary. (In this particular case, I was reverting an edit that changed the Greek Heracles into the Roman Hercules. Arguably, this isn't quite an appropriate use of rollback; consider the point noted.) NewEnglandYankee (talk) 19:38, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Quite a few users make edits without use of the edit summary, and I generally try to inform them to use the edit summary. No problem, sorry for the mistake. =D Dusty777 (talk) 19:52, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reverting vandalism on my user-page

Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. :D

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Thanks for going to the vandal's contributions and reverting the vandalism to my user page! :) Also, do you use any specific tool(s) to revert vandalism? Anir1uph (talk) 23:11, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. No, I don't use any special tools, just the occasional glance at the Recent Changes list.

OK! I would like to suggest Wikipedia:STiki as an excellent tool for vandal fighting (dedicated or occasional). It makes the process very easy, and since i saw you doing quite a lot of work in vandal-fighting and also as a rollbacker. Just a friendly suggestion! Thanks anyways! :D Anir1uph (talk) 23:42, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Just wanted to say thanks for the revert to my talk page Fraggle81 (talk) 17:29, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure, really. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 17:47, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your second revert to my talk page in a week, thanks again.

"Original work" in "Autism rights movement" article

I was unaware that an observation clearly supported by one's own eyes constitutes "original work." What is most troubling is thatas I segue from article to article to articleI encounter ever-increasing levels of incompetence; falsehoods presented as fact; and infuriatingly weak (conceptually) "explanations" of what is readily explainable by a true expert, with the side effect that such "explanation" will be flagged as "original content" by some parochial reviewer.

Why is it that none of this is ever challengedother than by the attachment of some standard box at the top of the article to state what improvements the article requireswhereas my edits, good, bad, or mediocre, are summarily deleted by John Q. Schmuck?

You know, once upon a time I would devote actual effort to repairing articles that some moron destroyed or failed properly to construct from the outset. I have a knack for reducing pages and pages of nonsense to a paragraph or two of crystal clarity. Of course, this immediately raises the hackles of yet some other critic; they appear to be waiting for some demon to notice my changes and inform them, as if #1 Priority is "stanch any edits by Bruce David Wilner."

And you expect the quality of Wikipedia to INCREASE in this manner? 24.127.218.5 (talk) 18:37, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody is forcing you to participate in Wikipedia. It's a voluntary community with a well-known set of community standards. Among those standards are those of no original research and verifiability. There are many other places on the internet where you can describe your personal experience and expertise at whatever length suits you.

If you are truly interested in improving Wikipedia, please read the links I provided, which give the policies and the reasons behind them. To summarize briefly and bluntly, however: all you have done in your edits is share your opinion. There are many people with opinions, many of whom disagree with you. If you would like Wikipedia readers to believe your argument, you need to provide some better backup than "because I think so, and I'm ME".

Thanks for helping protect our "bad words"

Thank you. I've semiprotected most of the articles in question for a month, since there's no reasoning with the IP-hopper. Feel free to let me know if you should notice other articles that need it for the same reason. Bishonen | talk 00:02, 14 August 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks. Will do. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 00:07, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User page

I don't like cluttering people's Talk pages with personal comments, so forgive. But I really like your User Page stuff. Nice - says it all really :) Acabashi (talk) 20:52, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're too kind! Thanks. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 22:01, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin de León

I think that you applied the wrong template to the editor who is edit-warring the article. I don't think that the edits were vandalism, but they were biographies of living persons violations. This is a minor point, but I think that you used the wrong template for a needed warning. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:50, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're right. Thanks for the correction. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 23:52, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

William Paterson University

Thanks very much for explaining, I'm still learning! Next time I'll use the edit summary section :) JakeMadison1923 (talk) 14:12, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

For excellent anti-vandal work, and a very humorous userpage.

BakerStMD T|C 21:54, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! NewEnglandYankee (talk) 16:08, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Barfdemon56 has given you a c ookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Maine Maritime Academy

Hey buddy, what's going on with your addition to the Maine Maritime page? Why do you care? Rocketj4 (talk) 21:36, 22 April 2016 (UTC

I care because, when an editor whose name suggests a conflict of interest repeatedly removes cited negative information from a page, while refusing to discuss the removal at the Talk page, it looks pretty suspicious to me. For the record, I wasn't the person who originally added that information, and I have no personal knowledge of or stake in these events. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 15:39, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that makes good sense. The whole "conversation" just looked odd, since the actual article itself is so thin. Why introduce an issue on a plate so empty? But I guess only the person who added the section knows why. Thanks for paying attention to such stuff.Rocketj4 (talk) 22:24, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

For putting up with talk page vandals.

