This is an archive of past discussions about User:ItsAlwaysLupus. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Open, sesame!
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Hello, ItsAlwaysLupus! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! BMW(drive)23:11, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
My "diary": October, 2008 (Dancin' at the Dance-pop ball)
Latest comment: 16 years ago7 comments2 people in discussion
Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Dance-pop, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. — Realist215:19, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
I added this to your user page, it let's everyone know we are a team ;-) Apparently I'm supposed to lol. I add one one my user page too. Have a great day Rock. — Realist214:14, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
oh thank you, it's nice for you. :-) I hope that I don't be a ignominy to you :-D
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Synopsis
This discussion has been archived. Please do not modify it. I modified it, but you can't! Ha-haha!
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Uuuh *sounds like an old deadly ill grandaddy sitting in the old ancient rockin' chair*... I remember the days when I was in war. You know son, it was not some candy honeymoon but a huge terrible war!! And you know who wins? Yeah, you think right! Mommy wikipedia. So, story ends here and you can go to sleep. Uh.. I'm not feel so much good right now..... Oh no! Grim reaper is gonna take me out! *dying* ... ...
My first reaction (when I woke up) before convalesce in hospital for war veterans!:
Uh, what's happened? ... Oh, I know.. I'm now absolutely free! and I can do now everything ... ha ha haa *devil smile* yeeeah, nobody can stop me... ha-ha! ha haa... Mmmm.. JUST JOKING :-D RockandDiscoFanCZ (talk) 17:35, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
addition: Ooooops! 15 minutes remains! .. oh no, flub! *feels bad* :-( .. :-D RockandDiscoFanCZ (talk) 17:37, 30 November 2008 (UTC)200px|center
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
A tag has been placed on RockandDiscoFanCZ/Game score requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. James Robson (talk) 21:54, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Bad news, bad news! / Hello. I agree and understand, it's like when you destroying one horrible cockroach, right away appears another beetle. It's like cat 'n' mouse game. It's so full-range war.
Now, I have to reported another (probably with big "P") yanek.' socket-puppet Password635536 to NW's Public Sock program.
another outbreak of this tonight. the user is blocked indefinitely now, but i have a feeling he will be back under various anon ips, as usual. unfortunately i can't revert the various disco articles or templates without breaking 3RR :( --Kaini (talk) 23:29, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
Yanek is one kind of awesome "night thief". It's sounds so bittersweet! :-( that 3RR rule ALSO protects (indirectly) creative vandals like yankekleklukuklukukus :( it wants to be an super revertion admin that have rights over 3RR (so that admin can revert various articles many times - not only 3x per day). RockandDiscoFanCZ (talk) 17:33, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 15 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Please release me! ... and let me go.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Please avoid using multiple copies of the same reference within an article, as you did on Dance-pop, as this clutters the reference list. Better is to create one reference on a given page and cite it as many times as is necessary. To do this, use the name attribute of the ref tag. The first time you cite a reference, define it as
<ref name="refname">Reference content</ref>
and then, when you want to cite the same reference later in the same article, just use
That's strange - this edit has your name on it. Anyway, your work or not, at least now you know for next time you want to add references to an article. -- Smjg (talk) 12:56, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Footnote: These my edits [1][2] are so ironic to the "please do not add unsourced or original content" statement. So funny phrase :) (in fact, it's just some Wiki template that is usually used by admins and ambitious future admins). That's all, folks. RockandDiscoFanCZ (talk) 23:32, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to List of LGBT characters in film, radio, and TV fiction. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Your edit was also contentious given your summary of "…however this time sourced.. hahaha 8-)". Wikipedia is not a competition and the content was originally removed for lack of cited source. In this case, the cited source is another Wiki, which I'm sure you're aware is not considered a reliable source. Please refrain from making contentious and improper edits in the future. Thank you.DKqwerty (talk) 17:13, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello, ItsAlwaysLupus. You have new messages at DKqwerty's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I have reverted your edits on the smooth jazz infobox color. Whether or smooth jazz is a subgenre of jazz or R&B is a valid debate, but Wikipedia is not the place to express your view on this. To keep the article NPOV, the color of the infobox shall remain pink. ANDROS133723:42, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Case closed. Open for details
