User talk:107.185.97.165

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions so far. I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

Here are some links to pages you may find useful:

You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but if you wish to acquire additional privileges, you can simply create a named account. It's free, requires no personal information, and lets you:

If you edit without using a named account, your IP address (107.185.97.165) is used to identify you instead.

I hope that you, as a new Wikipedian, decide to continue contributing to our project: an encyclopedia of human knowledge that anyone can edit. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, or you can click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. We also have an intuitive guide on editing if you're interested. By the way, please make sure to sign and date your talk page comments with four tildes (~~~~).

Happy editing!

Reference errors on 13 December

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

April 2017

Information icon Hello, I'm Doniago. I noticed that you made a change to an article, It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history 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. DonIago (talk) 04:48, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Your edit at It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World

Would you mind looking at the article you keep linking to? Click John Clarke before you edit that page again. Thank you. CityOfSilver 23:51, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what you're talking about. I wasn't trying to edit the John Clarke article. Rather I was trying to add a reference for John Clarke on the It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World article because you folks asked me to do so. Please tell me what's wrong with the reference that I provided, namely, http://soapcentral.com/days/theactors/clarke_john.php .107.185.97.165 (talk) 00:05, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Again, click John Clarke. The link you keep adding to article doesn't go to the actor's article. CityOfSilver 00:00, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are you satisfied now?107.185.97.165 (talk) 00:05, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. Thank you. CityOfSilver 00:12, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

April 2017

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Missing You (John Waite song). This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Binksternet (talk) 04:12, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, I don't understand Wikipedia policy. Many other people have stated what can be found publicly in Billboard magazine, without citing any particular source, even in the same article, even in the same paragraph, which I wish to edit, so why can't I?107.185.97.165 (talk) 21:34, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel other information should be sourced as well, you're welcome to take appropriate action, ranging from providing a source (best) to removing the information (most likely to be controversial). Arguing that your information should be retained due to other unsourced information, though, to me simply begs the question, "If everyone else was jumping off a bridge..." DonIago (talk) 23:41, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Then let's start with the same paragraph, which reads 

 "Missing You" is a song co-written and recorded by English musician John Waite. It was released in June 1984 as the lead single from the album No Brakes. It peaked at #1 on the Billboard Hot 100 during the week of 22 September 1984, and number nine on the UK Singles Chart. 'Missing You' was the only #1 song from 1984 to only spend one week at the top of the charts (all other #1 singles in 1984 landed there for 2 or more weeks)."

There is no documentation that the song was co-written by John Waite. There is no documentation about the song being released in June 1984, or that it was from the album No Brakes. There is no documentation that the song peaked at #1 on the Hot 100 during the week of 22 September 1984 and #9 on the UK Singles Chart. There is no documentation that "Missing You" was the only #1 song from 1984 to spend only (not, only spend) one week at the top of the charts (which charts? Hot 100? or others?) or that all other #1 singles in 1984 landed there (where?) for 2 or more weeks.

Your thoughts?107.185.97.165 (talk) 00:50, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As noted above, my thoughts are that you can do anything from finding sources for the statements to removing them entirely. Assuming you're unable or unwilling to find sources and have concerns that the information isn't verifiable, I would recommend that you tag the statements you're particularly concerned about with Template:Citation needed. Hope this helps. DonIago (talk) 02:45, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So why then doesn't Wikipedia pull down the paragraph and notify those who wrote it, just as you pulled down my contributions and notified me?

The point is that there is massive lack of documentation, and a massive lack of consistency of standards, on every Wikipedia article that I have ever read. Such lacks led me to believe that Wikipedia policy really decreed documentation only for whatever isn't obvious, whatever obvious means. The present case leaves me much more confused than ever about what Wikipedia actually expects of editors. Adding a complete set of authoritative sources for even one Wikipedia article is almost always way too massive a project for one person.107.185.97.165 (talk) 03:01, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's the nice thing about it being a collaborative project largely maintained by volunteers; nobody needs to do any more or less than they're willing to do. If I was more invested in the article we're discussing, I'd take the time to go through it...but I have other places where I prefer to focus my editorial efforts. DonIago (talk) 03:21, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So then Wikipedia would prefer to keep the paragraph as written, without any documentation whatsoever, but pull my contribution from that same paragraph and warn me, even though my contribution pointed to the Hot 100 repeatedly, didn't it? Shades of Wikipedia warning me in September 2016 about my adding a sentence to the Sugarloaf article to indicate the death of Jerry Corbetta, without documentation because the whole world already knew about Corbetta's death, but keeping, apparently without a warning, a nearly identical sentence about Corbetta, in the same place in the Sugarloaf aricle, that someone else added just a few days later, also without documentation (but which was later supplied). You may focus your efforts wherever you wish, but that sort of galling inconsistency, if I may say so, seems to be a daily occurrence, over many, many Wikipedia articles, leaving me, and undoubtedly many other would-be contributors, completely in the dark about Wikipedia's expectations.107.185.97.165 (talk) 03:56, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's policies concerning the verifiability of statements can be found at WP:V. I'm happy to answer any questions you might have about it, or you could ask at the Talk page there. But you seem to think there's some sort of overall authority governing article content, and for the most part, that's not the case. It's up to individual volunteer editors to create, maintain, and keep tabs on each others' content. DonIago (talk) 04:25, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Then maybe it's time for an overall authority, given the continuing, galling inconsistency.107.185.97.165 (talk) 05:08, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck! DonIago (talk) 07:33, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017