ThePlatypusofDoom (Talk) 19:36, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AN/I Notice

I made a page at AN/I for the vandalism on your user page. ThePlatypusofDoom (Talk) 19:41, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! NewEnglandYankee (talk) 19:41, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May 2016

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. It's not the first time you've been warned. This is very annoying. Anyhow, thanks for fighting vandalism. Peter Sam Fan 14:24, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

When it's a new user who pops up with a single drive-by vandalism, however, it's often better to ignore it. More often than not, they just go away. Giving them a warning, by contrast, sometimes encourages them. I use the templates if I see a second vandalism from the same user, or if they have previous warnings. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 14:29, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. I'd explain that in your edit summary though. Peter Sam Fan 17:13, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rather vexingly, the one-click rollback link doesn't give the option of a customized edit summary. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 20:14, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see your point now. Sorry about the entire thing. Peter Sam Fan 19:15, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 19:16, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my talk page. The user was obviously upset over something... Meatsgains (talk) 01:47, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

IM NOT THE ONE YOUR AFTER

Jeez dude. Im trying to fix the Randy Gregory page back to the original format from that donaldduckforprez dude because he is defacing the page with 420 puns and shit, yet your accusing me of being the vandal? your just enabling him. theres no such thing as chronic sack or rolled joints in the NFL statlines. Fix it and Fix him.

Harambeswill (talk) 18:34, 11 November 2016 (UTC)harambeswill[reply]

Working on it. Sorry if I got it wrong. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 18:38, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Rag'n'Bone Man

Hey, I don't know if you keep such things on your watchlist, but if you see the vandalism return after semi-protection runs out, by all means ping me. Thanks for cleaning up, and merry Christmas, Drmies (talk) 02:32, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; will do. I've watch-listed the article. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 02:33, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

April 2017

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. Kostas20142 (talk) 19:38, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm well aware of the messages. However, as I've noted before on this page,wWhen it's a new user who pops up with a single drive-by vandalism, it's often better to ignore it. More often than not, they just go away. Giving them a warning, by contrast, frequently encourages them. I use the templates if I see a second vandalism from the same user, or if they have previous warnings, or if the vandalism is egregious. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 19:42, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Aseeem Malhotra

I'm not sure how to use the talk feature but here goes. I've tried to edit a page on Dr Aseem Malhotra to add some context to the total lack of data to support his asssertion that cholestrol reduction reducing heart disease is a myth. Why are you so resistant to adding that given the danger of what he is saying in terms of public health. The comment I added was not malicious, it's just a fact. He has not a single bit of research to his name just opinion pieces. Do your own pubmed search. Wikipedia should at least mention context in some acceptable manner. I don't know whether it's right or wrong but any decent article shoud give context. There's also a reason why he isn't a fellow of the academy of royal colleges anymore. With your kind of editing we'll end up with another Andrew Wakefield type situation with sensationalit messages going with no context. Please don't turn Wikipedia into a tabloid. I'm going to leave it to you now but you might want to do your own research before rejecting even such a small edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.185.200.211 (talk) 22:46, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Small edit, big edit, any edit--it still needs a citation. You're drawing a derogatory conclusion in an article about a living person. You need to provide a reference, or at least get consensus on the article's Talk page. The use of scare quotes in the article already shades the edges of what's acceptable under WP:NPOV. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 00:52, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

UV Korean band

Dude/dudette,
what gives?
I add:

"* UV, the name of a "hip-hop project band" with two members ([[Yoo Se Yoon]] and Muzi) <ref>[https://www.viki.com/artists/20776c-uv?_escaped_fragment_=#! UV - 유브이 - Korea - Artist - Viki] (Accessed 2017-04-21)</ref>)"

which has a citation and also WP cross-reference to a band member's page, and also I add a Talk entry on the UV_(disambiguation) page. But instead of being patient and waiting for consensus, and instead of having a dialogue or discussion, you have ordained yourself The Almighty Decider.
Try to go back to basics and learn how WP works. Hint: it's not the way you're playing the game here.
—DIV
P.S. I know there's a lot of 'bigotry' in some circles against IP contributors on WP. If that includes you, then get over it.

Somebody needs a nap. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 02:04, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Who's that?

—DIV (120.17.115.15 (talk) 02:06, 21 April 2017 (UTC))[reply]

Well, just on a kind of prima-facie level here, it looks like the one who's saying things like "Try to go back to basics and learn how WP works." NewEnglandYankee (talk) 02:14, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that may have been harsh. But you might consider it's pretty irritating to be in the process of working up a case to demonstrate notability, and in the middle of that process the edits keep getting reverted.