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Hello RockandDiscoFanCZ. You've removed a valid link from the disambig. page C (disambiguation) with the following edit summary: however, not notable enough. Would you mind to check the article again? In my opinion it is well-referenced with various independent and reliable third party sources and the link to the article should have its place also at the relevant disambig. page. To some extent I share your dislike for some elements of the Czech culture in the communist era, however, my (or your) opinions and tastes are not a part of any guideline or rule here. The article is very important for better understanding of the Czech culture in the significant period, and moreover, the claim of notability is clearly established - Céčka are now a part of the collections of the Czech National Museum, don't forget. If you don't consider the subject to be notable, take the article to AfD and let the community to review it. I'll revert your edit now and I would appreciate a discussion before further steps are taken. If you revert again without proper explanation, I'll report your behavior at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thanks for constructive cooperation. Have a good day. Antonín Vejvančický (talk) 10:07, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
I'll report you on Edit warring, etc Oh, thanks. I appreciate it.
The "cecka" article has however only two solid sources (national radio web, national television web). Its need more additional references ... for example foreign referenes from English webs, etc, you know.
I'm czech and I NEVER heard about "cecka" or "cecka fever". So that's the reason, why is that article questionable (for me). Honestly, articles such as cecka or similiar non-notable bullshit with lack of sources is the cancer of English Wikipedia. Have a fabulous day. RockandDiscoFanCZ (talk) 15:36, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Template:New Wave music
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Open for more details.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
When there is a source or even conflicting sources leave out Take your Time do it right it is a disco song and there are sources for it not to mention it is on every disco countdown and compilation ever made!! Do not put it back as a post-disco or remove source!! Post-Disco is a borderline Fringe Genre/Style!! i will make an Administrators notice board incidents complaint if you continue to POV push!!!! If you knew anything about music and wanted to use POV Celebration by Kool and the Gang was the First Post Disco song which was a hit very late 1980 into 1981!!!!Even though it barely exist as a Genre/Style!--Wikiscribe (talk) 17:49, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
(WOW, to many exclamation marks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
Calm down, bro... calm down, you look a little bit upset and nervous. I recommend you 2 weeks of wikibreak and everything'll be fine.
As you know, i¨m not a native english speaker and sometimes i don't know some words... i use some words that i think it is something else.. but you know, it's a translation error... "useless"? I mean "usemore", you know.. every edit by wikipedians is a good edit.. not useless! I'm not meaning it. Your acting like a almighty administrator (WP:ADMINABUSE) it's in my opinion. Oh thanks you give me chance, nice. Thanks so much. RockandDiscoFanCZ (talk) 17:30, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Surprise inside!
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Post-disco. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Post-disco. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:07, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Boogie
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I have rearranged the article on Boogie a bit. Please take a look at it, and I especially ask you not to rush and just go and revert everything. If some edits seem doubtful to you, bring them to the talk page. If you feel the urge, you could also engage a WP:3O into the discussion. -- Appletangerine un (talk) 11:59, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
You better not open that (Part II – 2011-2013)
I told you to not open this thread! You probably don't listen to your mommy too, right?
Click
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
August 2011
Latest comment: 13 years ago8 comments3 people in discussion
Click
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Blocked for combative editing and personal attacks
Your first article edit after making a series of sarcastic comments and personal attacks at AN/I was to go back to reverting – without good explanation, and without providing your own supporting sources – edits made by Nickyp88, under the assertion (without discussion) that they were 'original research': [3]. This was the original issue which started the thread at AN/I in the first place, and you should well have known that simply returning to the original edit war was not acceptable.
