User talk:Captain Screebo

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|Captain Screebo}} on your talk. Please click here to leave me a new message.

I have deleted this information as it was: unsolicited; in the wrong place; and falls foul of WP:BLP.

Thanks for editing the article "Hank Skinner". I had started this article several years ago and it has now grown up a lot. I live in Panama and I am also teaching English. With my students, we often publish articles, mostly in Spanish but sometimes we create some in English, and I would be glad to submit them to you for review: For instance this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peristeria_elata or this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopoldo_Fern%C3%A1ndez_%28Cuban_humorist%29 Have a nice week. We are all interested in making Wikipedia better. --Adumoul (talk) 12:39, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to be of service, I tend to end up editing articles that I am drawn to reading for one reason or another, and generally try to fix grammar, syntax, punctuation and other stuff like references, links or pure rubbish. Well, I do remember trawling through Hank Skinner late into the night, so your comments are appreciated.

I will try to have a look at the articles you propose sometime soon. Captain Screebo (talk) 21:17, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When welcoming people on Wikipedia with a blank user talk page, be sure to check to see whether they are actually new or not--the easiest way is to see if their talk page has a "History" tab in the upper right corner. User:Neptunekh2, for instance, has about 8 times more edits than you do yourself; however, they have a tendency to blank their user pages after they've read messages. Just a tip for the future--thanks for your work on Wikipedia. Qwyrxian (talk) 16:51, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear, I came across this user at the help desk wishing to insert incorrectly sourced trivia into an article and complaining about an editor's reverts. After visiting their user page and talk page I naively assumed that it was someone who had mistaken WP for MySpace, judging by their user page, and also figured they needed a little guidance as they have a userbox saying that they have Aspergers Syndrome. I figured that they had gone mad creating their user page and then edited to their heart's content last night.

It had never occurred to me that people go around blanking their talk pages! So far, I have seen archiving all over the place and, effectively, it was the blank talk page that led me to conclude bla bla bla. How did you happen across this? Are you a patroller of sorts? And how come this user is still on Wikipedia? Apparently they spam people's talk pages, continually add unreferenced material, ignore all messages/warnings and create loads of wierd categories that should be deleted.

A case in point here, have a look please, I have just installed Twinkle, I would assume that this could be immediately nominated for deletion or rollbacked, although I hesitate as I would rather read the guidelines a few times and ask for a third opinion than stomp all over people's well-intended contributions. Looking forward to your feedback. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 18:12, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As you pointed out, the user has stated that he has Asperbergers. This is, apparently, what compels the user to routinely ask multiple different people and the Help desk the same question. Any time he receives a helpful response from one person, this leads him to add that helpful person to a list of people he thinks it's okay to ask any question about in the future. He has been told many times not to ask multiple people the same question, but the message isn't getting through. I vaguely recall that he once said that if he doesn't receive an answer right away (which, of course, isn't possible on Wikipedia), he needs to ask someone else. In my opinion, the user is rapidly approaching the boundaries of WP:COMPETENCE and WP:NOTTHERAPY. While many editors, including myself, try to accommodate the idiosyncrasies of users, we do eventually have to draw a line and say "We understand you're trying to contribute helpfully, but it appears that you just aren't able to, our apologies". I'm going to send a query to Elen of the Roads, who is an admin and Arbcom member, who has interacted with him quite a lot, and has, recently, been showing signs stepping up warnings to him.

Regarding some of the other points....I went ahead and nominated that category for deletion--as I said on the deletion discussion page, with only 10,000 Jews in Peru, I find it highly unlikely that enough of them later emigrated to the US and also became notable enough to have articles for that category to ever be populated.

Regarding blanking of talk pages, it is okay for users to do so, even if they don't use archiving, per WP:BLANK. Some people, like myself, consider it to actually be a problem, especially for users receiving warnings/messages of concern, but it is part of our user page policy.

Regarding me...I do vandalism/recent changes patrol. I also have a fairly large watchlist, that includes a fair number of user talk pages. I'm not sure, but I think the first time became aware of Neptunekh2 is when I saw him post the exact same message on two different talk pages I stalk. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:14, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right, thanks for your detailed reply, starting by your last point, I would be inclined to agree about WP:BLANK, warnings and suchlike should have some sort of permanence as it's far too easy to just dismiss anything and evrything by blanking the page, when I started to look at the diffs of the talk page I was like "whoa, this person is a serious pain in the anatomy".

Good for the category, in fact could you look here, I'm not sure if I did this right as your deletion request shows up on the Categories for discussion board and mine doesn't, although I used Twinkle to nominate it for speedy deletion (considering this to be an unpopulated category and highly unlikely to ever have enough notable people to fill it). I posted some stuff on the talk page, should the user/creator be informed? I thought that they would automatically receive some sort of message?

Finally I noticed Elen of the Roads over on the help desk and elsewhere getting a bit irate with this person's posting of the same question to multiple places, probably a good thing to get them involved as they seem to have a lot of experience with this user. Cheers! CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 14:17, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi pet:) Thanks for trying to help Neptunekh out. There's nothing wrong with welcoming someone who appears to be a newbie - I'd rather err on the side of good faith most of the time. They (I think this editor is female, but I'm not 100% sure) have been around for a reasonable time, but I think part of the presentation of their Aspergers leads to a kind of Groundhog Day effect, and they keep forgetting they have been told something. The desire to categorise everything is I believe totally characteristic of the Autism spectrum, but they do come up with some doozies. If you read the questions, they are actually very nervous about getting reverted - but because they never remember what anyone said (would help if they didn't blank their talkpage - I'll try telling them again) they get it wrong loads of the time. I do get a bit irate - I'm not sure if they warrant any kind of action other than warnings, but they will probably contact you. If they do, check their contribs - they usually also post to helpdesk. Other than that, it's up to you if you want to continue answering, or if you think they are a bit of a nuisance and want to tell them to stop. Elen of the Roads (talk) 21:35, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the input, Elen. About the category, Captain Screebo, your way was fine. I actually nominated it for deletion using a CfD discussion (that's a slower, more involved process), while you used speedy deletion. For some reason, I was thinking that there wasn't an appropriate speedy deletion rationale, but you found it correctly. Both categories will likely be deleted, yours will just be deleted faster. Qwyrxian (talk) 21:44, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First off, thanks to both of you, I have started to come across editors who are willing to help, reply, assume good faith etc. and it makes the whole thing a lot less bewildering, and is frankly highly encouraging, as initially one can get the idea that Wikipedia is full of trolls, bad faith editors or just IP drive-by editors (as one editor with a Bugs Bunny style user name insisted on using in an ongoing dispute, where incivility and assume the other editor is an a*hole prevailed).

I do waste hours reading all of this archived stuff but then again I generally have a good laugh doing so, I think what came above might be from the Lamest edit wars that I read a couple of days ago.

Back to business, Elen, I kind of figured that this person, definitely she as defined by userbox but also hair is brunette, not a lot of guys go round saying "I'm a sexy brunette" ;-), had some sort of attention problem, I agree that this syndrome seems to manifest itself in an obsessive-compulsive disorder to classify things. I was actually planning to inform them that they had posted too much personal information in their user space and that I could quite probably identify them if I came to Vancouver, B.C., and hung out for a little while but this would seem to be futile as the person does not seem to take on board even the mildest of messages/warnings. Oh well, enthusiastic but misguided, what to do?

@Qwyrxian, great, on Wikipedia there always seem to be at least two ways of doing the same thing, see here, these were replies to a user on the help desk at the same time, so edit conflict, but basically are WP:RA and WP:AFC the same thing or not. Apparently, yes they do the same thing, but the pages and the processes are not the same? (I think both would be suitable though in this case?!?).

