Please use this page to contact me regarding any entries I have created or edited.

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. You may wish to respond here David in DC (talk) 21:23, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What's wrong with it? It's sorting the Nelson Mandela category, where things named after the man are called "Nelson Mandela" or "Mandela", thus is not properly sorted, as most items would end up under N, or M. This is the day commemorating him, so should sort under "Day" as the sort key. -- 65.94.78.9 (talk) 18:47, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have already replied on your talk page. Dwpaul ^Talk 18:57, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's a sort key, you won't see only "Day" ever. It's a category sort key, not a hyperlink label. Everything in a category appears with the article's full title, not just the sort key. The sort key organizes where in the category listing it appears. Just as sort keys are used to do "Mandela, Nelson". Or if you have say 'Company X Headquarters' in 'category:Company X', you would use the sort key "Headquarters", so it would appear under "H" and say "Company X Headquarters" in 'Category:Company X'; Using "Day" as the sort key will appear under "D" in "Category: Nelson Mandela". This is why the article Nelson Mandela uses the sort key " " ("Category: Nelson Manela| ") per my edit request to do that at talk:Nelson Mandela#Category:Nelson Mandela. It did not make it appear as a blank space, it's only a sort key. -- 65.94.78.9 (talk) 19:01, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting the reversion. I'm removing the warning now. -- 65.94.78.9 (talk) 19:06, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

sorry got mad with project farm boy01 (talk) 00:47, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dwpaul.I am Naynaysissom iwas just wondering how to get to sandbox and what sandbox will allow me to do exactly.Thanks,Naynaysissom.p.s.you know how to replay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naynaysissom (talk • contribs) 04:00, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dwpaul could you help me.I do not know how to use sandbox and i would like to know what sandbox would allow me to do.Thanks Naynaysissom.December 7,2013 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naynaysissom (talk • contribs) 04:05, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It was fairly obvious from the first edit that LungiMayte was trying to create a redirect and didn't know how. From there it spiraled out of control because no one looked at what was going on, they just saw the page blanking. Now he's at a level 3 warning for no good reason. I've let him know how to do redirects. It might be a good idea to reduce to a level 1 warning message, all things considered. Just a heads up. Sven Manguard Wha? 06:47, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

--

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dialer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Access code (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) 09:03, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Graphs and charts. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi General Ization. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! John Reaves 22:46, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm so embarrassed. I guess I was thinking of the recent Prop 522 vote in Washington. It's impressive how quickly you caught the error. ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grandma Nettie (talk • contribs) 04:53, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Username policy/RFC. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for having my back. Sometimes my patrolling makes me worry about the state of society, until the forces for good, like you, arrive. Thanks again! Josh3580_talk/hist 00:37, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I appreciate the sentiments, even though we're probably both delusional. You're welcome, and hope you'll return the favor after that user's block expires in only 31 hours. ;-) Dwpaul ^Talk 00:40, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Harvey Littleton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

I suppose I have not made changes to the Wiki entry "Harvey Littleton" correctly, judging by your comments in history.

I am a close friend of Harvey's and his family. Someone (unknown) added (and it stuck) the erroneous date of his death. Members of the family and I noticed the error and I, as a neophyte, joined Wikipedia, and made the change to his death date and added the location.

Harvey is well-known in his field, and the family did not want to have false info show up on his Wiki item.

