Content deleted Content added
ScottMHoward (talk | contribs) fixing error |
ScottMHoward (talk | contribs) Archiving... |
||
Line 3:
| text = This is the Archive (2) of [[User:ScottMHoward|ScottMHoward]]'s [[User talk:ScottMHoward|Talk]] page. Entries are added ''manually'' by Scott M. Howard once the topic has come to a close. Newer topics will appear at the top of this page. Please '''do not''' edit this page. Older archived discussions may be found [[User talk:ScottMHoward/Archive|here]].
}}
== Amy Lee ==
Hey, this is about the Evanescence edit you undid. I am afraid I don't understand why you undid it. You sent me a message proclaiming it wasn't 'constructive' however I don't know why this was since it seemed like a perfectly reasonable and helpful edit giving more information about an important section of information about Lee which I felt the page was lacking.--[[User:Leinelikes2smile|Leinelikes2smile]] ([[User talk:Leinelikes2smile|talk]]) 19:38, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
:I assume you are referring to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Amy_Lee&diff=551999542&oldid=549959049 this edit] that was reverted by user Ethan1994. As you can see by their [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Amy_Lee&diff=next&oldid=551999542 edit summary], YouTube did not exist in 2003 (it was founded in 2005 and became popular only in 2006), which is only a portion of the false information you posted with your edit. Even if you ignore the fact that your edit appears, at least to me, to be a complete fabrication, your edit was posted in a [[WP:BLP|BLP]], or Biography of a Living Person. Any information posted about a living person must have verifiable sources included with this edit. Otherwise, it is slander and liabilities come into question. ''You'' are publishing false information about a living person on a ''public'' website, which may spark a lawsuit. Without a valid source to fall back on, it can only be seen as the lies that they are. Thus, an unconstructive edit / vandalism. <small><span style="white-space:nowrap;">'''~ [ [[User:ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Scott M. Howard</font>]] ] ~ </span><span style="white-space:nowrap;">[ [[User talk:ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Talk</font>]] ]:[ [[Special:Contributions/ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Contribs</font>]] ] ~'''</span></small> 21:37, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
== same-time edit ==
[[:File:Herestonevergrowingup.jpg|Sorry]]! I've asked admin to remove orig size and mine. – <font color="#06266f">Kerαu</font><font color="#1240AB">noςco</font><font color="#4671DS">pia</font><font color="#A60000"><sup>◁</sup></font><i><sub><font color="#5E1FFF">[[User:Keraunoscopia|gala]][[User talk:Keraunoscopia|xies]]</font></sub></i> 23:53, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
:Honestly, I think you should revert back to your 320x320. That picture has the best quality out of any of them. It's still within the size constraints for copyrighted images, but the wording is much clearer. JPGs are HORRIBLE at processing RED, and even though I tried to convert mine to 100% quality compression, it came out like crap. =D <small><span style="white-space:nowrap;">'''~ [ [[User:ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Scott M. Howard</font>]] ] ~ </span><span style="white-space:nowrap;">[ [[User talk:ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Talk</font>]] ]:[ [[Special:Contributions/ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Contribs</font>]] ] ~'''</span></small> 23:59, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
== Minor Statistics ==
{{tl|helpme}}I'm wondering if any user knows of any Wikipedia policy that has information about detailed statistics within articles. For example, a popular Youtube user, Lindsey Stirling, has a couple hundred million video views and over a million subscribers, and [[Lindsey Stirling|her article]] displays this fact. However, it's displayed in a way that causes random users to feel the need to update the number at every opportunity (ex. from 219 million to 220 million, after each milestone). I'm hoping there's some type of policy on the Wiki that might say something along the lines of keeping big numbers general, as if to only display a number like that as "over 200 million". Or is this just one of those things that will forever be an "issue"? It seems ridiculous to continue updating an article weekly just to make sure those ''numbers'' are accurate when it really doesn't matter if it's only a 0.5% increase. Ideas? <small><span style="white-space:nowrap;">'''~ [ [[User:ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Scott M. Howard</font>]] ] ~ </span><span style="white-space:nowrap;">[ [[User talk:ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Talk</font>]] ]:[ [[Special:Contributions/ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Contribs</font>]] ] ~'''</span></small> 00:14, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
:Hi Scott, Well, unfortunately there is no policy that can stop them from doing that. However, I don't see this as being an "issue"; making these minor edits do make the article more accurate, even if the accuracy increase is slight. Cheers, [[User:Kevin12xd|Kevin12xd]] ([[User talk:Kevin12xd|talk]]) ([[Special:Contributions/Kevin12xd|contribs]]) 00:27, 24 January 2013 (UTC)<br />
::Thanks for the reply. I understand the article can be more accurate with these numbers but to me, it seems tedious and not useful (since it's not really notable). "This is youtube user has millions of views" vs "This youtube user has 220,156,158 views" even seems easier to read for the casual user. I wasn't really looking for a policy to prohibit it, just a Manual of Style type thing to help curb the amount of "useless" edits made just to keep the numbers ''exact'' ("over 200 million", while an extraordinary feat should is still sufficient and accurate, in my eyes).