Tanks a lot, glad I got the CSD right, see you round. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 22:19, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No probs. I've just blocked someone for photoshopping actresses faces onto nudie pictures and adding them to articles, so I know what you mean about 'problem editors'. RA and AFC are slightly different - RA is 'why haven't you got an article on Foo', while AFC came in when anonymous editors lost the ability to create articles - they can contribute titles, sources even text, and have the article created for them by a registered editor. Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:28, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1. I just wanted to say the this link says Eli Wallach has polish and Jewish ancestry: http://www.nndb.com/people/735/000022669/ Should that be noted in his article? Thanks! 2. Would it be ok to list Alyson_Hannigan under Category:American_people_of_Jewish_descent since it says she is Jewish on her mother's side? 3. Also is it ok to list Josh_Keaton under Category:American_people_of_Peruvian-Jewish_descent since his parents are both Peruvian and Jewish? Please give your opinions on these questions. Neptunekh2 (talk) 12:47, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Commented out categories; replied at Wikipedia:Help_desk#People_of_Jewish_Descent. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 12:54, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Captain Screebo, I just clipped some of your text from your entry on the mojo gurus as it violates quite a few guidelines. (just to name a couple). Even if the gentleman you responded to is not who he says he is, it doesn't matter. Please don't repost that. Thanks 16:49, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but I think you are being a bit over the top and totally misunderstood what I posted. I really don't think that pointing at all those policies is very useful either, in particular when you don't sign your posts, as is indicated to be good practice per WP:TALK.

I posted that I was tired and off to bed (almost 1 a.m.) and this was an attempt at humour, it is not a personal attack on the OP or the writer(s) of the article, it is about the content and presentation of the article and not the contributor(s), did you bother to take a look? I did add WP:SPADE in my defence. Maybe I should have worded it "looks like it was written by a chimpanzee"?

I am not trying to bite anyone, and referring to the person as Mister was a sign of respect, recognizing the fact that the person has probably been informed of COI and has had the intelligence to come to the right place instead of just editing away about themselves.

So a late-night attempt at humour, maybe a bit flippant, but no biting or personal attacks going on here. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 17:22, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't troll my talk page, it is very immature. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 19:02, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Captain Screebo. You appear to have violated 3RR, per WP:AN3#User:Captain Screebo reported by Mtking (talk) (Result: ). If you would add a comment there and agree to take a break from the article from a period of time (e.g. one week), and from any other articles about Strauss-Kahn, an admin might close the report with no action. EdJohnston (talk) 16:03, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have fully replied over at the AN3 with detailed reasons for why I think these reverts were exempt under BLP, that I was only trying to maintain consensus as expressed by at least 8 editors (against three persistent trivia-hounds), that I appealed for other editors to come over, no-one came so I was left on my own (all through my night) for 5 hours and so on. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 11:07, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. See here. FatTrebla (talk) 10:04, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The age of Chibiusa of Sailor_Moon in the manga should be mentioned in her article. I found a source that talks about her different ages in manga: Chibiusa goes through several different designs in the manga as she grows up, but she's almost always wearing some school uniform or another. She's also unusually short for her age, a point that you notice when she hangs around with anyone from her class. When Chibiusa first shows up she's in fourth grade at Juuban Elementary. During the Death Buster's arc she's elected class president of the fifth grade, and at the beginning of the Galaxia arc she and Hotaru are both in sixth grade (classes 1 and 3, respectively). Here's the source: http://www.chibimoon.net/mangaforms.html Neptunekh2 (talk) 20:41, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) You've been told that you have to ask this at the article's talk page. I see you did that on 19 May. You must now wait for someone there to discuss it. Sorry, but that's the way it works--sometimes, on Wikipedia, things take time. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:36, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Neptunekh2, you may not remove other people's comments from talk pages that are not your own. Generally, you shouldn't even remove your own comments, because then if makes conversations not make sense. If Captain Screebo wishes to remove this section, xe may do so, but you may not.

Re [1]: This was done semi-automatically by AWB, as the software must have considered the article to be sufficiently wikified. As I'm checking around 500 links each evening, I don't have the time to go into the background of every page to verify each change, but put my trust in the software. This does lead to occasional mistakes, so if I do mess it up, please let me know so that I can avoid making the same mistake the following day (each link generally gets checked a few times before it's actually on the main page). Many thanks. —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 18:32, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, no problem, I'm planning to put my name on the AWB list so I'll get to see how it works soon enough.

I assumed it was a good faith removal, if you see the talk page here you'll see why I put the wikify tag. In fact I have come across a lot of articles about Japanese anime, Muslim law and now the Mongol Empire where people absolutely do not follow the WP:MoS concerning capitalization, italics for foreign words not in mainstream English, italics for book/film titles and so on. Sometimes you'll get the foreign word italicized in certain sections of the article and not others. This drives me a bit nutty because it is visually sloppy, it's one of the first things that jumps off the page at me. Anyway, I slapped the tag on as ancient Mongolian is not really my speciality so I'm hoping one of the contributors to that page takes it to heart to clean it up. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 10:37, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will accept your help. But if you want me to leave Wikipedia, I'll leave. But If I stay on wikipedia I will use Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith. Neptunekh2 (talk) 21:32, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, great! you replied. Thank you, as I said, nobody wants you to leave, people would just like you to channel your (immense) energy into positve contributions and not stuff that's just going to get deleted (and use up other editor's time instead of improving the encyclopaedia).

There are several people involved, did you read the discussion at the Admin noticeboard concerning you? Elen, Qwyrxian, Blade and myself like you and think you mean well but sometimes get it wrong. Only, when we try to tell you what's not right or why this information can't be included you don't seem to listen.

Okay, enough for now, who would you accept to help you? User:The Blade of the Northern Lights has offered to mentor you, Elen is a bit overworked, we would like to see you transform into a great Wikipedia editor, do you have a preference? (Random fact: I used to live in New Brunswick when I was a teenager). CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 21:50, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to echo you above; I'd love to be of whatever assistance I can be. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 22:04, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Blade, cool, I guess we just missed each other, I was over on your talk but the most important thing is Neptune we want you to stay and contribute positively to Wikipedia. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 22:20, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I created 2 article about a city in Sierra_leone called Ballowharf and a mountain in Peru called Pitusiray. Both articles need work on them. Neptunekh2 (talk) 00:22, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm posting once and 3 questions day on Blade's page. I'm not posting all over the place anymore. Thanks! Neptunekh2 (talk) 21:25, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, good faith editor, there is other stuff but let's say for now that's great! CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 21:47, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Captain Screebo, for your recent helpful copyediting to the article, Santorum (neologism). Much appreciated. ;) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 14:21, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, always something new and surprising to read/edit in the wierd world of Wikipedia. :) CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 16:05, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And, hey, it was only moving a comma ;-) CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 17:22, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you have been involved in a discussion about the example of Eskimo/Inuit on Wikipedia:Categorization/Ethnicity, gender, religion and sexuality. I have simply removed this example from that page, and so resolved the issue. Debresser (talk) 11:15, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Very good, in fact, looking through the talk page archives I found that this discussion had already sort of taken place but I'm glad you removed it as it is not a clear-cut example. Eskimo is considered offensive by most Inuit, but Alaskan first nations people prefer Eskimo even if some of them are Inuit. Go figure and good move! Cheers. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 19:45, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(linking) "There are exceptions ... where the links are in a table or in a list, as each table or list should stand on its own with its own independent set of links. But, of course, within each list only the first occurence should be linked" Imgaril (talk) 22:51, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good, nice to know, I didn't have time to look for further information, but it was æsthetically unpleasing to just see the red links, much better and I wikilinked Alstom at the end of the business structure list so that all of the subsidiaries are linked to from that section. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 09:35, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

diff yes that looks right now.Imgaril (talk) 14:52, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Chzz  ►  23:34, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CaptainScreebo: Saeed while appreciating that you have a lot of enthusiasm for the subject and, quite possibly, a lot of knowledge, I would suggest that you make major edits/improvements(?) to the article in your userspace and ask someone to verify them there before sending them live. I have just spent the afternoon copyediting the small section, Physics#History, that you copyedited. I initially was going to reply to you about CAPITALS, see my edits or this article; disciplines, theories or beliefs do not take capitals unless they are at the beginning of the sentence (first word) or they contain someone's name, e.g. Newton's constant. To copyedit correctly:

• you need to understand some basic rules, like the one above;
• also you cannot cite Wikipedia as a source for itself;
• you need to learn how to format refs properly (see the talk page for two refs I removed as they just referred back to the article itself);
• it would be good to read the articles that connect to your subject to try to have the same tone, facts and so on;
• if you make a list and then bullet point it, the headings of your (bullet-pointed) list should match those that you have mentioned just beforehand and so on.

Please do not make further edits to this page without discussing here or on the talk page, and I would strongly advise you to make a draft in your userspace first. Thanks. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 16:43, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Saeed: Dear Captain Screebo. Hi.

"quite possibly, a lot of knowledge"

I have no knowledge. but I have studied a few years, so that I can someday improve this article.

About the useful info and advice on copy editing. I can use them.

You are right. I thought the names of science fields are "names", and must be capital. I should've checked it in another article.

You are right. I shouldn't cite Wikipedia. I should link to it.

And not just these. I am a man full of mistakes. But I am also...

present.

able to learn.

able to avoid future mistakes.

able to correct my past mistakes.

"I have just spent the afternoon..."

That's why no one can continue to help me. It takes time. I've spent three years. a few more weeks is no problem if the artlcle becomes a "good article" again.

"I have just spent the afternoon copyediting the small section, Physics#History, that you copyedited."

Really thanks. But in none of us would copyedit it, It would be like this: no ref, no structure, no separation between Philosophy, astronomy and physics, no equal paragraph length for each time period, no global point of view, no understanding of the development of methodology, and no new information for anyone who reads it. It was a c-class section. but now it's better.

I'll try to be responsible, learn, correct, and not repeat my mistakes. but making no mistakes = leaving the article in a full of mistake state.

"I would suggest that you make major edits/improvements(?) to the article in your userspace and ask someone to verify them there before sending them live."

"Someone" is the key word:

1. I have asked three people for review. All of them eventually left.
2. It's hard to find anyone interested.
3. There seems to be no one to help. Just take a look at the article history page. No one seriously edits this article. this article deserves more attension. If it's not getting it, that's because it's a hard to edit article. It neeeeeeeeds study. I have done that study, and I have been bothered seeing the article remaining in the same state for years.
4. If no one is going to help, why not me?
5. If you accept to help, I'll do it.

Thanks, --Saeed 20:24, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CaptainScreebo:

Please do not change the article again.
Let's ask Qwyrxian what he thinks of the changes.
Even if man used astrology, mythology and religion to understand the universe initially, this is a science article and you putting mythology back in is original research and POV.

Wikipedia has rules, I study mythology, spirituality and so on and am deeply interested in Oriental philosophy, mysticism = Siva, Taoism and so forth, but Wikipedia has rules, so I cannot say "the Universe spoke to me last night so incarnate intelligence exists", this is considered original research until it is backed up by verifiable sources.

Also, a sentence like: "For example, see atomism" is not correct English and not suitable for an encyclopaedia as a proper sentence, a sentence has a subject and a verb. You are obviously not a native English speaker, and this is nothing to hold against you, but for the moment, slow down, or you will find yourself being blocked for disruption. I am willing to help but you cannot equivocally make changes like you just did,[2], unlink perfectly good wikilinks and so on. It shows that you do not (fully) understand what you are doing. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 20:39, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Saeed:

"Slow down"

Ok. I'll REALLY slow down.

"Let's ask Qwyrxian what he thinks of the changes."

I have already bothered him enough

Asking a third person is good for a hard to solve discussion. I'm ready to accept your ideas if we can't come to a common conclusion.

If you think that's really vital, go on.

I'm online right now. so we can speed up the discussion: Saeed.Veradi@yahoo.com. I have gmail, live, ... accoutns too. just tell me what you prefer.

--Saeed 20:47, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CaptainScreebo: Saeed, it is 11 o'clock at night here, I have been editing wP on and off for about 10 hours, there is no reference about mythology, I am trying to explain to you the workings of WP and verifiability and so on. This is a science article, you need to have a book which says "man's perception of the Universe, initially influenced by mythology and religion, progressivelly discovered philosophy which led to bla bla bal", which you don't.

I'm logging off, but I am willing to help if you slow down and ask for advice/help first. I have to sleep, feed my chickens, visit my daughter tomorrow and so on. Speak to you soon. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 20:57, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Saeed:

"I am trying to explain to you the workings of WP and verifiability and so on. This is a science article and you putting mythology back in is original research and POV."

That's not original research. This is the reference: "Pre-Socratic philosophers like Thales refused supernatural, religious or mythological explanations for natural phenomena and proclaimed that every event had a natural cause. Singer, C. A Short History of Science to the 19th century. Streeter Press, 2008. p. 35.

"I am willing to help if you slow down and ask for advice/help first"

There is no hurry. and I definitely need your advice and help.

"Speak to you soon."

Then please read this carefully. I spent three hours to write it, and it clarifies many things.

Thanks, --Saeed 23:29, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CaptainScreebo: Saeed, it does not say "physics evolved from x which evolved from y which evolved from z which evolved from man's attempt to understand the universe through religion and mythology" so it is synthesis, it is OR, and please stop hassling people, you will be reported and get blocked if you are not willing to listen to what people are trying to tell you. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 21:05, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Saeed:

"It does not say "physics evolved from x which evolved from y which evolved from z which evolved from man's attempt to understand the universe through religion and mythology" so it is synthesis" Here is more direct references with no synthesis:

It wasn't my edit. It existed in the previous versions of the section, like this.

It's not POV. It's not original research. It's not even synthesis. The evolution process you just mentioned has been deliberately discussed in every book about history of phylosophy that starts with pre-Socratic phylosophers.

I can bring a lot of reference for such a highly popular topic. even if I couldn't, it's more rational to use the ^{[citation needed]} tag instead of reverting edits without reference.

Examples of references for the claim. Please read carefully.

• Bryan Magee, The story of phylosophy, . It explains this evolution process in full detail. especially read: Thales, From Copernicus to Newton, Francis bacon, and the whole 20 century chapter. I can bring quotations from the book if you like.
• Jostein Gaarder, Sophie's world, A story about history of phylosophy, ISBN 0297858815, 9780297858812. In the second chapter of So, the writer explains in detail, brings sufficient examples, and lists many other examples of "man's attempt to understand the universe through religion and mythology". In the chapter three, he explains how philosophy was evolved from mythology.
• Kathryn A. Morgan, From myth to phylosophy (click to read), page 30: "from myth to logos?". It criticizes the usual theory of "From myth to logos". but it doesn't completely reject it as you did. In fact it ensures us that such a theory is necessary.
• Frank Reynolds and David Tracy, Myth and philosophy (Click to read). It's a very popular textbook among scholars and students of this field. Page 95 talks about Myth, religion and Phylosophy in ancient Greek.
• Myth and philosophy, Lawrence J. Hatab Page 293 can also be useful.
• There are many more sources for mythos & logos theories. I wonder why it has no Wikipedia article. It's such a hot topic. If you read some of Plato's and Aristotle's writings in random you'll find them "not myth-free". It's in fact full of mythical characters and ancient Greek gods, and even some supernatural explanations. what remains myth-free is just their core theories.

