| Revision as of 21:19, 24 November 2021 editBilCat (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers215,892 edits Advocating animal abuse?Tags: Undo Reverted← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:03, 25 November 2021 edit undoMrDemeanour (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,040 edits Undid revision 1057005798 by BilCat (talk) I want to comment here, so you know what I'm doing.Tags: Undo RevertedNext edit → | ||
| Line 110: | Line 110: | ||
| ...for your continuing attention to the ] article. The work I did today was motivated by my trying to connect quoted material with actual sources. The work on the one paragraph is not perfect, but at least now one knows which quotations and facts came from the WSJ, versus the Guardian. Note, the I am working from home on holiday, and so did not have access to the WSJ, and so I could not check its content deeper than the unfirewalled opening two paragraphs. Cheers. ] (]) 16:46, 23 November 2021 (UTC) | ...for your continuing attention to the ] article. The work I did today was motivated by my trying to connect quoted material with actual sources. The work on the one paragraph is not perfect, but at least now one knows which quotations and facts came from the WSJ, versus the Guardian. Note, the I am working from home on holiday, and so did not have access to the WSJ, and so I could not check its content deeper than the unfirewalled opening two paragraphs. Cheers. ] (]) 16:46, 23 November 2021 (UTC) | ||
| == Certificated == | |||
| You commented on my change. | |||
| You made the comment on my talk page; that's where I replied to it. But it's not some private conversation; it's a discussion of edits on the article. So the discussion belongs on the article talk-page, where I will transpose your remark and my reply. | |||
| In one of your edit comments, you spoke of "edit-warring". Well, I reverted your revert. Once. You have now reverted my revert; if I sinned, so did you. The correct procedure to follow (for me) would have been to post to the talk page after your first revert. But I don't call what you (or I) did "edit-warring". That's just hurling abuse. If you're in a bad mood, take it out on the cat :-) | |||
| ] has resolved the matter to my satisfaction; if you're also satisfied, I won't transpose your remark and my reply. OK? | |||
| 19:48, 24 November 2021 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:03, 25 November 2021
CAN'T RETIRE BilCat tried to leave Misplaced Pages, but found that he couldn't do so… | This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated. |
 Archives |
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 14.5 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 2 sections are present. |
Reversion of seawolf edit
Can you explain to me why the seawolf edit was reverted? i provided a source, the United states Navy fact file, and you not only reverted the change inspite of my source but reverted it to an incorrect number of torpedo tubes with no source. It's kinda annoying to have an edit reverted at the best of times but when i have provided a good and reliable source (an official website of the united states navy) you shouldn't be reverting it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.106.71.68 (talk) 12:57, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
- My apologies. I goofed. BilCat (talk) 19:39, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
Bobby Cox and a baseball editor in general
I made multiple edits to Cox today. They were deletions. Editor Wikidude10000 puts in some accomplishment for Cox but without ever referencing it. In fact, he points to list articles. WP:Circular I think covers that an article shouldn't be edited that way. I saw one of those articles, it is thinly sourced based on one reference to Baseballreference.com.
At Felipe Alou today, I reverted an edit of 1000's. Mostly because it putting in unreferenced opinion. Slow but dutiful. What does that mean? A few months back I was tangling with this same editor over George Kell. He has repeatedly put in opinions about a player or baseball at the time that almost never referenced. I see this problem all over WP, not just in baseball articles. As they are both BLPs, the Alou and Cox articles need to be sourced properly but I feel all articles need that too. Want to read what can happen when some editor don't like this? See this thread on my talk page.
BTW I play Strat-O-Matic baseball on my PC as a hobby. I've completed a full 1960 replay. Alou was on the Giants that year. My SOM replays account for my editing lots of player articles associated with MLB between 1952 and 1993. Fun baseball fact- 1993 Texas Ranger Jeff Bronkey is the only major leaguer to have born in Afghanistan....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 21:09, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
- I'm not exactly sure what you expect of me in this, other than making me aware of the issue. I edit some sports related articles, mostly those related to the Braves and a few other sports teams I like. However, I'm not deep into the sports projects, and beyond BLP in general, I'm not that experienced in the area. You might drop a note on User:Muboshgu's talk page. He's an admin with a lot of baseball article experience, including at least one FA. He may be better able to advise or intervene in this.
