CubBC

I probably will not be starting any new pages, but I do sometimes make changes to the pages I read here. If I see a typo or incorrect detail I will make the change.

If you see anything that I've changed and feel I should have left it alone, please leave your comments here.

CubBC (talk) 22:43, 14 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

In regards to your edits on Big Brother 9 (U.S.), wikipedia is not censored. The information as to who is the current head of household, who is nominated, and who won the POV are all available online and on Big Brother After Dark. In the interest of providing current information, Wikipedia editors update the information as it becomes available. Thanks! Redrocket (talk) 09:00, 16 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

In regards to your last edit summary, the situation in the archives was a different matter. The fainting spells and medical attention did not happen during BBAD, and thus there were no sources available to back up claims without using YouTube, which is not an allowable source on wikipedia.

On Big Brother After Dark, several times each night a crawl airs on the screen indicating the current events on the show. In addition, James won the POV during the time the show was on the air. It's properly sourced from a primary standpoint, and verified multiple times every night.

Again, wikipedia is not censored. Wikipedia contains spoilers, and he most up-to-date information. I'm going to revert one more time, please discuss your edits on the talk page before making them again. We're both approaching the three revert rule on this one, so I'd prefer to talk these problems out rather than wind up in an edit war. Thanks! Redrocket (talk) 09:11, 16 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Okay, I agree we shouldn't be battling back and forth with this. I agree WP is not censored. I just want to point out that BBAD is only available to US residents, and there is no way I'm going to pay to see what is going on in the house. CBS doesn't need my money, and I'm willing to be the paysite will allow me to pay once they have my credit card but will block the viewing due to international broadcast rights. Up here in Canada we see the block all the time. Thanks for the discussion, CubBC (talk) 09:22, 16 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

No problem, sorry you don't get BBAD up there. It does spoil some of the fun of watching the original show, I'll admit that. Take care! Redrocket (talk) 09:31, 16 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

WHY YOU TAKE DOWN EDIT OF BUBLE? ME NO GET IT. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcpenny (talk • contribs) 21:58, 21 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

I suspect that people are removing the Yes Minister trivia from Propanol because it doesn't add useful information to the article; while it may be relevant to Yes Minister, specifically for that episode, its inclusion in the Propanol article adds 0 value. See WP:TRIVIA and associated essays for further details. --Firien ^{need help?} 10:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

No problem here is the link I use for callsigns: https://extranet.eurocontrol.int/http://prisme-web.hq.corp.eurocontrol.int/indicators/aircraft_operators_browse.jsp MilborneOne (talk) 10:03, 5 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

The place to ask about the copyright issue is at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. To add the image, if it's OK to do so, use the following [[Image:name of file.jpg|thumb|CFS Alert station crest]]. If the image is OK to use (free and not fair-use) it might be a good idea to upload it at Wikipedia:Wikimedia Commons. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 14:53, 5 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

You must tell why he is important to Canada, lots of people are awarded the Bronze Wolf, who was he outside of that? Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 01:14, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

According to the English release page, TACA will not release a pax list while it doesn't have final info - it might release a list later. Did TACA indicate otherwise in its Spanish page? WhisperToMe (talk) 02:07, 1 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

I thought there were 5 fatalities on board and 2 on the ground. Well, I'll check it out and edit the article accordingly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Starbucks95905 (talk • contribs) 00:26, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Tropical Storm Alma is a proper noun. See the National Hurricane Center, or CNN coverage of the plane crash and the storm itself. On those grounds, your undoing of my capitalization was mistaken and I am going to undo it. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 00:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

>Revision history of Shipping container architecture: 20:24, 8 May 2008 CubBC (Talk | contribs) (11,235 bytes) (→Other uses: Removed joke statement, but I admit is was a good punchline) (undo). Please consider an undo after you read the source documents for 'Detached Accessory' discussion [1].