Yeah, well, the whole internet (I will not disclose my reliable source until tomorrow since you probably won't even read this) supports my claim and disprove the user's speculation. Actually my intentions were good, you asserted something else... I hope everyone is happy now, especially the kid. I couldn't care less, though. See you tomorrow. ItsAlwaysLupus (talk) 16:15, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Caution
While I have no objection to you doing constructive work on your talk page during your block, you are strongly advised to avoid continuing the conduct which led to your original block.
Referring to Nickyp88 – or any other editor – as "the kid" after being warned not to do so is not appropriate. It is also a violation of Wikipedia policy to accuse other editors of libel. Misuse of your talk page in this manner will lead to both an extension of the current block, and a withdrawl of your editing privileges on this talk page. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 22:10, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
It's nice that you completely ignored the main thing whereas cherry-picking "incidental" words as you like. This is completely unacceptable and I feel somewhat threatened and ridiculed. ItsAlwaysLupus (talk) 17:39, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
If you're looking to have a conversation, then you shouldn't box up the discussion; it hides your comments. If you have concerns about the way I've handled your case, you are welcome to raise a complaint at WP:AN/I. I would strongly urge you to reflect on your own conduct, however, as I don't believe that any such complaint would be sustained.
Speaking for myself, I feel threatened when an editor accuses me of libel; I would imagine that other editors feel ridiculed when you call them condescending names. What you have been subjected to, on the other hand, is clear and specific criticism of your conduct, including explicit description of how and where it has fallen short of Wikipedia's policies and standards; you have also been clearly warned what consequences would apply should you fail to remedy your conduct. Recently, you were blocked because you failed to heed those clear warnings, and in so doing you made Wikipedia a hostile and unpleasant place for other volunteers.
If you don't want to have any further replies from me to this thread, that is your choice. I won't make any further comments here as long as this thread remains boxed up; I just don't want to leave any passers-by with the impression that I am unable to respond to your concerns or unwilling to have my actions subjected to scrutiny. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 19:25, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
It might sound plausible, yet it doesn't explain the step of being expelled from Wikipedia. This unrelated revert triggered the expulsion yet it doesn't have anything to do with AN/I and I will prove it on your talk page. It was a hasty action to block someone just because he rightfully reverted the disruptive edits of one user who previously has partaken in multiple disputes over the same thing - genres in the infobox. I find it quite ironic that no one seemed to notice that these exaggerated responses are clearly-obviously-not-to-be-taken-seriously which some unrelated users reduced to "vicious personal attacks/borderline threatening". This was used as an excuse to make the final step. Also it's quite shocking that AN/I is treated like pub where everyone can influence others' opinions. ItsAlwaysLupus (talk) 20:13, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
There's no need to split the conversation into two parts; I have your talk page watchlisted. Please keep the threaded discussion here.
I believe that your interpretation is entirely mistaken, and that my actions were taken in accord with normal Wikipedia policies and practices. Frankly, you enjoyed more leeway than most administrators might have offered you. The fact that you still don't recognize that your comments – before or after your block – were belittling and condescending is worrying.
Regarding the content dispute you were involved in, I don't know what (sub-)genre Kylie Minogue or any other (nu-)disco artist might be categorized into. The problem with your edit there was not whether it was arguably factually correct, but that your edit was a revert of another editor
in an area where you has previously been involved in edit warring;
with whom you were involved in a current conflict;
on a topic where you were involved in an AN/I discussion;
made without recourse to the article talk page;
made without adding any suitable references or sources to the article, its talk page, or even in the edit summary in support of your revert.
As to the "plebs" (your wording, from my talk page) on AN/I—they're all volunteers, just like you or me. They are as entitled as any Wikipedia participant to help determine the course of this project, and to offer their input on how it should be administered. The input of neutral, uninvolved third parties is generally held to be a useful and potent tool for defusing and (if necessary) deciding disputes. More often than not, the editors who offer comments and input at venues like AN/I have years of experience and thousands of edits behind them. Your casual dismissal of of that process, that experience, and that input is regrettable.