::But I guess this will indeed forever be an "issue" (at least in my eyes). I see the same thing with musical album sales, etc. People seem to feel the need to have exact figures over a "notable amount", and that just irks me slightly. It's not a big deal, I was just curious. Thanks :) <small><span style="white-space:nowrap;">'''~ [ [[User:ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Scott M. Howard</font>]] ] ~ </span><span style="white-space:nowrap;">[ [[User talk:ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Talk</font>]] ]:[ [[Special:Contributions/ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Contribs</font>]] ] ~'''</span></small> 00:43, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
== Avril Lavigne Discography ==
Hi, I've seen you also cooperate on Avril Lavigne Discography page. I think the page must be semi-protected. What do you think about? --[[User:Watquaza|Watquaza]] ([[User talk:Watquaza|talk]]) 22:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
:I'm not sure it qualifies at this point. The bulk of the recent edits were only done by a single IP-editor, so if there's really much of an issue, that single user could be blocked. Any other possible poor editing was the result of other registered users, where a protection would do nothing. <small><span style="white-space:nowrap;">'''~ [ [[User:ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Scott M. Howard</font>]] ] ~ </span><span style="white-space:nowrap;">[ [[User talk:ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Talk</font>]] ]:[ [[Special:Contributions/ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Contribs</font>]] ] ~'''</span></small> 00:25, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
::We should report those Ips then. --[[User:Watquaza|Watquaza]] ([[User talk:Watquaza|talk]]) 20:09, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
:::I'm not so sure this IP is doing anything wrong. From what it looks like, he's going through and CORRECTLY changing the country names to the actual names of the charts (AUS → ARIA) and verifying all the info and if there isn't any certification on the source provided, he's tossing out the cert. That's what it ''appears''. I'd have to go and check each of the references he's deleted, but from what I can see, it is ''not'' vandalism at all. Remember to [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]] in other editors, even if they are IPs. Not all major-edits are vandalism. If you question this editor's reasons for making these major changes, seek discussion on his talk page, or the article's talk page for a more general opinion from all editors.
:::Again, he appears to be doing more good than harm and I don't see anything wrong with what he's doing at this point without looking into the references that were removed, but if you do, by all means report him. <small><span style="white-space:nowrap;">'''~ [ [[User:ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Scott M. Howard</font>]] ] ~ </span><span style="white-space:nowrap;">[ [[User talk:ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Talk</font>]] ]:[ [[Special:Contributions/ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Contribs</font>]] ] ~'''</span></small> 21:06, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
::::I definately want this article to improve, it was a mess back then, the certifications section just included 5 countries. It clearly didn't reflected the huge performance of Avril's albums. The WW sales didn't even have sources. That's why I get pissed off when people delete with no reason the success of any artist. Thanks for your message. I'm hoping we can keep cooperating with the article of this talented lady :). --[[User:Watquaza|Watquaza]] ([[User talk:Watquaza|talk]]) 04:56, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
:::::Absolutely. =D My plan was to just save all the references that were being deleted (they're in an HTML comment in the references section) and at ''some point'' go through them all and see if there's any unique information in them that can be re-added to the article. The IP-editor, to me at least, seems to know what they're doing, so I don't usually like to interrupt a construction job in-process. I do, however, go through afterward and tweak all the things I didn't think were right during the overhaul. I'm sure many of those references are garbage now, but I'm also just as sure that some vital information can still be found within some. It's just matter of finding the time to go through them. =D <small><span style="white-space:nowrap;">'''~ [ [[User:ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Scott M. Howard</font>]] ] ~ </span><span style="white-space:nowrap;">[ [[User talk:ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Talk</font>]] ]:[ [[Special:Contributions/ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Contribs</font>]] ] ~'''</span></small> 05:00, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
Dudee, seriously, this Ip keeps disrupting the Avril Lavigne Discography page over and over and over. It's obvious he/she's not improving it, every edit is for remove sales or change the structure of the page. I beeeg you, please report that Ip.<small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User: Watquaza | Watquaza ]] ([[User talk: Watquaza |talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/ Watquaza |contribs]]) 06:53, May 1, 2013 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
:Sorry, somehow the Discography was removed from my watchlist so I haven't seen ''any'' of these edits, but the edit history seems clear that there's some "warring" going on, so I've put in a request to have the page protected from IP users, citing it via your request. <small><span style="white-space:nowrap;">'''~ [ [[User:ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Scott M. Howard</font>]] ] ~ </span><span style="white-space:nowrap;">[ [[User talk:ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Talk</font>]] ]:[ [[Special:Contributions/ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Contribs</font>]] ] ~'''</span></small> 00:22, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
== Edits on articles undone ==
Scott,
With regard to the [[Amy Hartzler|Amy Lee]] article - two of those edits (the unsourced collaborations discography, and the Baldwin manufacturer reference) were subject to immediate deletion under [[WP:CITE]] and [[WP:PROMOTION]] respectively. As to the comment about flatulence, well, I don't like Amy Lee, and I think little jabs like that are funny. Therefore I am restoring the first two edits and leaving the third undone. The article already contains a note about what should be listed in the discography and adding collaborations, especially an unsourced list, was already vetted on the article talk page. The Baldwin reference, especially since it appears next to a picture of the article subject playing a piano with the manufacturer's name emblazoned on it in six-inch orange letters, is a blatant promotion for said manufacturer. [[User:Dkendr|Dkendr]] ([[User talk:Dkendr|talk]]) 10:48, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
:Making little "jabs" completely invalidates any of your edits as far as I'm concerned. If you're going to be a legitimate Wikipedia editor, you need to learn to withhold your immature "jabs" and just stick to the edits that actually help ''improve'' the website. Otherwise, it just makes it look like you're having a free-for-all, and makes you look like nothing but a disruptive editor. <small><span style="white-space:nowrap;">'''~ [ [[User:ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Scott M. Howard</font>]] ] ~ </span><span style="white-space:nowrap;">[ [[User talk:ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Talk</font>]] ]:[ [[Special:Contributions/ScottMHoward|<font color="#004400">Contribs</font>]] ] ~'''</span></small> 15:15, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
== Avril Lavigne post-grunge? ==
| |||