User talk:Qwyrxian

Talk page archives 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57

Re: WOIO

Hello, Qwyrxian. You have new messages at Levdr1lostpassword's talk page.
Message added 01:43, 22 October 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Qwyrxian. You have new messages at Vjmlhds's talk page.
Message added 01:47, 22 October 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Qwyrxian. You have new messages at Vjmlhds's talk page.
Message added 05:39, 22 October 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Regarding your edit on Swaraj (Book)

I have come to notice that you undid the 'Controversy' section added by me few days back on Swaraj book by Arvind Kejriwal. First of all, I'd like to mention that I have provided the appropriate citation regarding this which is from a popular Hindi Daily 'Jagaran'. If there is a valid clarification on whether the news was wrong or so, please let me know. I'm also admirer of Arvind Kejriwal, hence I assure you that I haven't added the same due to some vandalism; but there must be clarification why that section has been removed by you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flacmedia (talk • contribs) 03:05, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't think it was vandalism, but the problem is that "Jagaran" does not appear to be a newspaper, but, rather, just a slightly fancy blog. As such, it doesn't met our guidelines for reliable sources. However, if you can find the claim listed in a source that does meet those guidelines, we may be able to re-add it. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:28, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Universe

Hello, Qwyrxian. You have new messages at Extremind's talk page.
Message added 09:09, 23 October 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Qwyrxian- Simplyhired page

Hi,

I see you reverted my changes on including repemployment.com as partner site. For verification that repemployment.com is a partner site, please see this page- repemployment.com/independentsalesrepresentativeportal when it loads fully, you will find simplyhired jobs listed there. When you click there you may see it is redirected to simplyhired. Further, you ask for independent source, I think independent source is for information that could not be verified online. But if you see the proof on website itself then I think it is not needed. Please let me know.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FIVERROMNIA (talk • contribs) 10:29, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Sorry here is signature ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by FIVERROMNIA (talk • contribs) 10:33, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

The reason we need an independent source is because we need verification that someone else has already paid attention to this news and found it important enough to comment on. Companies make hundreds, in some cases thousands of business deals every year; we do not allow Wikipedia pages to simply become a list of these deals. In other words, I'm not actually disbelieving that what you say is true--I accept that it is. What I'm saying is that it is not important enough to include in an encyclopedia article about Simplyhired. In Wikipedia terms, we would say that while all information must be verified, just because information is verified is not a guarantee that it should in an article. I hope this clarifies why I've removed the info. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:36, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

revert

Hi, may I ask why you reverted this? [1] I am working on this article in huwiki, so I DID check these sources that they are valid. I actually have Nahm's book. Why did you revert it? Thanks, Teemeah ^{편지 (letter)} 07:25, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Isn't that site a Wiki? It's not the same thing as doopedia (i.e., Doosan Encyclopedia). I can't read the site, but the entire layout sure makes it look like an open Wiki. Open-edited sites (like Wikipedia) never meet WP:RS. Qwyrxian (talk) 08:09, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi! I can understand the concern, since you cannot read hangul. This is Doosan Encyclopedia and it is a traditional encyclopedia with editorial staff. www.encyber.com, which was the original address redirects to doopedia.co.kr, this is the official website of the online Doosan Encyclopedia. To my knowledge it is not an openly editable encyclopedia. As I could see from roaming around there it works much like in Britannica now, that you can send in content to an article but they are reviewed and checked by the encyclopedia regular staff. It's not a free wiki platform. Kowiki also regularly uses Doosan as a source. If you still have concerns I advise that you ask the Korean native speakers at Wikipedia:WikiProject Korea, as I am nowhere near native level in Korean, but since Doosan is widely used in kowiki as a source, I don't think we have a problem with this website. (It is also used as a source for a lot of other Korean articles on enwiki). Kind regards Teemeah ^{편지 (letter)} 11:23, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Panadura Royal College

Do you think Panadura Royal College really needs to be fully protected to stop the abuse, or could semi-protection work? Jackmcbarn (talk) 15:08, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, we can't really fully protect an article indefinitely; we're really stuck with just long term or indefinite semi-protection. Luckily, I think there's only one to three people bent on adding their own personal opinions to the page, so we can just block them each time they pop up. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:05, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

I think you misunderstood me. I'm asking because, right now, you have it indefinitely fully protected. Jackmcbarn (talk) 21:25, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Whoops! That was my mistake. I meant to make it indefinitely semi-protected, not fully protected; I must have selected the wrong option when I turned on the protection in April. I've switched it down to semi-protection, which is what I'd intended. Thank you for bringing that to my attention. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:02, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Notice of External links noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to inform you that a discussion at Wikipedia:External links/Noticeboard is taking place regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --MorrowStravis (talk) 18:38, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Hafaz Refrisa Maulana Blocked II

Qwyrxian We are now my page don't block and delete page! Or I Call American Police be prison. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.79.28.112 (talk) 07:38, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

I have reverted you. Please read WP:NLT. - Sitush (talk) 07:46, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Hafaz, which laws have I broken? Wikipedia is a privately owned website--no one has the right to post here, and anyone who posts here must follow our rules. You are not following our rules. Do you want to follow our rules? Do you want to start adding things to the encyclopedia? Qwyrxian (talk) 13:10, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Sorry Qwyrxian as 12 month ago I registration. So Thank You Loving I am Indonesia. And Qwyrxian are dead and should be jailed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.79.29.246 (talk) 05:38, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Again, I should block you for making threats of violence and legal threats. Please tell me what laws I have broken. You don't have any "rights" to be here. I am glad that you love your country. I am glad that you like soccer and video games--it's good to have things you enjoy. But you can't just write about them anywhere you want. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:45, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Hafaz Refrisa Maulana Don't Block,Delete Page And Qwyrxian because you naughty,understand ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.79.29.246 (talk) 05:49, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