You left a helpful link to WP:BAND. I have already mentioned that 'UV' wrote/performed key songs on the OST of The Plan Man. Based on the WP guidelines, that would be close to sufficient to justify notability — at least to have a little dot-point on a disambig page! (It's not even making their own article.)

I expect with more digging there should be sufficient to prove notability according to those guidelines.

But I also wonder: did you apply the same harsh criteria to assess "Ganz UV, a Hungarian tram type" or "UV Vodka, a brand produced by Phillips Distilling Company". They seem of pretty limited notability to me, but I wouldn't just up and delete them without a discussion/debate first.

—DIV (120.17.115.15 (talk) 02:30, 21 April 2017 (UTC))[reply]

Ganz UV has its own page, so I'd let that slide. If I'd been editing and I'd seen the vodka added, I certainly would have been tempted (at least) to remove it. In fact, I still am.

If I were you I'd go band article first, disambiguation-page link second; you'll have an easier time establishing notability that way, I think, and there will be no debate needed about whether it belongs on the list.

NewEnglandYankee (talk) 02:35, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that would also I suppose be your response to the point I may not have made explicit above, which is that typically disambig pages are not replete with content justifying notability for each entry....
AFAIK IP contributors can't (certainly couldn't in the past) create new WP articles themselves, only 'request'/'suggest' them. I haven't bothered with that in a long time.
Update: OK, it seems now the process is for IP contributors to make a "draft", which will then be reviewed...
—DIV (120.17.115.15 (talk) 02:46, 21 April 2017 (UTC))[reply]

That's the rationale, I suspect, behind the create-the-article-first guideline: it's a bright-line rule to establish what does and doesn't belong in a list. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 02:50, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Just saying thanks for earlier. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" ^{Talk to me} 02:33, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@WarMachineWildThing: You're very welcome. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 02:35, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A cookie for you!

Thank you for your help with the Nate Speed socks. Sro23 (talk) 18:24, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oops

At Eclipse cycle, your revert adds in an unneeded space. I will rerevret you without ending up getting face slashed pleese. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doidlodilalodaiodloadodolodiododoldidoldilodo (talk • contribs) 15:33, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You're quite right. Pray accept my apologies. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 15:39, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. Thanks. Doidlodilalodaiodloadodolodiododoldidoldilodo (talk) 16:41, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RE:

Then this guy must let of screw me.--205.234.124.99 (talk) 18:28, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I genuinely have no idea what this means. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 18:29, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Investment

Hey there! I just re-launched the WikiProject Investment.

The site has been fully revamped and updated and I would like to invite you the project.

Feel free to check out the project and ping me if you have any questions.

I'd like to invite you to join the Investment WikiProject. There are a lot of Investment related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help get this project off the ground and a few Investment pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks!

Cheers! WikiEditCrunch (talk) 09:37, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Who is LTA?

Hi there, I saw your WP:AIV for the Boeing spammer and was wondering who LTA was. Thanks! Justin15w (talk) 16:50, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) It's this LTA. Sro23 (talk) 22:00, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Moorish Science Temple

Hello,

Why do you feel as though the changes I am making are disruptive? Who is to say that the word belief is neutral? Neutral for whom? Can you please explain why you chose to use the word "disruptive" when referring to the minor changes I am making? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:2C0:8700:3468:6DA3:102D:103E:2065 (talk) 02:58, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Vandalism on the new Mike Stuchbery article

Thanks for repeatedly reverting the changes on the Mike Stuchbery article. I knew that Mike had been targeted personally before, so I was already expecting attacks on the article while I wrote the first version. And while any change on the article in good faith is of course welcome, I - like you - had the impression that 88.104.153.195 was acting with malicious intent and might be related to the earlier personal cyberattacks. VividImpression (talk) 02:40, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Some baklava for you!

