Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:59, 11 November 2013

User:Epicgenius/logo

User:Epicgenius/t

This is Epicgenius's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83Auto-archiving period: 7 days

Epicgenius is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, then place {{Talkback|your username}} on my talk. If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, then place {{Talkback|Epicgenius}} on your talk. Please click here to leave me a new message.

28 December 2024

• diffhist Black Rock Gorge 11:05 −182 Geopersona talk contribs (reducing wordiness; re-word formation)

NOTE: Any edits I make with WP:STiki may be wrong, so please notify me of any errors. Thanks! Epicgenius 12:21, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Check this out: GUIDE TO STATION LAYOUTS and other stuff Epicgenius 21:19, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Takes Brooklyn! Saturday September 7

Please join Misplaced Pages Takes Brooklyn scavenger hunt on September 7, 2013! Everyone gather at the Brooklyn Public Library to further Misplaced Pages's coverage of— photos and articles related to Brooklyn, its neighborhoods and the local landmarks. --EdwardsBot (talk)

Lefferts Boulevard

I think that, in the context of the article, the point of calling it a "major thoroughfare" is not to say that it is one of the biggest streets in Queens, but to say that in relation to the residential side street (Austin Street) it was a busier and more active road where perhaps help or safety could be found. Don't think of it as describing Lefferts in relation to all streets in Queens, but only about its relationship to the event taking place there at that moment. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:38, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Isn't the correct name of this thoroughfare "119th Street"? Epicgenius 22:12, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

On second thought, Austin Street is too a busy street, at least east of Yellowstone Boulevard. Epicgenius 22:17, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

I took a look on Google Maps' Street View at the intersection (which, of course, is not the same thing as looking at it as it was 60 years ago), and Austin Street is residential looking and not all that wide (2 lanes of parking and one of traffic), while Lefferts Boulevard is about 33% bigger (2 lanes of parking, 2 lanes of traffic in 2 directions) with retail shops - so the point of the statement in the article stands, I think, that getting to Lefferts Boulevard was an attempt to get to a more major thoroughfare. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:53, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

A 4-lane street is no less important than a 5-lane street if they are both heavily traveled and/or heavily visited. Austin Street is very busy around 71st/Continental Avenue. Epicgenius 12:41, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Now. What was it like back then? Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:10, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Umm... empty? Epicgenius 16:43, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

KB Peja

Please don't do this again. All you have done here is change a problem article which can be deleted because of the problem, to an even worse one that now can't. If you're not capable of translating something properly, adding a bad machine translation is not a productive thing to do--Jac16888 17:56, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

• What is wrong with it? Why should I not do it again? Epicgenius 17:58, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

• Did you bother to read it after you copy and pasted the translation in, without thought to any kind of readability, syntax or grammar? Please do so now, and perhaps you will see why it was not an improvement--Jac16888 18:01, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, I read it, and no, I didn't want to waste time to re-edit it correctly, because of the many errors in the article. Epicgenius 18:04, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

• Let me get this straight. You added a mass of terrible content, realised it was terrible, and because it was terrible decided not to fix it? You've really got this whole "editing the encyclopedia thing" down haven't you--Jac16888 18:07, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

• Well, I just came across it. I didn't know about the article before I clicked on the link. I don't know anything about the subject, either. Even if I knew Albanian, I would not have been able to edit it. What else should I have done? Epicgenius 18:10, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

• Not edit it perhaps? If you came across a man needing a heart transplant would you just jump in and give it a shot? (assuming you're not actually a heart surgeon)--Jac16888 18:13, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

• Actually, I want to be a surgeon (seriously, I'm going to go to medical school in a couple of years), so, nope. I've RB'ed my edit. Epicgenius 18:16, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Hypertension

hello epicgenius !  :)

please can we discuss.

you reverted an edit of mine, on 16-Oct at 16:44, page Hypertension - Signs and symptoms paragraph #1.

original text - "... A proportion of people with high blood pressure report headaches (particularly at the back of the head and in the morning), as well as lightheadedness, vertigo, tinnitus (buzzing or hissing in the ears), altered vision or fainting episodes. These symptoms however are more likely to be related to associated anxiety than the high blood pressure itself."

my edit - "... These symptoms might be related to associated anxiety rather than the high blood pressure itself."

the problem - the cited article DOES NOT demonstrate it is 'more likely'. it suggests a possible relationship, without proving the relationship causality or % incidence.

your thoughts ?

snu7 :)

ps - there are other factors which can cause both hypertension and anxiety and the other symptoms (eg POTS/OI, causing increased epinephrine etc). there are other factors which can cause both hypertension and the other symptoms. i don't have proof of % incidence. i'm just pointing out that the relationship between hypertension, anxiety, and other symptoms, isn't simple.