As I've noted above, if you wish to seek a review of my administrative actions, you may do so at WP:AN/I, or through a request for comment. I would discourage you from doing so only because perceived misuse of those venues for frivolous, vexatious, or otherwise ill-judged complaints tends to result in uncomfortable scrutiny of the complainant. I am quite willing to respect the judgement of our peers.
I don't think there's any further benefit to my continued participation in this conversation, if it is simply going to be a reiteration of your mistaken belief that your conduct was civil and appropriate. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 02:16, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Legolas2186 replied to my message. It seems the Oricon chart you'd like to add to the article is based on CD sales alone, and it is one component of the Japan Hot 100, which also includes information about radio airplay. Since the Japan Hot 100 includes the Oricon data, only the Japan Hot 100 is shown in the article.
As far as WP:GOODCHARTS goes, look at the fourth and fifth columns. Do you see how Oricon is only listed under the fourth column (Sales), while the Japan Hot 100 spans the fourth and fifth columns (Sales and Airplay)? Legolas2186 says that charts that span multiple columns—such as the Japan Hot 100—are preferred over the charts that fall in only one column, and I think that makes sense. — Malik ShabazzTalk/Stalk19:46, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I somewhat see that Oricon is redundant now (since the Oricon data is used by Japan Hot 100). His clarified response sounds plausible to me and I feel relieved now. Once again, thank you. ItsAlwaysLupus (talk) 20:57, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Replaceable fair use File:Evelyn king - the artist's face.jpg
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for uploading File:Evelyn king - the artist's face.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 05:32, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Hello ItsAlwaysLupus/Archive 1! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.
Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.
You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey
MTV UK
Latest comment: 12 years ago14 comments2 people in discussion
Yes but MTV UK is equally reliable and it was there since the beginning. I was not trying to be rude when you told me to mind that ..something. That;'s why i told you that i have been here for long enough to know what to write or not. With all the GAs i have promoted, i don't work like like a robot or for the sake of having a big number of GAs. I also learn form my mistakes. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 04:57, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Tell me then, does it sound reliable to you?
"As soon as we heard this track, it screamed 'classic disco', making us want to chuck on our dancing shoes & hit the floor"
MTV UK is a commercially known product but it doesn't make it more reliable. In fact, their reviews are biased and often contain tongue-in-cheek humor. That's why I challenged you to provide better sources, which you did provide... so I guess everything is "cool" now. ItsAlwaysLupus (talk) 17:30, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
I know you are not a fan (do not love the song that much) because of the edit you were making. Excuse me for my honesty. I am a big fan. I am a fan of anything Beyonce does. Lol. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 17:54, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Haha, no, that's not the reason. There are much worse songs than this. I noticed that ridiculous MTV UK source on Wikipedia after I saw the music video on VH1. You sure are! I don't listen to her but Katy Perry and Mariah Carey (you listen to them too, don't you?) are okay. ItsAlwaysLupus (talk) 18:14, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
I listen to all three. I like how Katy has evolved from the s**t she used to be to a woman who now knows that she is married and knows that she can sell her songs without using sex as a means. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 18:32, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Well, you are somewhat right, she is acting "mature" now, but she used to be really funny. Especially the songs and music videos like "Waking Up in Vegas" and "Hot n cold". I can't simply relate to her pretentious "T.G.I.F." or "E.T". . It really misses her carefree persona. Wow, I didn't know that she is married. ItsAlwaysLupus (talk) 19:09, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
★*★*★*★*★*★*★*★* Merry Christmas And Happy New Year 2012*★*★*★*★*★*★*★*★
I Wish You And Your Family A Merry Christmas And A Happy New Year 2012. May The New Year Bring Much Happiness, Prosperity, Peace, And Success In Your Life. I Am Very Happy To be Part of Wikipedia And To Have Great Friends Like You. Cheers.
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. When you recently edited Dance-rock, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Blondie (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.