"you will be reported and get blocked if you are not willing to listen to what people are trying to tell you."

Am I not listening? you spent 10 hours editing Wikipedia until 11 at night. I spent six hours answering you in your talk page untill four in the morning (take a look at signature times). Don't you think that I "read" your text before I quote it and think about replying? Please be optimistic.

Blocked? Take a look at my user-page. I'm a "retired" Wikimedian.

--Saeed 23:29, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Qwirxian: One small note (will try to look at article later): you can't hide behind the "retired" banner to keep from following policies. I mentioned before that you (Saeed) should probably be very wary of making such drastic changes; what may well happen is that someone may just revert your whole, hard work, since its too much at once. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:33, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Saeed: Policies are ok. Slow change is ok. Being reverted is ok. being blocked is ok. and I don't edit Physics until my discussion with captainScreebo comes to a conclusion.

You (Qwyrxian) added two citation-needed tags to the article. here (above) are five references for that. We are just discussing whether they are reliable and synthesis free before adding them to the article.

Qwyrxian:Is there a reason you're refactoring the posts to use a non-standard method (putting the person's name at the beginning and not using indentation? Qwyrxian (talk) 08:53, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Saeed: No. I would use the cite book template in the article. The fields would auto arrange. --Saeed 11:32, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes all that is true. There were numerous Godzilla projects that never were. The only one thats wrong is Godzilla vs The Devil. That was misinformation that has been spread for years from an old article in Japanese Giants. You can read about it here http://www.tohokingdom.com/articles/art_toho_busters.htmGiantdevilfish (talk) 15:34, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	For lifting the corner of the rug, leading to the identification of a mass of now indefblocked PR accounts and deleted promotional articles that were abusing Wikipedia's charitably donated resources. NIce work :) EyeSerenetalk 16:34, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit at AN/I removed a new section I added. I have therefore undone your edit; you may wish to re-add your comment. RichardOSmith (talk) 13:41, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, it wasn't deliberate, I think there was some sort of server bug as I had an edit conflict and just took my text and added it back before the section before yours (which didn't appear I don't think). So I didn't remove anything and it would have been preferable to add my comment back yourself but now it's too late. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 09:59, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why did u delete the page,it's valuable and contains reliable sources — Preceding unsigned comment added by DS success (talk • contribs) 00:38, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
:Um is this the same person? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Okasha24.0.133.234 (talk) 17:12, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not. Thanks for asking. The psychiatrist would appear to meet notability guidelines even if the article could do with some major improvements. Cheers! CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 11:40, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

what the errors did u notice to fix it? u should tell me don't delete it suddenly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DS success (talk • contribs) 01:31, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Antisemitic remark going unpunished regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Debresser (talk • contribs) 8:15, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Talk page etiquette requires that people sign their comments, thank you. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 12:32, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! I'm not sure if you remember, but you requested an article (Archaic Greece) to be copyedited at the Guild of Copy Editors. Sorry for the delay, but I'll be copyediting the article, so you shouldn't have to wait much longer.--Slon02 (talk) 18:02, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Captain Screebo. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Archaic Greece at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome!