Information icon Hello, I'm Vanamonde93. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Hugh Masekela have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Vanamonde (talk) 06:46, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please be specific. On which comments are you remarking?107.185.97.165 (talk) 21:23, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be referring to the period that I removed? Whenever a sentence ends in an exclamation point or a question mark, regardless of the reason, no period should appear afterward. Thus my edit.107.185.97.165 (talk) 22:42, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize: you are quite correct. I have reinstated your edit. To avoid this sort of thing in the future, it would be helpful if you left an edit summary: something along the lines of "period after exclamation unnecessary" or even "grammatical correction" would have presented your edit in a different light. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 04:17, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have made many such edits for many articles for years, and you are the first person to flag any of these edits.107.185.97.165 (talk) 04:20, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

January 2018

Information icon Please do not add or change content, as you did at The Box Tops, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Fylbecatulous talk 14:26, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

What specific content are you claiming that I added or changed?107.185.97.165 (talk) 14:38, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 2018

Hello, I'm I dream of horses. I noticed that in this edit to Mike Durbin, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.  I dream of horses  If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message  (talk to me) (My edits) @ 15:04, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 107.185.97.165. You have new messages at I dream of horses's talk page.
Message added 15:11, 14 March 2018 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]
Hello, 107.185.97.165. You have new messages at I dream of horses's talk page.
Message added 15:26, 14 March 2018 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]
Hello, 107.185.97.165. You have new messages at I dream of horses's talk page.
Message added 15:38, 14 March 2018 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Age not updating?

At Talk:Eve Graham#Age you wrote: In the United States, today is 20 April 2018, and Eve Graham is already 75, but the age showing is 74. Why? 107.185.97.165 (talk) 05:46, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Could be one of several reasons. Most likely is your cache needs purging. (On the "page" menu at top right of page next to the "Search Wikipedia" box, 2nd-to-bottom item on that menu is "Purge cache". Pdfpdf (talk) 13:33, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No. Just to make sure, I purged the cache and cookies once again, but Eve Graham's age still appears afterwards as 74.107.185.97.165 (talk) 00:31, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. It shows 75 for me. I'm afraid I don't know. Pdfpdf (talk) 02:07, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Still shows 74 for me, on my laptop. Earlier today I asked a friend to look on his phone, and it showed 74 on his phone.107.185.97.165 (talk) 04:45, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 2018

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at The Left Banke. Binksternet (talk) 05:54, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To which editing of The Left Banke are you referring, specifically?107.185.97.165 (talk) 12:05, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You cited Facebook (unreliable source) and said the date was undetermined, which is not useful. Binksternet (talk) 17:28, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

At the time, there was no other source that Wikipedia could have possibly accepted. So I cited Tom's son's Facebook page. That's not unsourced material. Who could reject Tom's son's testimony? The only uncertainty was whether the exact date of death is 5 August 2018 or 6 August 2018. Since then, other sources, reliable sources for sure, have surfaced, and I cited one of them, which indicated August 2018. But the exact date of death, 5 August 2018 or 6 August 2018, is apparently still not known yet.107.185.97.165 (talk) 20:31, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

October 2018

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World. Please review WP:SPS. I see you were already warned previously about being more careful about the quality of your sources. DonIago (talk) 14:35, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

January 2019

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Stan Freberg. Binksternet (talk) 06:56, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What unsourced material on Stan Freberg might that be? The information that Casey Kasem did say on American Top 40?107.185.97.165 (talk) 20:26, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

June 2019

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Joey Lawrence has been reverted.
Your edit here to Joey Lawrence was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links in references which are discouraged per our reliable sources guideline. The reference(s) you added or changed (https://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-celebrities/actors/joey-lawrence-net-worth/) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 14:08, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

Specifically, why would the reference that I included be on your list of links to remove?107.185.97.165 (talk) 15:43, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 2019

Please stop making test edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Mark Farner. It is considered vandalism, which, under Wikipedia policy, can lead to being blocked from editing. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:31, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

What edit? I edited the article on Grand Funk Railroad, but I don't recall editing the article on Mark Farner.107.185.97.165 (talk) 20:04, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I checked further and found that you believe that a sentence in the Mark Farner article needs the period that I removed. I disagree. For any sentence ending in a punctuation mark, a period afterward would be incorrect.107.185.97.165 (talk) 20:11, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits to Beach Baby

Information icon Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Beach Baby, 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! Materialscientist (talk) 14:06, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I personally transcribed the quote that I submitted to this article directly from the audio of the 31 August 1974 edition of American Top 40. Anyone can find the same information by consulting the corresponding YouTube video. I don't understand why such a source would not be authoritative.107.185.97.165 (talk) 15:46, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019

Stop icon You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make disruptive edits to Wikipedia contrary to the Manual of Style, as you did at Kenny Loggins. Binksternet (talk) 07:11, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In what specific way was my editing disruptive?107.185.97.165 (talk) 17:34, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your Ides Of March edit?

I’m trying to understand your edit to the Ides Of March/Success section on March 7th, 2019. You put this in the middle of a list of rank positions “(#19, not #15, on 15 March 1971, the Ides of March)”. I’m not saying it’s wrong, but it’s not a full thought and seems unsourced? #19 on what list? Who said it was #15? Are you pointing out that 15 March is the literal Ides of March? Do years other than 1971 matter? I’m just very confused. Would you mind fleshing that out better?

Thanks!

The Ides of March (band)

--108.67.141.115 (talk) 02:49, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an anonymous user who has not created an account yet, or who does not use it. We therefore have to use the numerical IP address to identify them. Such an IP address can be shared by several users. If you are an anonymous user and feel that irrelevant comments have been directed at you, please create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other anonymous users.

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/User_talk:107.185.97.165"