Erle Richards e.erle@ccvn.com

• @Erle.richards: Erle, I can appreciate that, but we cannot include the corrected date and/or place of death without a citation any more readily than we can the incorrect date. Unless we have a citation to a reliable source that notes Mr. Littleton's passing, his article will not include a date or place of death. Please see this link for information on Wikipedia's policies concerning biographies of living persons (who are presumed to remain living without a reliable source indicating otherwise). If you can supply the name of a local paper where an obit has appeared, we may be able to cite it as a reference. Dwpaul ^Talk 04:29, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see that after you undid my corrections, that Materialscientist made the corrections, citing a couple of web pages. I'm sorry to have crossed swords with you. I don't know who added the erroneous date of death, but I did not see any source cited. No obituary has been published yet, per the family's wishes.Erle.richards (talk) 13:23, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Apparently Materialscientist was able to find an In memoriam page posted by a professional association and used that as a reliable source. I have already thanked them for making that edit. Thanks for your and the family's patience. Dwpaul ^Talk 13:48, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly want to thank all who helped get Harvey's death information correct. I certainly have a lot to learn about how to edit a Wikipedia article! Whoever made the first entries not only got the date wrong, but also entered the date in the place of death spot. An obituary is now available at yanceyfuneralservice dot com Erle.richards (talk) 21:40, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You did fine; this sort of thing (both technically and policy-wise) is not always intuitive on Wikipedia. Respect to you for your dedication to your friend and colleague, Mr. Littleton. Dwpaul ^Talk 21:52, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have declined your speedy deletion nomination of Empty forest under CSD A10. While poaching is a factor in Empty forest syndrome, it is not the only factor, as the given source indicates. Human development and encroachment also play a factor. Thus, it is not a duplicate of Poaching. If you wish to pursue deletion, please use Articles for Deletion instead. Thanks. Safiel (talk) 16:46, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Proposed deletion of biographies of living people/RfC: Change duration from 10 to 7 days. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:07, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Gun control. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have no reason to believe that my edit is anything other then a reliable verifiable source. I also don't have any reason to believe that stating facts are posting the fact of my declaration of intent to run is in anyway a conflict of interest. I believe that my edits fall completely in line with your sourcing rules. While I do respect the fact my blog is not reputable, I am Going to run for senate.Therefore my source is factual and unbiased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by William.C.Stewart (talk • contribs) 03:34, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please learn how to sign your posts here. Read the detailed information at the links I placed on your user page. They clearly explain how your edits violate Wikipedia's policies, and why a personal blog or Web page cannot be used as a citation. Also, if you persist, either without reading the policies or after reading them, in COI editing I will file a report at the Conflict of Interest Noticeboard (COIN), which will generally result in your being blocked from editing. Dwpaul ^Talk 03:43, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please proceed to report. I am ready to escalate this matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by William.C.Stewart (talk • contribs) 03:48, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have now understood. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raja Umair Satti (talk • contribs) 19:12, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How to add sources on Satti Page because I don't know how to create them although I know enough sources!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Innocent Historian (talk • contribs) 10:36, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Dwpaul

I saw your comment and the fact that you have removed my posting . The logic you have used is that my posting is less than neutral. I do not agree. My comment is no less (or more) neutral than what's already on the page,which I repeat below. In fact as you will see later in the comment , the existing information is false. >>>>>>>> The duty of Sudras is to perform tasks that demand highly physical work. Although their form of labour is different from the other three castes, the Sudras are not discriminated against. In fact Vidura, the famous Prime Minister of Hastinapura was born in the Sudra community and attained the status of a Brahmin due to his wisdom, righteousness and learning. All other three sections namely Brahmana, Kshatriya and Vaishya protected Sudras and contributed for their safety and happiness. >>>>>>

Now the facts do NOT bear out that "the Sudras are not discriminated against". In India they were definitely discriminated against historically. In fact they are discriminated against even today, not so much by law as by social custom. The Indian Parliament/ Indian State Legislatures would not have passed laws providing for reservations in employment and education for Scheduled Tribes and Castes had the SC/ ST people not been discriminated against. The passage and implementation of these reservation laws is a complete and comprehensive admission by the Indian Nation state that the Shudras historically suffered discrimination. You can check this with any leading scholar of Indian history or sociology.

So while it may be noncontroversial with the Indian readers / users of Wikipedia (who come mainly from the higher castes) to say that "the Sudras are not discriminated against" it is certainly not the truth... as I said its been acknowledged by the Indian Parliament that there was indeed discrimination. I expect wikipedia to not shy away from the truth even if it is not always convenient.