I see you've also reverted Dannymex. For info, I've found he is cut'n'pasting text from other websites. Wee Curry Monster talk 12:17, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey look, links to Twitter accounts and YouTube and MySpace pages here, here, here, here, more, still more. The world is coming to an end!! Call the WikiCops!!! Delete! Delete! Delete! Why do you have such a hard-on for this Watts guy? What did he do to you? I revised the entry and since then the AfD consensus has been positive except for you (repeatedly) and one other member. This kid is busting his ass to get his music heard and you sit behind a computer and sanctimoniously deem him unworthy of anything but a couple of lines? Where is YOUR neutrality? Choreboy (talk) 19:06, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He's not NOTABLE, that's all, folks! Try reading the guidelines and stop using Wikipedia as a free promotional tool, hmm sanctimoniously, personal attack methinks, you want to see my neutrality I'll send you a photo if you want, you are so UNobvious, getout of my face, thanks. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 23:57, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I would just add CAN YOU READ? go read the relevant Wiki policies, WP:RS, WP:BLP, WP:MUSICBIO, WP:GNG etc. I didn't invent these, there is a horriblle man called Jimmy Wales who appears to be responsible for all of this reprehensible internet fascism, let's do him, instead! CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 00:01, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have still not deleted the links to external social media sites on these entries: here, here, here, here, more, still more. Better get cracking! Why are 50 and Bieber, et al, allowed Twitter, etc. and others aren't? I can't find in the relevant links WP:RS, WP:BLP, WP:MUSICBIO, WP:GNG it says some are allowed to fudge the policies but up and coming artists aren't. Choreboy (talk) 18:49, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, go to it, I just had Avery Watts on my watchlist, if 50 and Bieber's pâges breach the rules go delete their external links to Twitter accounts etc. I am not a Wikipedia-wide enforcer, this is a collaborative project, I don't make the rules either and it would be totally impossible for one person to watch the 3,000,000+ articles. This is not a personal vendetta so don't make a mountain out of a molehill. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 13:19, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The complete deletion of my Richard Santulli edits that you made was unwarranted. The sources are reliable, it is not an orphan article and accusing me of being a PR hack is very serious accusation. If you want to contend with certain facts that is what User talk is for but you can't just go in and delete a well written and well documented Wiki entry. I can show you numerous entries that pale in comparison into the facts I put in. This article is no more self serving then Eli WallachMonstermike99 talk 11:53, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New heading or indent of previous post? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.25.107.153 (talk) 12:15, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The section heading problem began in [3] which should have started with ==. The "New section" tab automatically does that but the poster didn't use it. See more at Help:Section. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:05, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Test after correcting level of section headings - David Biddulph (talk) 12:38, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! You corrected me here. Now the text is more encyclopedic, for sure, but it's not what actually happened. :) Please watch the music video and change it to mean that the two groups were "digitally put together" to appear performing together on stage. Also, by "following the success" I wanted to say that the Berryz' single was a success, so they released a follow-up version, so you may reword it too. And there's one more thing - it always sounds strange to me when people call Japanese idol groups "all-male" or "all-female", cause idol groups can't be gender-mixed. The closest English term for an female idol group is girl group, that's why I prefer to use it. Moscowconnection (talk) 09:38, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Exok objects to the closure of the discussion about whether to split Jeremy Bamber into two articles — one about the murders and one a biography. He has requested that I make a formal proposal to split the articles on the talk page. I'm very sorry to ask this, but it would be appreciated if everyone who commented at the BLPN here could offer their opinion again at Talk:Jeremy_Bamber#Proposal_to_split_this_article_into_a_murders_article_and_a_biography. (Also, for some reason, that link isn't going directly to the subsection, so please scroll up a little to find it.) Many thanks, SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 21:42, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you kindly, I know that you watch this article too, have just finished for the evening, although some sections would need a good re-write. I have tried to prune back all the obvious "throw some more (unrelated) trivia in". Cheers! CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 18:54, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was a copyvio anyway eg http://www.bouygues.com/upload/pdf/discoverhistorybouygues%20group.pdf - In my experience any large unreferenced addition of text usually is.. (sadly).Mddkpp (talk) 21:08, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to find that too. Also, if it sounds like a book, it probably is - harder to pin down, though. Always worth dropping a bit of the text into Google in quotes to see what comes up. But beware of mirrors like MuseumStuff. Peridon (talk) 17:40, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Only applies to something deleted after discussion - AfD, MfD, RfD. Not CSD or PROD. Deleted CSD usually means it's going to be deletable, but not always. It's a common mistake, that one. If you do find one that's been XfDed, it's a good idea to list it on the tag or on the talk page - especially if it's not the same title. Peridon (talk) 17:35, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Darkness Shines (talk) 22:50, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello CS. I saw your edit summary here [4] and it brought a smile to my face. If you were referencing this songs When the Boat Comes In (song) alternative lyrics then you are the first person that I have come across who knows it. I learned it by watching the TV series of many moons ago. Even if you know it from somewhere else this is a fun coincidence. Cheers and happy editing to you. MarnetteD | Talk 22:56, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, smiles all round then, as this rather unusual tp post is making me chuckle quietly inside. Indeed, I have the tune going round in my head, and I am quite amazed to learn that this is some sort of retrograde memory from my 1970s childhood, I actually just assumed it was a folk song that I knew from a long time ago, and have no recollection at all that it was a TV series. Strange and amusing coincidence, indeed (oh I do like that word). Incidentally, what part of the world are you from? Did you grow up in the UK or did you learn it "from afar"? CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 23:05, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My learning did indeed come from afar as I grew up, and still live in, Colorado. I have been a long time fan of British TV. I have memories of The Avengers and The Prisoner from my young days but it was The Six Wives of Henry the Eighth that got me hooked properly. When I was in college in the late 70s our PBS station (in addition to Masterpiece Theatre and Mystery!) would show various series at 10pm every evening. It was a great way to unwind at the end of the day and that is where I saw When the Boat Comes In. A few years ago I bought a region free DVD player and started adding to my collection by purchasing series like that one, which has never been made available here, from Amazon UK. As to the use of the song they played the first couple stanzas over the opening credits and am abridged version of the rest over the closing ones. It is a pleasure to meet you and I hope that you have a nice rest of your week on wiki and off. MarnetteD | Talk 01:25, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great, just a hunch but turns out to be right. Grew up in the 70s so The Prisoner was a bit before my time, although saw the re-runs, loved The New Avengers with Purdey and was a big science-fiction fan, Doctor Who (of course), UFO, Blake's 7, classic comedy like Fawlty Towers, Some Mothers Do 'Ave 'Em or The Fall and Rise of Reginald Perrin, oh dear, this has set off a flood of memories. Funnily enough, back in the UK at Xmas, I picked up a box set of one of your country's great sci-fi shows Lost in Space. And am still amused by the When the Boat Comes In thing that set this all off. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 21:52, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sharing your memories. Reggie Perrin is one of the all time greats (well season one and two anyway - three felt like Reggie had merged with The Good Life and I kept waiting for Tim and Barbara to pop in) and, when I was in London in the summer of 1980, I went to see this play [5] because Rossiter and Prunella Scales names were on the marquee. My DVD player has allowed me rewatch many other series unavailable in the US including Tenko, By the Sword Divided and all of David Attenborough's The Life Collection. It is always nice to meet people with similar interests so I will cheers and best wishes to you on wiki and off. MarnetteD | Talk 00:12, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New I left out one memory. One of the actors that who impressed me in Six Wives... was Patrick Troughton so I was excited when I learned that he had played the second Dr in Dr Who (we didn't get to start watching that gem until the 1980's) and, when I got to meet him at the 20th anniversary convention in Chicago, he told me that his first role after DW was as the Duke of Norfolk in Six Wives! MarnetteD | Talk 00:25, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great stuff indeed, a very charismatic person I imagine, my first memories are of John Pertwee, Doctor #3, but have you seen The Three Doctors, in which all three doctors feature? I remember this quite well. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 00:36, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Three Doctors is an anniversary tradition for me. I was lucky enough to meet Pertwee and Lis Sladen at a smaller convention here in Denver in the summer of 83. I hope the upcoming weekend is full of pleasant times for you. MarnetteD | Talk 00:48, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Captain Screebo, I understand that you felt that my edits for the page SMS Language were too long and cluttered up the pages. I assure you that it is not my intention to vandalise the page if that is what you thought. Sorry if I messed up the page as I am quite new to editing wikipedia pages. I also completely understand if you feel that the page is already good enough as it is as sometimes, too much information can make an article less easy on the eyes. However,we would be very grateful if you will allow us to retain those edits. Sorry for making this unreasonable request, but in the meantime, we will also try our best to make our edits less confusing. If you are still feel that the edits are bad, you can revert it as you feel is appropriate. We will be very grateful if you can consider our request. Thank you very much! Also, as I said, I am new to this, may I ask if I am supposed to discuss on the talk page first before making major edits as such to ask if others think that it is fine? --Emtan1 (talk) 03:17, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am replying at your talk page but you should know that Wikipedia is not a playground for racking up the most edits to get better marks for your project. Information needs to be relevant, verifiable and written in an encyclopaedic style. Also please see Wikipedia:Copyvio as I get the impression that you have just lifted whole passages from the books that you are using as references, which is expressly forbidden as it infringes copyright laws. I am looking into this.

I do not want to appear harsh but if the information is not suitable then, no, it cannot stay on this website until your assignment is over and it will be removed immediately. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 13:09, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Captain Screebo,now that the lead for the page has been shortened and moved to the content, is it ok for me to to add in those sections that I wanted to add in previously? I have checked through all of them to ascertain that they do not violate copyrights and I truly feel that those sections are relevant to the page and people interested in sms language. In the first place I did not edit the lead much anyway so if that is one of your main concerns, this should not be the case anymore as those sections are going into the content part and not the lead. In the event that you should still feel that those sections are unsuitable, I would appreciate it very much indeed if you could explain exactly which and what part is objectionable or not to your liking and I will be glad to make the changes before adding them to the page :) Thanks a lot! Emtan1 (talk) 03:21, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! 1615 Top 10 hits. The band does have lots and lots of "reliable third party coverage in reliable sources". Come back in a few hours. :) I didn't really want to do it, cause the article 1. is bad, 2. will never be deleted anyway. And I just recently corrected the discography links, so it's just not right what you did. :) Moscowconnection (talk) 18:07, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've finished adding references. (Yes, I know the writing is not good and the article doesn't have a flow, it's mostly bits and pieces taken from the news, but it's much better than before.) You should understand that j-pop and k-pop articles are mostly written either by non-English natives or by schoolchildren, so you should assume good faith. If you compare before and after, you'll see that there were only minor factual errors. All the facts in the section you marked as "unreferenced" have proven to be true. Moscowconnection (talk) 19:39, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And I undid your edits (when you just completely removed the Bibliography and Concerts sections), sorry. The info is on their website and is easily verifiable. I'm going to move these sections to the Berryz discography article, though. Cause now I think they clutter the article unnecessary. Moscowconnection (talk) 19:39, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved Performances and Bibliography. Moscowconnection (talk) 20:15, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've also put the discography links back, sorry. :) I understand that the articles about singles are mostly unreferenced, and I appreciate the fact that you didn't put them for deletion, you just deleted the links. I plan to be slowly adding sources there too. If you look at the Berryz Kobo article history, people do care about the section, so it's not like noone needs the links. Also, they facilitate navigation a lot. I'm gonna create an article for the upcoming single, so I need it to be noticed, too. :) Moscowconnection (talk) 20:56, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