There may be similarities, but are there any comparisons done in the media? Who compared them? To advance the position that they are similar by using synthesis of actual facts would be OR. If the TAM article has something similar that is unsourced, the stuff should be removed from that too. WhisperToMe (talk) 14:16, 21 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

I have provided references demonstrating that tussock grass is a perfect synonym for bunch grass. If you require more simply put [grassland “tussock or bunch”] into Google scholar. This is no way controversial. Moreover even if the terms were synonymous the article concerns tussock grass, not tussock grasslands. These are completely different terms, one referring o a growth form, the other to an ecosystem. Added to that we already have an article on tussock grasslands. So this is in no way a hackjob. Please do not revert this edit unless you can provide references for your (presumed) claim that tussock grass is not a perfect synonym for bunch grass. It is grossly misleading to suggest that the terms are not considered perfectly synonomous by all ecologists, and by trying to create two separate articles rather than redirecting or disambiguating this is precisely what you are doing. Ethel Aardvark (talk) 07:21, 2 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 21:46, 30 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

I have nominated Template Retired CF (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 14:36, 21 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

I don't appreciate the personal attack in this reversion that my word is 'gospel' [2]. Infact, rather than preaching to others, I edit according to the accepted cycle of bold, revert, discuss. You boldy inserted information about BBC World, I reverted it. Per BRD, it is on you to open a discussion if you think the material is worthy of inclusion, and I will be happy to join it. However, your subsequent revert and demand that I discuss it, makes it Bold Revert Revert (attack me) Discuss. That is not acceptable. MickMacNee (talk) 20:19, 26 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

 

I saw from here that it's been exactly two years since you joined the project. Happy WikiBirthday! Keep up the good work, rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 01:22, 3 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

In regard to your revert, I simply didn't see how it was necessary to state it was incorrect. I mean, it states what is used and then what is sometimes used; no need to add that it's incorrect, well, in my opinion at least. —Frosty ☃ 07:38, 12 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

Please do not blank this redirect again. Blanking is (almost) never the proper way to handle bad content. If you truly feel that the redirect needs to be removed, you need to start up a proper deletion debate on it. WP:RFD tells how to do this. You'll need to give you reasons why you think it should be removed, but that's the proper way to do it. - TexasAndroid (talk) 15:13, 3 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

Any news program will occasionally be hosted by somebody other than its official regular anchor, when the regular person is away for some reason. But the CBC's own website still lists Martina Fitzgerald as the weekend anchor of World Report and Young as being the weekend anchor of The World at Six — and even Young's own Twitter feed still names The World This Weekend, not World Report, as the show she's officially the host of. If we just changed a show's Wikipedia article every time a radio or TV show happened to be hosted by somebody different than its regular host, then we'd never have the time to do anything else (especially in the summer, when the network's bigshots are prone to taking vacations). So we need a much more definitive source (like a news article, or the CBC's website) than just the mere fact of who happened to be hosting the show on any given individual day, else we'd be claiming that Gill Deacon was the real host of Q, and Piya Chattopadhyay was the real host of The Current, and Chris Howden was the real cohost of As It Happens, and Karen Gordon was the real host of Here and Now, just because they're who a listener would have happened to hear on those programs yesterday. Bearcat (talk) 14:42, 20 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Gladly. Twice you have removed my comments from the April Wine "Electric Jewels" page. I was willing to concede my comments were improperly entered into Wikipedia's General layout, the first time around: I corrected this on my second edit. _Again_, you removed it, citing "poorly referenced and improperly referanced (sic) content". Most of my inclusion expands on the album "Special Thanks" section, which lists the guest musicians. There is already a reference to Mashmakhan (the band in which drummer Jerry Mercer last played prior to joining April Wine, and in which this album's guest musician Pierre Senecal was also a band member). If this needs further referencing, then you have to concede you know nothing about the people on this album (apart from possibly Myles Goodwyn and Jim Clench), as this is very common knowledge to people familiar with the Quebec rock scene of the 1970's. Likewise, I find it impossible to give further reference to a personal conversation I have personally had with founding member David Henman in which I distinctly wished to know on which of the album's songs he was involved. His answer to me was clear: "I was involved in the recording of all the songs on that album." Short of writing an article myself, having it published, and then linking back to it, there is very little way I can think of to further provide reference to this quote. This particular Wikipedia entry is sorely threadbare for anyone who already has a copy of the album: it offers nothing beyond the album's liner notes. As this is my favorite April Wine album, I have twice attempted to rectify the situation by adding information I wholeheartedly Inow to be true (and feel free to ask David Henman yourself if you don't believe me; he's more easily reached than you may think). As it stands, I feel there's no reason whatsoever to remove information just because it's not triple-referenced. Part of it can't, and the other part is already referenced in the body of the text. As it stands, you've just disgusted me from ever entering any NEW information into a WikiPedia article. Thank you for showing me how contributing to WikiPedia is a complete waste of time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Burgmail (talk • contribs) 03:48, 21 February 2016 (UTC)Reply