- I'm still enjoying my "high" from the Braves WS win this year. The Astros knocked the Braves out of several playoffs back in the 20'00s when they were in the NL, so this was a sweet win, along with knocking off the Dodgers. The only way it could have been sweeter is if they'd beaten those darn Yankees! :) BilCat (talk) 21:43, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
- I just remembered that the last Braves game I attended was in the 2004 National League Division Series against the Astros. The Braves won that game, but lost the series. So yeah, this was a sweet series to win! BilCat (talk) 22:02, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
- Bill I wasn't expecting anything. I was just explaining things in a friendly note. Our paths have crossed occasionally. Cheers!...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 00:33, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
- Ah, ok. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 00:34, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
ANI notice.
There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. (it wasn't me) Kleuske (talk) 09:48, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'm headed to bed, so hopefully it'll be settled by the time I return. BilCat (talk) 10:11, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Civility Barnstar |
| For your apology to GansMans; behavior like you showed is how conflicts get defused, and once-antagonists become allies. Props to you for that; I hope to be able to follow your example. EducatedRedneck (talk) 20:23, 22 November 2021 (UTC) |
- Thank you very much. I wish I had done that earlier before it got out of hand. Pride is a dangerous thing sometimes! Thankfully, I have a Father Who keeps me on a short leash, when I let Him. I often forget, especially in the heat of the moment, that there's a real person with real feelings on the other end of the internet.connection. I'm always grateful when others treat me kindly in return for my bad behavior. Forgiveness is a gift none of us deserve, but oh how grateful we are when we receive it anyway. BilCat (talk) 07:50, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- You should pin this post in a quote box at the top of this page. These are quite humble, yet very wise words everyone could benefit from. Cheers Bil - wolf 09:31, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
HMS Ark Royal (R09) edit
You cut my addition (below) to the article about the British aircraft carrier: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elendil's Heir (talk • contribs) 20:53, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
In popular culture
The carrier appears at the conclusion in the 2015 movie The Man from U.N.C.L.E. Although it is not mentioned by name, its partial pennant number "09" is visible when the ship launches a missile attack.
You said it was "unsourced, minor appearance, speculative." I provided the source; "minor" is in the eye the beholder (and in my experience this is the kind of interesting detail that people appreciate on Wiki); and it is not speculative, as I saw it myself and described where in the movie it occurred.
Elendil's Heir — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elendil's Heir (talk • contribs) 20:53, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) - please see WP:PROVEIT and also WP:TRIVIA for why we don't include unsourced "I saw it myself" trivia in the encyclopedia. - Ahunt (talk) 21:41, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
- Also, per WP:MILPOP:
"In popular culture' sections should be avoided unless the subject has had a well-cited and notable impact on popular culture."
BilCat (talk) 22:15, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks
...for your continuing attention to the News Corp article. The work I did today was motivated by my trying to connect quoted material with actual sources. The work on the one paragraph is not perfect, but at least now one knows which quotations and facts came from the WSJ, versus the Guardian. Note, the I am working from home on holiday, and so did not have access to the WSJ, and so I could not check its content deeper than the unfirewalled opening two paragraphs. Cheers. 2601:246:C700:558:1013:C770:A5A3:55FD (talk) 16:46, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
Certificated
You commented on my change.
You made the comment on my talk page; that's where I replied to it. But it's not some private conversation; it's a discussion of edits on the article. So the discussion belongs on the article talk-page, where I will transpose your remark and my reply.
In one of your edit comments, you spoke of "edit-warring". Well, I reverted your revert. Once. You have now reverted my revert; if I sinned, so did you. The correct procedure to follow (for me) would have been to post to the talk page after your first revert. But I don't call what you (or I) did "edit-warring". That's just hurling abuse. If you're in a bad mood, take it out on the cat :-)
User:Ahunt has resolved the matter to my satisfaction; if you're also satisfied, I won't transpose your remark and my reply. OK?
19:48, 24 November 2021 (UTC)