for the cleanup on my talk page. I'm going to go with vandalism on that one.  :) Either that or the editor just felt I would enjoy some random quotes. Having no history with that editor, I'll call it vandalism. Thanks! Wikipelli ^Talk 09:06, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, no problems, couldn't really make head nor tail of the motivations, the only thing I can see is this FeedbackDashboard where your name features prominently as #1 responder, but as to why? CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 11:02, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Playing with the new toys, I expect. :) Wikipelli ^Talk 11:16, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ho-hum, ;-) CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 11:19, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You dump all over me, dig in my trash to find a template from 2010, make preposterous presumptions about WP:IDHT, claim that an encyclopædia does not require formal writing, use red herrings to show me how you reckon things oughtta be done, and to top all that – threaten to go to a noticeboard because you don't like wasting time (which is precisely what going to noticeboards is for the most part). Charming to have met you, Captain. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 19:21, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) if you've lost track of that line, Hearfourmewesique, turn around... it's just there behind you. If you disagree with an action or stance of an editor, be civil and talk about it. You don't gain anything with sarcasm and name calling. Just an observation. Wikipelli ^Talk 22:18, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if someone hit you on the head with a blunt object, would you react by politely pointing out that a terrible misunderstanding had occurred and you would like to discuss the matter? Just an observation.

• P.S. Incivility comes in many shapes and forms, and I too may have weaknesses. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 07:59, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly? Yes, I would. :) I just think the profanity/name-calling is unnecessary and unproductive. Just my take on it. Wikipelli ^Talk 13:22, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Captain, thanks for getting involved with the Robin Ficker article. I've restored the previous, long-term consensus, specifically including the term "heckler", and updated the talk page and Trainhead's talk page . We'll see how it goes from here. -- Pemilligan (talk) 00:24, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh okay, great, no worries. You saw from my comments that I totally agree with your pov and what would be consensus that the guy is famous as a heckler. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 17:00, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Things aren't improving. Any ideas what to do next? Seek protection from anonymous edits maybe? -- Pemilligan (talk) 02:28, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, oh dear, this is becoming problematic, I spent some time investigating, the result is this: administrators' noticeboard report, within which you'll find a link to the page protection request as well. Hope this helps, all those different IPs locate to Ficker's county in Maryland (except one). CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 15:46, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. -- Pemilligan (talk) 05:26, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll work on this sometime.

I'd just like to say, I've disambiguated everything in the lists. You're welcome Capitan!Ncboy2010 (talk) 15:12, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi thanks, didn't check all, you missed one Vulcan link so I fixed it, and I linked to the Starship Enterprise article in your List of fictional extraterrestrial humanoids. Cheers! CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 08:45, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's all good. I'd just like to say that most (if not all) of the links came from lists I transcluded and split from larger articles. Ncboy2010 (talk) 12:39, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, no worries. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 15:28, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

hello sorry if its been you that ive been semi battling with on the wiki page changing "heckler". i do not agree with that word there and believe that the descriptive areas involving sports should be the only places it says heckler.

the fact is he has been punished enough by this word so much that he has not been to a game in over 14 years. so why i ask is it a accurate description of himself as he is today.

i feel it is not accurate to make something a man was labeled for 14 years ago what is focused on as the main description of him.

what do you think sir? is there a compromise we may come to on this. you are doing what you believe and i am now showing you the logic from my end, will you deny or argue please and if you can make me see more your way then vice versa i will gladly give in. if not we can continue i feel is my duty. no offense and good day to you. i hope to hear from you soon.