If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 21:15, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. When you recently edited Darryl Payne, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Carol Williams (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. When you recently edited Fred Zarr, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Out of the Blue (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Yin Yang Yo!, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mark Bowen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I am sorry, It's just that Frederator did not Co-Produce with Jetix on Yin Yang Yo, the reason Why I Did this is beacuse Mundi's World did not exist although it's a Rumor, plus Fred Seibert didn't work on Yin Tang Yo, if you google Yin Yang You 7 click on the wikipedia page. You'll see that Fred Seubert did not do it. plus Frederator Studios did not creaed Mundi's World, it was actully an Unknown person. Thanks for understanding! - Annoymous — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.92.42.82 (talk) 20:21, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
The problem with claims such as "plus Frederator Studios did not creaed Mundi's World" lies in the lack of additional references or simple proof to back it up. You need to understand that Wikipedia primarily relies on trusted third-party references and verifiable claims which you unfortunately didn't provide any (except subjective speculations of yours which aren't welcomed even on a Z-grade fan-based blog catering to tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorists). The "Mundi's world" line was heavily maintained by Mexico-based Anonymous user 201.160.131.251/189.220.19.117 so feel free to contact them (him/her) directly. ItsAlwaysLupus (talk) 17:27, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
Japanese-Jewish Common Ancestor Theory
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I quoted several passages from that source in two separate block quotes separate by a single short sentence, so I think it as visually difficult to distinguish between the quote and my text.
At any rate, I have added italics and expanded the sentence between the block quotes. I hope that addresses your concerns. gather that since the non-neutral phrasing you pointed out is part of the source quote that there are no POV issues. If I am missing something there, please let me know.
I have noticed some large blue quotation marks people use to set off block quotes, but don't see them readily available on the page. I should copy and paste them next time I run across them and undo the italics.--Ubikwit (talk) 19:00, 3 December 2012 (UTC)Ubikwit
Terminology.
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
nemzeti mozgalmak célja, módszerei és eredményei. (in Hungarian). Magyar Fórum, 1995/9, 22. old.)</ref>.
that Hungarians in Slovakia are actually overprivileged.<ref name="Sharipol">{{Cite book |title=>Politics Without a Past: The Absence of History in Postcommunist Nationalism|last=Cohen |first=
Latest comment: 11 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Please be aware that the topic of Anti-Hungarian sentiment falls in the domain of the WP:ARBEE arbitration case. Any effort by you to recreate a free-standing article on this topic by edit warring is unlikely to have good results. See WP:AC/DS for the sanctions which apply. User:Malik Shabazz has suggested a WP:Deletion review as one way you might get consensus to recreate such an article. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 04:13, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Am I the only one who can read that AfD? It says, "an article of this nature must be backed up by substantial third-party literature that addresses the discrimination as a whole. Anyone is welcome to attempt to create a new article with these guidelines in mind; I can provide the deleted text of the article and talk page if desired, as long as it is not used to recreate the article in its present form." The article It'sAlwaysLupus has written is not the same content as the measly coatrack I nominated for AfD 2 years ago and I don't think people should be reverting him unanimously. I definitely don't see any sane reason to stop him saving that article in userspace and filing a deletion review. I would welcome this since having a redirect from "anti-Hungarian sentiment" to "Hungarians in Slovakia" is possibly the worst POV violation I'm aware of on en.wikipedia.