pps - be gentle, i'm a newbie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snu7 (talk • contribs) 10:35, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

It might have been a mistake; I'll check it. Thanks for handling it in a civil way.
P.S. This is a good article. Epicgenius 12:44, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

User:Zhuangyilong

I would appreciate if you would drop him a message in Chinese as per WP:ANI. I can understand his enthusiasm for something that he has probably devoted his entire life to, even though I don't share his interest in theoretical physics, so I would hate to see him get blocked for pasting his theories all over the place (I would have had no qualms about him getting blocked if it had been some nutty fringe theory in the fields of religion, languages, politics, UFOs or what have you, though, the kind of nuts that we usually see here, but scientists are usually nuts in an introvert harmless way, unlike the other ones...). Thomas.W 18:10, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

I will try to send him a personalised message when I get a chance. But first I will send this: Template:Contrib-zh1 Epicgenius 18:12, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Tks. I'm a bit nutty myself sometimes when it comes to things that interest me, that's why I'm being a bit more lenient than usual... Thomas.W 18:25, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Cooper Union

In regard to your edits to this article:

• Please recall that "New York, New York" is a postal address, and is not proper to use as a location, since it is ambiguous (does the first "New York" refer to "New York City" or to "New York County"?). Please try to use "Manhattan, New York CIty". As a world city, New York City does not require additional identification (i.e state and country), so "Manhattan, New York City" is quite sufficient.

• Your change of the location of Cooper Union in the article text was not the best idea, since what you were identifying was only one of the school's buildings, the Foundation Building. Since the school's "campus" is entirely on Cooper Square, "Cooper Square" remains the best way to describe where the school is located.

Thanks, Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:07, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

"The intersection of Cooper Square and Astor Place" is only partially correct. Do people know that it's also at Third Avenue and at St. Mark's Place? Yes, it might be the corner of Cooper Square and Astor Place, but a corner is:different than an intersection.

Additionally, "New York, NY" is not an acceptable link for the reasons that you described above (New York is a city, county, and a state)... Epicgenius 12:27, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited South Street (Manhattan), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Broad Street and Pearl Street (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) 11:48, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Your deletions of parameters that may subsequently be input

Please stop deleting parameters that may subsequently be input from infoboxes. Thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 20:23, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

There is a greater chance that the article bight be deleted, merged, or otherwise changed than there is of the infobox parameters being filled. Also, what's the odds of all the parameters being filled? (Note: I have been talked to about this before.) Epicgenius 20:27, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

It's broadly accepted that infoboxes are input in the template form. Deletion of parameters that might be input is not an accepted practice. It causes unnecessary work for those who may later input the parameters, or worse yet leads to a failure to encourage input of the information. There is no consensus support for your practice. It's disruptive for you to engage in that practice -- you are deleting parameters that may be filled in later, without consensus support for the practice. If you wish to change consensus, feel free. If you have been spoken to about this before, and taken an IDONTLIKEIT approach against consensus, marring the template form as input, that could be a problem. Please don't do it in the future. You add nothing to how the article itself looks, as readers do not see as-of-yet unfilled parameters, and you impair the future of the article for zero benefit. Thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 20:37, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

If that is the case, then what I did is justified, for the parameters that I deleted do not seem to be added into the article in the future, if the infobox gets altered at all. Epicgenius 20:43, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

That's completely untrue. Obviously. Just look at your deletion here. Of course its untrue, for example that you happen to know that an image will never, ever be added. Anyway -- the rule, which should make it simple for you -- is to leave such parameters as they are, unfilled. It does not damage to what the reader sees. What you are doing, in contrast, is disruptive. Not only that -- you left an extremely misleading edit summary there, failing to mention that the vast majority of your edit was the deletion of template parameters. Please, as well, leave properly descriptive edit summaries, rather than misleading ones.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:18, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

See the conversion templates that I added onto the page. I just wanted to make a 'constructive' edit with these, but apparently that's untrue too, since conversion templates need to be written out completely, just so you can leave 90% of the template empty. Epicgenius 21:21, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

The only time that empty template parameters should be deleted is when there is absolutely no possibility of their being used in the future. For instance, for a film that has no narrator, there's no problem in removing the "narrator" parameter, as it's never going to suddenly get a narrator in the future. However, the "gross" parameter shouldn't be deleted, since just because we don't know the gross at this time doesn't mean that it might be disccovered in the future.

