User talk:Eyer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Indecent exposure[edit]

I quoted the criminal in that case as set out in that judgement (Indecent exposure). He did NOT say "wee-wee". Wikipedia is NOT censored. --Deus omnipotens sum (talk) 02:40, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

@Deus omnipotens sum: Do you have a secondary source that has this quote? Wikipedia's policy states "Do not use trial transcripts and other court records, or other public documents, to support assertions about a living person." I don't care to censor anything... I just want to see an appropriate secondary (not primary) source for the claim. Thanks. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 02:47, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
Note that the policy says "to support assertions about a living person" (i.e. usually stuff of the form, N.N. said that cows are blue with green stripes, and usually on biographies of living persons, to avoid "putting stuff in people's mouths" that they didn't say). This is not a biography of the specific flasher in Boston, and in any case takes the words straight out of his mouth (i.e. is a direct quotation) - the source isn't the judge, but rather that specific perp (he's directly quoted in the judgement and thus is really the end source). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deus omnipotens sum (talkcontribs) 04:15, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
You know ~ Wiki could care less whether it's true or not, so long as it is properly sourced ~ so find that statement in all your policy quotes ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 04:29, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
@Mitchellhobbs: Do you mean Verifiability and its essay counterpart Truth? —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 13:22, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
Yes~ ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 13:35, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
@Deus omnipotens sum: My mission, when I initially reverted that edit, was patrolling recent changes for vandalism. We've established that expanding the quote to include profanity wasn't vandalism. Wikipedia doesn't censor, so having the profanity in the article doesn't concern me (though it is a red flag for possible vandalism, which is why I got involved at all). We've now had a brief discussion about reliable sources: secondary sources are preferred, though primary sources aren't forbidden. I am left with two questions: (1) is using only a primary source sufficient here? and (2) does the quote add anything of value to the article? Those two points are beyond my sphere of concern for this article, so I'll leave it to other editors from here. Thank you both for your time. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 13:22, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
You know ~ ~ I met a goose one time ~ (at the park) ~ she had a lot of feathers ~ but I didn't think she was exposing herself ~ just a comment ~ ~mitch~ (talk) 03:34, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Wendy Murphy Update[edit]

@Eyer:

I made a change recently and cited the book that the information came from as well as where the quote came from. Yet it was taken down. Was there a mistake in how I cited? I was trying to correct it when the correction was removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.255.49.4 (talk) 23:35, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

It was less the citation, and more a potential violation of Wikipedia's biographical policies. I didn't think the statement "She is also a supporter of "guilty-until-proven-innocent" in the American Judicial system." was appropriate to state in Wikipedia's voice. I re-added your content in the voice of the author of the book... and I improved the citation by adding more detail from the book's ISBN. I'm still not sure that it fits Wikipedia's biographical policies, but I'll leave that to editors to decide. If I can help more, I'm happy to. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 23:42, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Michael Redman[edit]

I suggest you delete the post in reference to Trish Duke immediately. Michael Redman Jr TheFourPreps (talk) 22:26, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

@TheFourPreps: ? —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 22:28, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. Do you know how to delete the other post in reference to Trish Duke. I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks Michael Redman Jr TheFourPreps (talk) 23:25, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
@TheFourPreps: Which post is that? I'm happy to look. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 23:26, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
Eyer
Please delete post that says I am not same mind or heart
TheFourPreps TheFourPreps (talk) 02:11, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
@TheFourPreps: Which post is that? I'm happy to look. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 02:14, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
Reply to Eyer
It is the post Michael RedmanJr
That 5:07 and added content +118
and 4:54 and added content +434
Please take care of this TheFourPreps (talk) 03:02, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
@TheFourPreps: Perhaps the information at Wikipedia:Requests for oversight can help. There is a process for removing potentially libelous content. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 03:11, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you![edit]

Barnstar of Reversion2.png The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
I've been seeing you doing vandalism reversion on some of the same articles as me, keep up the good work and thanks for reviewing recent changes! PohranicniStraze (talk) 01:41, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

My partial revert[edit]

I can't be certain this generated a notification to you, and I wanted to make sure you saw it—especially since I see you're doing the same thing at other articles. I'm about as fervent a defender of de-caps per JOBTITLES as anybody, but I think there is a strong case that that particular line of an infobox should be treated as title case; i.e. all words capitalized except for a few exceptions like "of" and "the"; hence exempt from the JOBTITLES modifier clause. ―Mandruss  19:55, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

It did and I did. I had read somewhere that infoboxes were to be set in sentence case, but I can't find it now. If it's custom to pick and choose which parts of infoboxes are title case vs. sentence case, then that's fine by me. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 20:20, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
It would be really nice if officeholder infoboxes were consistent on this, and I haven't seen anybody else de-capping that line of the infoboxes. Have you? My hope was to convince you to refrain (and perhaps even revert some of the other changes) and see if that unwritten convention can be sustained in the long term. ―Mandruss  21:07, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
I don't personally like those lines being title case, but I don't feel strongly enough about it to push for a change. (Too much other work to do.) I'll refrain from further uncapitalizations of that line. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 22:29, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

I have watched original movie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imransaifimrt (talkcontribs) 19:00, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Raaste ka patthar[edit]

I watched original.movor Imransaifimrt (talk) 19:03, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Job titles[edit]

I just made a proposal about job titles on WT:MOSBIO. I'd greatly appreciate your input.

Cheers! --Woko Sapien (talk) 17:17, 24 August 2019 (UTC)