ty,

````mathew — Preceding unsigned comment added by Msin147 (talk • contribs) 20:23, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please take this to the talk page, there are four editors (myself included) that you can discuss this with if you feel so inclined. Your personal sentiment has no sway on the matter, your statements are factually incorrect, this article from 2010 describes him as a "heckler" attending wrestling matches, and your personal opinion that he has been 'punished' enough by this term counts for nothing. Are you a mind-reader or his therapist, for example? CaptainScreebo <sup>Parley!</sup> 09:30, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		The Modest Barnstar
		Thanks for your recent contributions! 66.87.0.179 (talk) 20:37, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello Captain Screebo. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click HERE to participate. Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 00:13, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Congratulations, Captain Screebo, for making over 1,000 edits to articles on English Wikipedia! Thank you for all the amazing work you've done to improve the encyclopedia, and here's to hoping there's lots more great work to come :) Maryana (WMF) (talk) 19:43, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Captain Screebo, Neymar page has 'future attributes' which cannot be placed under 'outside football'. I have only tried to make the page better. User talk:Cyber17 —Preceding undated comment added 23:17, 15 April 2012 (UTC).[reply]

• I am reporting you to ANI, you keep changing things that are fine and well referenced, leave them alone. The talk page of the article is the place for any discussions. CaptainScreebo <sup>Parley!</sup> 23:21, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cyber, this is correct. Please stop reverting. Drmies (talk) 00:29, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If the Neymar page is "well referenced", explain why cite note 60, appears as a 'Template' and does not contain any information on the matter its referencing. All of the information I've added has improved the Neymar, because if you scroll back before October 2011, you will that the page was short. Since, what ever I've added has been referenced and written well. Also, AMI, the quote under Future Attributed is neither written well or referenced, not to mention the quote of Diego Maradona does not appear on anywhere else on the net. Shouldn't Captain Screebo be reported for being negligible, repeatedly 'undoing' the correction that I have made time and time again. I may have been not neutral with my edits, but that is no reason for being called "ridiculous", I made a mistake but I will continue learning the rules of Wikipedia and will continue editing page such as Neymar. User talk:Cyber17. —Preceding undated comment added 16:49, 16 April 2012 (UTC).[reply]

• Well, one of the things you added in this edit (to the lead!) was "He was discovered by me on Football Manager several years ago." I really don't wish to explain what that is not acceptable. This source clearly says £20m, not £18m, so your change was incorrect, and I'm puzzled as to why you would change that. Drmies (talk) 17:19, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cyber you are being deliberately obtuse, as Drmies points out the source for the Chelsea offer says £20m not £18m, that's what I mean when I say that you are changing things that are well-referenced. Ridiculous refers to (as noted on the article talk page) "your peacock-termed opinion of the guys footballing skills ("who possesses blistering pace, exceptional dribbling") and ... ungrammatical changes to the text, like removing verb auxiliaries, or ... the definition of what Peixe represents". As to whatever I've added has been written well, please explain how:

• which (has), in the past, produced Brazilian internationals like (is well written, after you continually remove the "has", obviously you don't understand the use of the present perfect)
• Neymar made his professional debut on 7 March 2009, only 17 years old he was brought on for the last thirty minutes (this is better English than "Neymar made his professional debut on 7 March 2009, despite being only 17 years old; he was brought on for the last thirty minutes ...)
• having ended the 2010 season with an impressive 42 goals in 60 games, problems had been idntified (is better than "having ended the 2009-10 season with an impressive 42 goals in 60 games, problems had appeared", the football season runs from 2009 to 2010, no it doesn't in fact, it runs from May to December, if you actually tried communicating it would be helpful, so that leaves just the obvious spelling mistake)

I have made no objections or remarks to your additions concerning "Media" or "Sponsorship" (yet), but apparently you don't understand Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, "a widely accepted standard that all editors should normally follow" or Wikipedia:PEACOCK, that I have tried to point you too, amongst others. CaptainScreebo <sup>Parley!</sup> 14:37, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is. There are others--HelloAnnyong, the MacDaddy/Mommy of SPIs, recently showed me a different tool which they said was superior. Drmies (talk) 18:25, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great, I take it that both are usable by non-admins like reflinks and whatnot? CaptainScreebo <sup>Parley!</sup> 18:38, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. I guess! Try it. See where we intersected. Perhaps you'll find that I'm you. Drmies (talk) 18:47, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I just love randomness, serendipity and chaos, I saw the post from Collect on your talk, we have interacted on 40 wierd and wonderful articles in mainspace, some I had to click on to remember who (or what) the heck they were, such as Assia Wevill, gosh really tragic.

BTW, you have some wierd reptiles around your way in the Netherlands, or have you been smoking too much Nederwiet and doing a Hunter S. Thompson? CaptainScreebo <sup>Parley!</sup> 19:12, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest you to go through category:Electro-hop songs, category:Electro-hop artists, category:Electro-hop musicians and reclassify the articles properly. Staszek Lem (talk) 00:13, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, thanks, i tried to do some cleaning yesterday as the user HiddenStranger has been going on sprees of putting loads of artists into the category as "proof" that it exists ;-) CaptainScreebo <sup>Parley!</sup> 17:11, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In one section of a current AfD discussion you wrote, "You're deliberately twisting the policy to suit your own ends." When I objected, and tried to continue the discussion with you on a substantive basis, you wrote, "You must be paranoid or something" and suggested that I don't understand English. I believe administrators would see the first as a personal attack, and the second as a substantial escalation.

Do I really need to explain why? You're entitled to your opinion that my view misrepresents policy, and you're entitled to express that opinion. But to accuse another editor of deliberate misrepresentation − just a hair's breadth away from lying, after all − is completely unacceptable. It's fine to assume you're right; it's mind reading to assert that your interlocutor secretly agrees, and is deliberately making an argument he knows to be false, for self-serving motives. And I doubt you're a genuine mind reader, superpowers being so thin on the ground these days.

As to your perception that my objection was supercilious, yes, it was. That wasn't really intentional, but most people react with some form of disdain when falsely accused of deliberate misrepresentation. Nor is calling the person you're speaking with "paranoid" because he objects to being characterised as intentionally deceptive likely to win you his undying respect, either.

I'm requesting that you strike your "deliberately twisting the policy" sentence, and the entirety of the subsequent post you made at 17:21, 27 April 2012 UTC.  – OhioStandard (talk) 05:02, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as you've made almost 100 edits since I posted the above − including one to the section immediately below − but have not responed, I've asked for third-party assistance in addressing this. Please see the new section on this talk page entitled "Notice of Wikiquette Assistance discussion".  – OhioStandard (talk) 00:29, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I didn't respond was because I have better things to do on wiki than get into pointless squabbles. There was no personal attack, and accusing someone of a personal attack when there is none can be considered a personal attack.

I maintain that selectively quoting parts of a policy to convey the meaning one wishes is either a) intellectually dishonest or b) shows a lack of understanding of the English language.

Example "Ben & Jerry's manufacture ice-cream and became popular by offering surprising combinations of ice-cream and ingredients. For example, Strawberry Cheesecake, Cookie Dough or Chocolate Fudge Brownie ice-cream."

The point being (and what we disagree about), the "for example" just gives a selection of what is being mentioned precedently and does not purport to cover all the instances of what the previous sentence is referring to (as you maintain).

Finally, here is a personal attack from this talk page, to which I did not respond, as I did not wish to escalate it into drama, a kindly talk page stalker put the person in their place and drama for all and sundry was avoided. Maybe they have different standards in Ohio, or maybe I'm thicker skinned, but my initial comment is nowhere near calling you a liar, I could have used the term "cherrypicking" too, would that have been a personal attack too? No, it's my opinion about your behaviour in this particular instance, I am not saying "crook, liar, thief, fag" am I? Let's just drop it shall we? I would like to get on with editing and not get embroiled in ridiculous arguments, all because some people think Romney's dead dog and its one-time voyage on the roof of his car makes for encyclopaedic material. CaptainScreebo <sup>Parley!</sup> 11:02, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure? --SMS <sup>Talk</sup> 09:38, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. CaptainScreebo <sup>Parley!</sup> 09:42, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a line to indicate notability (with a ref). See talk of article. CaptainScreebo <sup>Parley!</sup> 11:36, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ahhh for pitty SAKE Mobile Forces Source is not a user mod of mobile forces its NOT IN any way related to Mobile Forces IT WAS JUST INSPIRED BY MOBILE FORCES nothing MORE do i haf to Leave 1000 notes on the page JuST BECAUSE SOMEBODY WONT read the "engine" part and think this cant be a user mod ITS A DIFFRENT ENGINE -_- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Filippro (talk • contribs) 14:09, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, quite, do you understand anything about Wikipedia's notability guidelines, or copyright issues (i.e. ripping off the logo and screenshot), or indeed that the game doesn't exist yet, and, finally, Wikipedia is not a blog, MySpace or some random web hosting service? CaptainScreebo <sup>Parley!</sup> 14:22, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

okey what did i do now ... yeah i got mad cuz of everyone thinking that Mobile Forces Source is eather Mobile Forces or a user mod ^^

but what did i do now ? i have copyright on MobileForcesSource.png :# and what did that u said was vandalism is i undone a edit from me that undone a edit from someone that acutally improved the language of the article -.- so what the hell did i do now. i just want to have a simple article about my game without someone constantly removing text from it and then it getting deleted automaticly 0_0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Filippro (talk • contribs) 18:07, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i tought wikipedia was a nice place i could write articles about stuff... not get Redirrected, not get flagged for inapropriate content, not get flagged for may not meet Wikipedia's general notability guideline, not get for speedy deletion.... ON EVERY THEING I MAKE WHAT DO I DO WRONG !? ?! Oh ya AND CONTINUE WHAT DISRUPTIVE EDITS !? If 1 Page(my page :D) iS A HUUUGE History of disruptive content .... You have no idea whats True Griefing -_- and Also mobile forces source beta's are available BUT YOU GUYS FLAGGED THE LINKS TO MY MOBILE FORCES SORUCE SITES -_- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Filippro (talk • contribs) 18:11, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

