| Revision as of 18:11, 17 February 2011 editCourcelles (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Administrators434,776 edits →February 2011: NB← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:30, 17 February 2011 edit undoMewulwe (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,281 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
| Daily Times is a reliable source, please discuss before reverting. Thanks!--- ]] 17:23, 5 January 2011 (UTC) | Daily Times is a reliable source, please discuss before reverting. Thanks!--- ]] 17:23, 5 January 2011 (UTC) | ||
| :I did discuss it in the inline comment. Go and find a real source before reverting. ] (]) 17:26, 5 January 2011 (UTC) | :I did discuss it in the inline comment. Go and find a real source before reverting. ] (]) 17:26, 5 January 2011 (UTC) | ||
| == February 2011 == | |||
| <div class="user-block" style="min-height: 40px"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''24 hours''' for ], as you did at ]. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to ]. If you would like to be unblocked, you may ] by adding the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx" argument. -->{{tlx|unblock|2=reason=''Your reason here ~~~~''}}, but you should read the ] first. ] 17:54, 17 February 2011 (UTC)<p>During a dispute, you should first try to ] and seek ]. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek ], and in some cases it may be appropriate to request ].</p></div><!-- Template:uw-ewblock --> | |||
| :Note that I also considered when considering the level of disruption that has been caused by you. ] 18:11, 17 February 2011 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 18:30, 17 February 2011
Czech Republic
For the record, I agree with you that "Czechia" should not be mentioned in the lead- I just want to discuss it on the talk page and reach a consensus because there doesn't seem to be a clear one at the moment. Please use the talk page before making edits like that please (or at least after you are reverted the first time). Once again, I agree with you completely. The DominatorEdits 04:46, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
- Maybe you should read the talk archives. This was settled years ago. Someone must have recently reintroduced Czechia without consensus. Mewulwe (talk) 14:41, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
- Really? Cause I read the archives yesterday and this is the section where it was discussed: Talk:Czech Republic/Archive1#The name Czechia, and it certainly does not seem like an official consensus. Can you please point out an official discussion and completed !vote on the talk page that shows a consensus to exclude the name? The DominatorEdits 16:47, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Birth dates etc.
Thanks for the good work you're doing picking up unreferenced birth dates! I noticed you doing it on a couple of pages I'd edited. Best, Dsp13 (talk) 00:38, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, except you are adding them back referring to sources which themselves got them from Misplaced Pages. To reference a date that has already been on Misplaced Pages, you need to find a source that either dates from before the date was added to Misplaced Pages, or obviously maintains an impeccable standard of accuracy, so that there is no suspicion it would ever take information from Misplaced Pages. Mewulwe (talk) 08:55, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
- It's increasingly a problem for web sources - and indeed recent sources in general. Journalists routinely copy from WP, and I've also sometimes noticed academic articles doing so. (The problem there is that they're embarrassed about doing it, and so don't knowledge their source. At least the Library of Congress Name Authority file, when it takes WP as a source, says so.) I may have made the wrong judgement about Election Politique Citoyen - it looked at first sight independent of the WP page Kurt Tibbetts (which since I touched it has also become crazily swollen by puff about his Lions Club involvement!). But KT's birthdate was added 3 September 2008 by an IP user, which is plenty of time for it to have been copied around the web indiscriminately. Bayle's initial idea for the Dictionnaire Historique et Critique was to compile a dictionary entirely composed of exposing published falsehoods. We need his reincarnation. So thanks again. Dsp13 (talk) 22:59, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks
This is much better, thank you. DVdm (talk) 19:31, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
Daily Times
Daily Times is a reliable source, please discuss before reverting. Thanks!--- Managerarc 17:23, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- I did discuss it in the inline comment. Go and find a real source before reverting. Mewulwe (talk) 17:26, 5 January 2011 (UTC)