I'm glad that you and Finsry worked it out! Naraht (talk) 11:19, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RE

Hey man you're not a Marvel fan and there are the sources. If you continue screwing me I'll watch for you and I'll dismember you alive.--94.242.252.14 (talk) 17:38, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Eek. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 17:45, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why the revert on cousins

I have been using the talk page, no one responds and reverts without adding comments. What is the point? Please respond to what needs to be fixed. I added the table to consolidate the text, but the format of the table does not allow easy viewing for cell phones or any other browser with a small screen. THe term ordinal is unnecessarily complicated. The distinction was not made between earliest common ancestor and ancestor, the names where wrong in the display of some relationships.2602:304:415C:4669:3C2A:160B:C0AD:17DA (talk) 16:23, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is it better now?2602:304:415C:4669:3C2A:160B:C0AD:17DA (talk) 16:54, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have the right motivations, I know people here can be harsh, so giving you a kudos. 2602:304:415C:4669:3C2A:160B:C0AD:17DA (talk) 18:08, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

hey

if you see anything like that again and I'm online, email me and I'll take care of it Dlohcierekim (talk) 03:54, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Dlohcierekim; I'll do that. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 14:25, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for watching AT&T Stadium

Yeah, Aaron Rodgers had a great game, but Arlington ain't officially giving him the deed to the city just yet. Someone has requested semiprotection. You're quick on the trigger. Thanks. Moishe Rosenbaum (talk) 00:33, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 00:34, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fred is not gay nor is he cool

Checkmate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.15.64.254 (talk) 18:00, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well played. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 19:22, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ANI discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Railfan23 (talk) 18:06, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Revert on TJW's page

I dunno, "dirty lenin" strikes me as found art... Anmccaff (talk) 17:27, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seems clean enough to me. GMG ^talk 17:29, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nah. The user clearly meant to say "dirty Line N", presumably in reference to NYC subway service. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 18:11, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nannobacterium

I edited the nanobacterium page at the request of R. L. Folk. In all of his publications, he spelled nanobacterium nannobacterium. His spelling should be used. Also, the transmission electron microscopy was conducted by Dr. Brenda Kirkland. Dr. Folk wants to make sure she gets credit for that. The publication in reference 24 is from Meteoritics and Planetary Science. Please allow these changes as they honor the author's wishes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevendm (talk • contribs) 02:03, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Stevendm:, thanks for your comment. You should know, though, that what you're doing is very strongly discouraged here, because you have a conflict of interest. It would be better for you to request other editors to make these changes on the article's talk page.

As far as the spelling is concerned, the article really ought to be internally consistent, and consistent with its own title. "Nannobacterium" may be Dr. Folk's preferred spelling, but as far as I can tell it's just plain wrong; I'm afraid that Dr. Folk's orthographic preferences are not germane except in the case of a direct quote. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 02:22, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Restoring PROD tags

Hi. I saw that you restored the PROD tag I'd placed on 1000 miles of corn after someone else removed it. Ordinarily, anyone can remove a PROD tag, and articles can't be rePRODded once anyone has objected. Was there something about this situation that I'm not seeing? Meanwhile, I've removed the tag. Largoplazo (talk) 11:52, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Largoplazo:: No, just a mistake on my part. Thanks for catching it. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 15:11, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, NewEnglandYankee. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Experiences survey

The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Please be aware this survey will close Friday, Dec. 8 at 23:00 UTC.

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:14, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So ok too vandalism

Me just wandering why yew take post away. I thought it was a encyclopedia everyone edits. So that meant I wasn't vandalism — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.87.124.161 (talk) 01:30, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it was[2]. Profoundly unoriginal, but vandalism nonetheless. Don't do it again, please. NewEnglandYankee (talk) 01:33, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re: December 2017

Hi. Thank you for explaining and for your consideration. To ease your mind, here's a link "The Opening Night Excitation" Episode on Justin Davidson's Google Photos, where Wil was voluntarily allowing viewers to boo his Spock Costume. Hope this helps. Thanks: https://photos.google.com/u/0/share/AF1QipMdKtukMBg1PiMUkJHy2rwof_qPgujTANEMBds0vFK9Qzy7RNuC-ONZy-hpkrlUcQ/photo/AF1QipP9_tS3VhurZvJwYNqvyodI9lWk9ZwY8ceQohKs?key=YkxBQ2dZTHI0YTlLWTg2ZkVEaEZyY3VFdm1tU0lR - 119.95.139.29 (talk) 01:52, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Politico

Thank you [3]. You beat me to the punch by seconds. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 15:57, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And thank you back! NewEnglandYankee (talk) 15:57, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Season's Greetings

Hello there! Shearonink (talk) wishes you & yours the the very best of the season!
Whether you celebrate Christmas, Diwali, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Festivus (for the rest of us!) or even the Saturnalia, here's to hoping your holiday time is wonderful and that the New Year will be an improvement upon the old. CHEERS!

Share these holiday wishes by adding {{subst:User:Shearonink/Holiday}}~~~~ to your friends' talk pages.

Shearonink (talk) 02:44, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]