lol its so cute i cant resist ^^

i apreciate the work your doing but i dont get what im doing wrong ...

:D (talk) 18:17, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since you have not responded to my previous request on this talk page that you strike offensive comments you made in a current AfD discussion, I've opened a discussion thread about the matter at Wikiquette assistance.  – OhioStandard (talk) 00:29, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why was I accused of failing to notify JTBX when I notified him on his talk page at 10:22 28 April 2012? Did I do it incorrectly? --Ring Cinema (talk) 05:42, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, technically you did notify JTBX, only you didn't sign, [6], and you didn't link to the discussion or the page, [7], which seems a bit unfair, at least link to the page where you're reporting someone and let them know who you are. I will assume good faith and hope this was a simple oversight on your part. CaptainScreebo <sup>Parley!</sup> 10:30, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Technically? In fact, I notified him and I used the form provided correctly according to the instructions on the page. As far as I can tell, you accusation was completely unfounded and you should have known better. Am I overlooking something? --Ring Cinema (talk) 18:34, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm trying to tell you that if you had followed the instructions correctly, you would have placed {{subst:ANI-notice}} on his page, and he would have had a link to where the discussion was taking place, and talk page etiquette requires that you sign your comments. CaptainScreebo <sup>Parley!</sup> 18:44, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Screebo. Looks like one of your edits on the help desk overwrote one of mine (although to be fair, I was being a bit snarky, so there's no great loss). Just thought I'd give you a heads up in case something similar crops up with someone else's edits in future. Hope you're having a good weekend, Brammers (talk/c) 10:34, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, wasn't intentional, I've been getting a lot of server lag over the last 24 hours, sometimes I edit, hit send, and it takes about a minute for the page to reload, probably happened during a laggy edit. CaptainScreebo <sup>Parley!</sup> 11:39, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As per your request on WP:RFC/BOARD I added an RfC to the article talk page. You may want to watch that page for additional comments from other users. Coastside (talk) 13:33, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

In this issue:

• Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
• Research: The most recent DR data
• Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
• Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
• DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
• Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
• Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

--The Olive Branch 18:54, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Just a helpful bit about notability for music. When songs fail to meet the notability criteria, articles are generally redirected to the album. When albums fail to meet the criteria, they are redirected to the artist. If there is no existing article for the artist, the music article is speedy deleted. Hope this helps. There's generally little reason to send music to AFD, unless the article creator is not accepting the redirect and it needs discussion and salting. Hope this helps. Cindy(talk to me) 22:33, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would strongly suggest that you cool your jets. Ironholds (talk) 00:17, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Response to this here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Personal_group — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creativetechnologist (talk • contribs) 09:10, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Vice chancellor of a university is unquestionably notable by WP:PROF. I accordingly declined your speedy on Mufti Abul Qasim Nomani. Please also be aware that any claim to significance is enough to pass A7, so even if he were not actually notable by that provision, saying someone is head of any non-0trivial enterprise is a claim to importance, and could only be removed by prod or AFD. Speedy a7 is deliberately made bery weak in contrast to the requirements of WP:N. DGG ( talk ) 09:12, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Was Jerry Rawlings really helped by Togolese mercenaries on 28 May 1979, or is this the last filth from Mark Mysoe? DrMennoWolters (talk) 21:54, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Seeing the crusading, fixated nature of MM I would have serious doubts about any information that he inserted into the article here. I restored the infobox info and deleted the diffamatory categories, but I seriously doubt the stuff he has inserted into the main text. From what I can gather, if the people were not Akan ("true Ghanaians" according to MM) then he otherwise slurs them as being of the Ewe tribe, Togolese and so on.

BTW, you did the right thing posting at BLPN, several people reacted rapidly, resulting in an indef block of Mark Mysoe, if you weren't aware already. Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#MarkMysoe_blocked_indefinitely

So feel free to edit those articles knowing that the guy~'s blocked (watch out for similar style editing from IPs, block evasion, or new accounts editing in the same way, socking). Good luck. CaptainScreebo <sup>Parley!</sup> 12:29, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You did, of course, notice that the other editor is blocked for the exact same amount of time. By the way, you exact text on "fool" was "f**l" ... but none of us were fooled (✉→BWilkins←✎) 22:28, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Captain Screebo. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Starbucks (mixtape), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: not promotional. list at WP:AFD if you don't think WP:NALBUM is met. Thank you. SmartSE (talk) 21:38, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I notice that you have recently edited the information for Foulksrath Castle.

I recently added and edited this information but had all the edits etc removed.

One of the reasons I changed it was inaccurate information. You have not included some of this inaccurate information in your recent changes.

For example, you mention that the Purecels were evicted by Cromwell's men to live in the barn after living in the castle for three centuries. Cromwell's campaign in Ireland was 1649-1652. This would then put the Purcells at Foulksrath around 1350. However, the De Frenes were in Foulksrath then. It was actually Fulke or his son Fulco de la Frene that gave the area it name.

Extract from Foulksrath Castle and the Families associated with it by By JOHN S. GIBB In 1295, Fulke de la Frene was seventy-third on the list of nobles summoned to a Parliament by John Wigan. He was slain by one of the Butlers of Carrick or by followers of Butler in one of the many conflicts which arose between the invaders. He left two sons, Fulco and Geoffrey, and in 1325, Fulco was one of a number who went bond for £I,000 to Bishop Ledrede for Roger, outlaw son of Alice Kyteler.

Additionally, you mention the story of Dean Swift's daughter. However, Dean Swift is not known to have had a daughter. Additionally, the Swift family did not own the castle when Dean Swift was living in Kilkenny.

your 3rd link shows two photos. The second of which claims to be the entrance to the Castle..which it is not. It is in fact the main entrance to Swifts Heath which is a large house nearby.

Thanks

Paul

---

(----) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul hopkins777 (talk • contribs) 18:30, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Paul, I'm transferring this to the article talk page as you don't seem to get that Wikipedia is a COLLABORATIVE effort and most of the stuff you mention above (you recently edited, you mention, your 3rd link etc.) does not concern me directly but the three or four editors (myself included) who have been attempting to make the article conform to Wikipedia's standards (notably to be encyclopaedic, and not partisan or partial). CaptainScreebo <sup>Parley!</sup> 12:47, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(----)

Hello. I understand that it is a collaborative effort. However, consensus does not equal accuracy. I have tried to edit this page to correct inaccuracies but have had the details changed back. As I both own and live in Foulksrath Castle I feel I should have some say as to how it is portrayed on Wikipedia and anywhere else. If people insist of correcting edits then the very least they should do is ask why it was changed in the first place and do some research into the accuracy of there proposed edits. The information regarding the Purcells having lived in a 16th century castle for three hundred years before being kicked out by Oliver Cromwell is an impossible scenario. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul hopkins777 (talk • contribs) 01:51, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just, wanna say sorry since you think i try to threat you. It was not my intention, i was just trying to help the user so he could get an answer from the family quickly and easily and hopefully prevent it turned into a lawsuit. Please, dont ban me forever ): 109.232.72.49 (talk) 14:57, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, not at all, I don't think you were threatening me, what I was saying was that there is a policy on Wikipedia of No Legal Threats, so if the family of the girl in question did complain and try to attack Wikipedia, they would be rapidly informed to go elsewhere to complain about the image, as Wikipedia is not the author of the image. No threat perceived, so don't worry. CaptainScreebo <sup>Parley!</sup> 15:12, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a believer in the Bold, Revert, Discuss system here, but I'm not interested in edit warring with you if you don't follow this system. So let's leave your bold edit as you've again reverted to it while we discuss the issue in talk. I'm interested to hear how you justify this removal. -Thibbs (talk) 14:59, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay but I'm really busy this afternoon and won't be able to comment befoire this evening, or even tomorrow. Cheers! CaptainScreebo <sup>Parley!</sup> 15:00, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to get the matter cleared up promptly, but we can certainly wait for tonight or tomorrow. -Thibbs (talk) 15:03, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your post at the BLP noticeboard discussion about Manny Ramirez and have replied. Thanks for your great help! --76.189.111.2 (talk) 14:13, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to help out. CaptainScreebo <sup>Parley!</sup> 14:14, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:AutomaticStrikeout has inexplicably reverted all of your great changes, and posted a comment about it at BLPN. I told him why I thought it was inappropriate and asked him to please revert his own revert and continue discussing it at BLPN. --76.189.111.2 (talk) 16:13, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Captain, have a look at the rewrite I've proposed at the article talk page, and see if it's an improvement. Thanks, 99.137.210.226 (talk) 00:34, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just heading there when I saw that you left this message. On my way. CaptainScreebo <sup>Parley!</sup> 00:37, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was not calling you a jerk, I was saying don't be one. There is a difference. Even if I was wrong about the content issue, did you expect that I would like being told that my opinion does not count for much or having you order me not to undo your changes (you are not an admin, after all)? If you had remained polite, I probably would have done the same. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 13:08, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problems, thanks for explaining! With BLPs you have to be bold, they're such a risky area, and I pretty much take a zero-tolerance policy to unsourced material. Stub first, ask questions later ;) GiantSnowman 16:22, 25 March 2013 (UTC)