An option you might consider is to work in your proposed new article in a subpage, such as User:ItsAlwaysLupus/Anti-Hungarian sentiment. This would save you from having to constantly revert, which is something that risks a block. There are ways in which you can find out to whether your idea for a neutral article matches with the community's opinion. If you intend for your new article to survive, it helps if you will listen to feedback. EdJohnston (talk) 21:26, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
A backup page serves its purposes, I guess...... but still I have no freaking idea what is this racket all about. It's just a bullshit redirect with a topically incorrect and borderline racist destination that screams for being fixed and you guys make it a big whoop for no plausible reason. ItsAlwaysLupus (talk) 22:40, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Caution
Latest comment: 11 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
In your comments during the ArbCom case request, you went too far. Please read: WP:WIAPA, and refrain from such excessive abuse in future. If you continue to make such comments, you may be blocked. It would do you credit if you went back and amended your statement - in particular removing "he is biased against minorities because he is a racist nationalist as shown from countless cases of people raising concerns about his prejudiced behavior plastered all over his talk page. He's hiding his covert hate behind his apparent lack of English skills so he often throws in phrases from Wikipedia Propaganda 101 like "be civil" or "assume good faith" and so forth. This all resembles a clueless idiot or a conniving troll who drops sackful of marbles on the floor and is amused by the sight of people falling down and breaking their neck or something while cursing him back". SilkTork✔Tea time14:59, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
Again, I don't see the fundamental bad in it and anyone who does clearly fails to decipher the meaning and focuses on its empty shell that is covered with unbearable edges and spikes instead thus generally being prone to make arbitrary assumptions about the whole. Let me tell you this, executing the right to speak out against oppressive people and people who intentionally do harm through subtle diversion in the articles while everyone else remains silent is hardly "abuse" in any sense more like captivating testimony and if that's "illegal" then you better wrap it up and close Wikipedia altogether. Also don't give me that top-quality moral high ground BS, officer, I guess if you want to harass me with your feeble threats then you better bust me right away but don't be surprised when someone exposes the whole case in the media and on Reddit or something because this is the last straw, really. You need to understand one thing, I don't like being silent when there are people like User:Yopie out there and sysop staff even enables that and I don't like it when you are silent whereas people like Yopie are allowed to abuse Wikipedia while sullying the minorities openly(!) and freely with no palpable remorse. ItsAlwaysLupus (talk) 06:49, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
I came here to answer you question on the arbitration request - "AE" (or WP:AE) is Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement, where remedies passed by the arbitration committee are enforced. While I was here I read your above tirade in reply to SilkTork and I have to warn you that it comes very close to the line of being an attack for which you could be blocked. The bottom line is that it is never acceptable to call another contributor a racist. Thryduulf (talk) 09:48, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you make personal attacks on other people, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. In case you don't yet understand. We don't accept people insulting others on Wikipedia. You don't get a free pass at insulting ArbCom members either. Several people have made a comment on the ArbCom request regarding your incivility, and I gave you a caution on your talkpage, so you must now be fully aware that what you did was totally unacceptable. Your reply to me is inappropriate and deliberately offensive. If you are unable to edit Wikipedia without getting so upset that you need to insult people, then you need to give serious consideration as to if this is the place for you. In the meantime, if you make another incivil comment you will be blocked. If this message makes you angry, I suggest you don't reply until you have calmed down. SilkTork✔Tea time15:46, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
note:
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I noticed that you've posted in the Arb section here when you made this post. That should be moved up to your own section where you make your statement and comments. A clerk may get to it first though if you don't. If you're concerned that it may get missed you can use bold and/or @[[User:Some editor]] which not only highlights the question, but also pings the editor you're asking via our notification system. I would have moved it myself, but I'm not sure if that's allowed. If anyone who knows is watching, I'd be curious to know if I would be wrong to fix things on Arb related pages even though I'm not a clerk. — Ched : ? 21:06, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
Request for Arbitration case declined
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
This is a courtesy notice to inform you that a request for arbitration, which named you as a party, has been declined. Please see the Arbitrators' opinions for potential suggestions on moving forward.
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
A tag has been placed on File:Evelyn Champagne King 82.JPG requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free file with a clearly invalid licensing tag; or it otherwise fails some part of the non-free content criteria. If you can find a valid tag that expresses why the file can be used under the fair use guidelines, please replace the current tag with that tag. If no such tag exists, please add the {{Non-free fair use}} tag, along with a brief explanation of why this constitutes fair use of the file. If the file has been deleted, you can re-upload it, but please ensure you place the correct tag on it.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Redsky89 (talk) 06:30, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 24
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Don't Make Me Wait, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Garage (music) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