No, honestly, I really don't understand. Could you please explain? This is a private website. Wikipedia's rules say that people who don't follow the rules can't edit here. Our rules say that you must be here to improve the encyclopedia. You are not--you're here to write about things you like in your user pages. That's against the rules. Do you understand? Qwyrxian (talk) 05:54, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Sweetheart once you naughty, forgive not henceforth don't blocked user or I'm going to go now, Qwyrxian — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.79.29.246 (talk) 06:00, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I still don't understand. But I do have a suggestion. English is clearly not your native language. We have a separate Wikipedia in Indonesian. If you go to in.wikipedia.org, maybe they can help you more. I really wish I could help--I wish I could explain, but I don't think you're understanding me and I'm definitely not understanding you. For now, though, it's very simple--you're not following our rules. If you want to follow the rules, please come back and talk to me. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:34, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:08, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Nachricht

Hello, Qwyrxian. You have new messages at Krantmlverma's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Regards.--Manojkhurana (talk) 09:42, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Unintentional mistake

Hi , I have mistakenly and unintentionally marked an Edit as a minor edit[2], while it was not a minor edit. I AM aware that Help:Minor edit#When not to mark an edit as a minor edit says, "Adding or removing visible tags or other templates in an article." Right now, I AM reading Help:Dummy edit, but it thought that I must notify an admin about that. If there is anything that You can do about fixing that unintentional mistake, I kindly request You to do so. Sincerely, ← Abstruce 10:15, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Dear Qwyrxian, I have made a dummy edit to the WP Article[3]. And, I have marked the dummy edit as a minor edit. Please correct Me if I AM mistaken to consider dummy edits as minor edits. Any advice posted below would be appreciated. Sincerely, ← Abstruce 10:33, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

There's no way to retroactively change from minor to normal edit. I would not mark a dummy edit as a minor edit, personally. So, the only real difference with a minor edit is the "m" tag that shows up before it, and the fact that for some people, minor edits don't show up on their watchlist. But since the point of a dummy edit is to leave a "note" to other editors, to me, marking it as a minor edit partially defeats that point. Now, I have my watchlist set to show minor edits, because I don't want to miss something marked that way (intentionally or unintentionally). But as for edits, I basically never mark things as minor edits. One thing to be especially careful of is that if you make a series of "major" (normal) edits, and then the very last edit you make is just a quick typo fix, then that whole series of edits won't show up on a watchlist set to ignore minor edits. What it really comes down to for me is that I just don't see any benefit in marking edits as minor, so I almost never do it. In this particular case, I don't think any harm has been done, though. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:31, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank You Qwyrxian, Thanks ← Abstruce 08:21, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Colon El Nuevo

I did a thorough search on Colon El Nuevo and other profiles created by him. This is the complete list:

• 152.16.51.158 [4]
• 83.50.255.137 [5]
• 71.111.202.252 [6]
• CuriousColonal [7]
• Colombo-o-novo [8]
• Colombo.bz [9]

The same change to the text of the Wikipedia page:

• 24.40.207.142 \ Kolumbski [10]
• Colon El Nuevo [11]

It is an encyclopedic article and it must be written within the guidelines laid out in WP:NOT, and WP:V. He uses Wikipedia as a forum or a soapbox. Thank you. --Daedalus&Ikaros (talk) 18:13, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the detailed searches. The similarity of Kolumbski's recent comments to some of the earlier ones is enough for me to go ahead and block that account. I presume COlon-El-Nuevo will return again at some point... Qwyrxian (talk) 01:01, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

I and other users of Wikipedia (Dougweller, Aries no Mur, Maunus, Attilios, etc.) we spent a year and a half to cancel his frequent POV changes. He had become a nightmare.

Colon El Nuevo is absolutely certain that Christopher Columbus was a Polish Prince. He does not know that the story is absolutely impossible: he should have known that the Władysław III was a homosexual and thus would have rather had sex with men rather than with women, ergo would not have children. The Church officially recognised his homosexuality and because of that, Wladyslaw is only King Crusader who has never been beatified.

• Here goes the facts: Jan Długosz in his Chronicles of the Kingdom of Poland unambiguously suggested kings homosexuality.

• Wladyslaw III was fighting with Turkey in the defence of Christian Europe and he was killed during a battle in 1444 near Warna (seven years before Christopher Columbus was born!).

• Colon El Nuevo claims Władysław escaped to Madera after disaster near Warna. This escape is no a Historical Fact. It is only theory or rumour. --Daedalus&Ikaros (talk) 12:16, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

I have no interest in the academic debate itself--all I care is that Wikipedia represents the real world opinion--and the evidence is clear that while there are a whole bunch of fringe theories out there, the only theory with wide academic support is the Genovese theory. Colon is clearly trying to push a fringe point of view, as you point out, and is hellbent on breaking WP rules to do it. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:26, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

I presume COlon-El-Nuevo will return again at some point...

Sure. Thanks again for your support. Have a nice day. --Daedalus&Ikaros (talk) 12:45, 2 November 2013 (UTC)