When in doubt, leave the parameter. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:42, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

East River/New York City

What was your thinking in removing the identification of the East River being located in New York City from the PS General Slocum article? I don't get how it has a problem that needed to be fixed. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:38, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Huh? I don't get what you are talking about. Please provide a link to the diff. Epicgenius 23:39, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

In this edit you changed "New York's East River" to "the ]" in the infobox. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:44, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

...because there's only one East River in New York. I'll change it back. Epicgenius 23:47, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

I see I've been beat to it. Epicgenius 23:48, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

"because there's only one East River in New York"' Many of the people who read the article will known very little, or even nothing, about the disaster, so we can't just "East River" and assume they know that the East River is in NYC. That's why identifying where it is located is a good thing to do. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:56, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Nippon Club (Manhattan) 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:

• living in Japan or other countries, also General Stewart L. Woodford, New York). Resident members (186 total, most having Japanese surnames, with the business address of each; R.V. Briesen and Chas.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:44, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Peter's Got Woods 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:

• etc. during this time Peter and Woods sing a parody of "You two" from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang).

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:05, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for your creation of the new List of works in the Museum of Modern Art article, and for your work to organize and expand the encyclopedia. Northamerica1000 20:08, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the honour! Epicgenius 23:21, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikimedia NYC Meetup- "Greenwich Village In The 60s" Editathon! Saturday November 2

Please join Misplaced Pages "Greenwich Village In The 60s" Editathon on November 2, 2013! Everyone gather at Jefferson Market Library to further Misplaced Pages's local outreach for Greenwich Village articles on the history and the community. --Pharos (talk) 21:56, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome!

Stop reversing this edit.

So, you need to not reverse the line on Mary Richardson" "One may observe from photos, that Mary Richardson attacked a painting of a highly attractive voluptuous nude with a comely face; the exact opposite of her own unattractive straight body type." Per the talk page:

There is a serious problem with the line at the end of the section on Fascism, which stated: ""One may observe from photos, that Mary Richardson attacked a painting of a highly attractive voluptuous nude with a comely face; the exact opposite of her own unattractive straight body type."

First, this is opinion, second it is misogynistic, third it is unsighted or supported by any reference. Get it together, folks. The original removal of this sentence was done by an esteemed art historian. Stop reversing it. — — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.39.162.31 (talk) 16:57, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

...I don't get what you just said. Epicgenius 17:43, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh, OK. Epicgenius 17:51, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

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 14:33, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Show me one instance where I have used it. Besides, I use Misplaced Pages: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 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 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 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 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 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 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 15:00, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay... Epicgenius 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 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 19:28, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Welcoming Me

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

No problem Epicgenius 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 23:04, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

The Long Water

Hello, Epicgenius, 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.Template:Z120 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/search/?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/Spotify
https://en.wikipedia.org/Firefox
https://en.wikipedia.org/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 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 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) ". 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 16:56, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

• Changed, thank you for your help. Bin ed (talk) 17:55, 8 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}} ] || ] || ], 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)

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 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 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 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 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 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  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  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 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  01:09, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the reminder. Epicgenius 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 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 Misplaced Pages 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 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 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 12:47, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages 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 Misplaced Pages. 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 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 Misplaced Pages. 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 Misplaced Pages 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 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 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)

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 Misplaced Pages. 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 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 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 Misplaced Pages 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, Misplaced Pages has a better collection of articles about NYCS stations than the library does about books on the same topic, ironically. Epicgenius 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 Misplaced Pages 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 05:18, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Epicgenius 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 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==

or your suggestion above. Epicgenius 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 04:08, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

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

FIFA U-17 World Cup

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

Okay, then. Epicgenius 01:24, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

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 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 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 Misplaced Pages. 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 Misplaced Pages'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  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 Misplaced Pages. 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 Misplaced Pages'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  17:45, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

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 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 Misplaced Pages; 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 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 Misplaced Pages article, then the content should not belong on Misplaced Pages. You should probably provide a family connection from a website like https://familysearch.org/ . Epicgenius 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 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.

1. http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2012/03/22/People-and-Pop-Culture/Names.aspx?hl=erhardt%20died&sc=0

Epicgenius 02:58, 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 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 20:44, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

By the way, where did you find this text? Epicgenius 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 22:28, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I'll be sure to watchlist it. Epicgenius 22:32, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Chelsea Manning

Please realize that Misplaced Pages: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 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 01:13, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages'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 01:17, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Now, which does Misplaced Pages: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 01:25, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

According to Misplaced Pages: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 01:29, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Please read Misplaced Pages: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 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 Misplaced Pages 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 01:46, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Also, stop Canvassing people, as you did here. Epicgenius 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 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 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 02:54, 11 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 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)

Discretionary sanctions warning

The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions (information on which is at Misplaced Pages: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 Misplaced Pages, 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 Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions, with the appropriate sections of Misplaced Pages: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)