AjayAjayjo (talk) 17:52, 28 December 2013 (UTC) Dec 28, 2013[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a forum. Wikipedia articles are not the place for you to offer competing theories about the subject of the article. You are free to offer suggestions to improve the article, including ideas regarding coverage of significantly documented alternative viewpoints (not just your own personal ideas), on the Talk page of the article, and even to edit the article to include these alternative viewpoints (with citations to sources that discuss them). However, your edits must always reflect the neutral point of view, and make clear that the alternative view is just that, an alternative. An edit should never begin "I am not sure of the correctness of this interpretation," because you are speaking with your voice, not in the voice of the encyclopedia. That you began your edit this way was the first clue that it was not encyclopedic (though the remainder did not meet the criteria for NPOV as written). Please familiarize yourself with these and other Wikipedia policies if you wish to contribute to articles. Dwpaul ^Talk 18:04, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. - You are welcome to begin an entry on the article's Talk page with the statement you made, and, in fact, that would be the appropriate place to do so. You would be initiating a conversation with other interested editors about the topic, with a goal of improving and expanding the article. However — and this is key — the article itself is not the place to initiate a discussion with other editors or readers of the article; that is what the Talk page is for. Dwpaul ^Talk 18:11, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, got editors mixed up. Flat Out let's discuss it 08:27, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I understood. That was the intention of the editor who actually made the edit. See their history. Are you an admin (with block)? Dwpaul ^Talk 08:28, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not an admin unfortunately, they had a pretty long run before being blocked. I have removed all the phony welcome messages that link your name, but they will be back. Flat Out let's discuss it 08:58, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was expecting that. Thanks for all your work to try to catch up with him until an admin came along, and appreciate your cleanup effort on his vandalistic attempts to implicate me. Dwpaul ^Talk 09:00, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please revert your revertion on Jools Holland or explain how artists appearing on the show are not notable — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pyb8 (talk • contribs) 08:02, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:notability for Wikipedia's guidelines on notability. In general, such claims must be supported by reliable sources. Just saying that someone appeared on a TV show neither means it is true nor that they are notable. Dwpaul ^Talk 08:09, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say that he appeared on the show, someone else did. Anyway if this doesn't statisfy you nothing will http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006ml0l — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pyb8 (talk • contribs) 08:17, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, OK, I have reverted my reversion on List of Later... with Jools Holland episodes. But the problem (and the reason I reverted on the Jools page to begin with) is that the article you created on BC doesn't contain enough content/references/anything to explain why the subject is notable and ensure that it will stick around. By every policy of Wikipedia concerning new articles, citation and notability, the page should and will probably be deleted speedily. So the Jools page will probably have a redlink where your article should be. Dwpaul ^Talk 09:17, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, but I don't want to spend more time editing the page if it's going to be deleted in an hour Pyb8 (talk) 10:34, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the speedy tag and added a reference to the BBC and a reference to The Guardian. Please do not nominate pages for speedy deletion (unless they are legal problems with them existing such as G10 - attack page or G12 - blatant copyvio) mere minutes after they have been created without doing due diligence yourself for sources. A google search for his name would have led you to these two sources. You may be interested in the historical WP:NEWT project. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:19, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Dwpaul ^Talk 15:46, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It could be worse - you could have made this edit! ;-) Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:15, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! Dwpaul ^Talk 18:17, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

At least the human who nominated Twitter waited a week. I also came to yell at you for biting the contributor of Benjamin Clementine, but it looks like it's already been done. Please be maximally respectful of others' contributions. -- Y not? 23:39, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No biting intended. The discussion ultimately had the needed effect of getting a minimal set of citations added to support the notability of the subject and allow the article (at that point two lines with no citations, already being wikilinked by the editor elsewhere) to remain. I'll be a little less hasty in future, yes, but I think things have worked out pretty well, in part because of the original editor's persistence, quick response and willingness to communicate. I understand not everyone will respond this way. Thanks. Dwpaul ^Talk 23:46, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey with all due respect we all know Anil Kapoor sir just turned 57 recently. It's all over media and twitter. He even said it on a interview. So why lie sir. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamilahmed2 (talk • contribs) 20:23, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If it's "all over media" you should be able to supply at least one reliable source (Twitter is not an RS) to document the correct information and explain the change. We do not chnage biographical information on living persons without citations. Dwpaul ^Talk 20:26, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please search "Anil Kapoor birthdate" in Google. Or read his Early life and Career in his wiki page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamilahmed2 (talk • contribs) 20:29, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I found the incorrect information was inserted earlier by another user, and recognize now that you were trying to correct it. Please note that the use of a good edit summary on your edits will greatly help to avoid this kind of misunderstanding, since other editors will understand what you are doing. I've fixed the article. Dwpaul ^Talk 20:33, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of what is written about him isn't backed so I'm really stunned your just picking on my edit. I clearly stated a fact - he is married to a popstar and has children. Other statements are on his page without any links to "back it up" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yesyesyesitsme (talk • contribs) 02:32, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I can't account for all the other things in the article without proper sources -- this basically falls under WP:OTHERCRAP. But unsourced biographical and family details cannot stay. See WP:BLP. Nothing personal. Dwpaul ^Talk 02:36, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]