User talk:Soulparadox

Hello, Soulparadox, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.

• Please sign your name on talk pages, by using four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username and the date, and helps to identify who said what and when. Please do not sign any edit that is not on a talk page.
• Check out some of these pages:
  • Introduction to Wikipedia | Tutorial
  • How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
  • The five pillars of Wikipedia | Cheatsheet of WikiCode

• If you have a question that is not one of the frequently asked questions below, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click the button below. Happy editing and again, welcome! ÐℬigXЯaɣ 07:36, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  
  
  
  

==References== {{Reflist}} 

ÐℬigXЯaɣ 07:36, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks DBigXray!--Soulparadox 08:49, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

I fixed the Logan Square, Chicago article Logawinner (talk) 21:35, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Soulparadox, you are invited to join other new editors and friendly hosts in the Teahouse, an awesome place to meet people, ask questions, and learn more about Wikipedia. Please join us! Rosiestep (talk) 01:52, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Soulparadox. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! Karl (talk) 17:17, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	Congratulations, Soulparadox, you've recently made your 1,000th edit to articles on English Wikipedia! Thank you so much for all the diligent copyediting you've undertaken and the many articles you've improved. Keep up the great work! Maryana (WMF) (talk) 22:33, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	Thanks for your help on K-pop and other articles. Drmies (talk) 14:21, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, glad you are! :) Send me a message on my talk page if you ever need any help!

Theopolisme _TALK 06:12, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad that you find editing Wikipedia is fun. Let me know if you need any help.

Salma Vian (talk) 03:08, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Check The Help Page.

Pacman451 (talk) 21:24, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad that your Wikipedia experience is going well and that you are happy! Thank you for your feedback and thank you for your contributions! For more help on getting started, please look at Help desk and the help pages.

If you need help editing,

• Check out the tutorial.
• Wanting to create an article? Use the article wizard.
• See the manual.

Cheers,
Riley Huntley   (Click here to reply)   00:41, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome

Lectonar (talk) 14:50, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it was very important to make mention of the influence of the briz cops and the Bjelke regime. I thank you for your kind acknowledgement. Dr.warhol (talk) 09:35, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are very welcome—this was an era that was significantly defined by Bjelke-Peterson's distaste for alternative culture (including policies of suppression) and the Brisbane police's reaction to the city's punk scene, and to omit them would be, at the very least, irresponsible.--Soulparadox (talk) 04:40, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in the process of cleaning up spamming of hoparoundindia.com. I noticed that you've used it as a source in Annavaram and Antarvedi. Do you believe hoparoundindia.com meets WP:RS criteria in any way? If so, how? --Ronz (talk) 22:26, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair Ronz, when editing the India articles, I had great difficulty locating sources (some of the articles are obscure), so there were occasions where I was glad just to find anything remotely reasonable. I just had a quick glance at the site and it seems promotional, so I appreciate the heads-up.--Soulparadox (talk) 03:21, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I completely understand. I'm fine leaving those references, in the hope that someone will find reliable sources in the future. --Ronz (talk) 04:48, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cool—I'm not holding my breath!--Soulparadox (talk) 04:50, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've placed 15 hyper-links of other articles in Wikipedia that link to the above referenced page in the "talk" section ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Rob_Halprin ) however, I'm unaware of how to insert them correctly inline. I see you're a respected contributor/editor. Could I trouble you for a little help please? Thanking you in advance for your help, ACAlliedcreative (talk) 22:32, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No probs—will look at it now.--Soulparadox (talk) 03:23, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your recent contributions to Briggs (rapper), including adapting the lead, tidying my messy citations, and adding extra info on his tattoo. —sroc (talk) 23:32, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problems. I'm very glad that the page is finally up, as I am a fan of the man they call "Briggs". I will continue to work on the page, so feel free to provide any feedback or guidance.--Soulparadox (talk) 03:45, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a bunch of extensive edits on Human Nature (band) to get it into decent copy-editing shape. Please take a look :) There are still a ton of citations to fill. AngusWOOF (talk) 05:06, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nice one AngusWOOF, as this is a page that required a fair amount of work in this area. I will have a look shortly.--Soulparadox (talk) 05:09, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I added some more references. It's looking good now. I've removed the "it's disorganized" and "copyedit" request from the front page. Still need official citations about the chart performances, copies sold and stuff from ARIA. AngusWOOF (talk) 18:06, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the open communication—I will see what I can add, but it might require sources that are not web-based. I might consider contacting the band's management. Furthermore, removing those tags is a fair call and I am glad that it has been done.--Soulparadox (talk) 05:26, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for adding sources. I think I can find the certifications (x platinum) on the ARIA website and maybe some leads on charting from the discography. The sources outside the web are okay to cite. Hopefully you won't need to bug management as that might be considered "original research". Had another question though; should Toby Allen have his own page? The other guys have one, and that can then detail his theatre involvements. AngusWOOF (talk) 18:56, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the late response; and yes I agree, this could be considered original research. I guess I would need to ask the band's management if they can direct me to any articles etc. that are not accessible on the Internet; or references that I have been unable to locate. I have not been able to look at this page for a couple of weeks due to other commitments, but I will look at it today and see what I can add. In response to your question on Toby Allen—I am not familiar enough with the band or Allen to know the answer to this. However, if he is an artist in his own right, in the same way that band members form solo careers in other musical acts, then it is likely to be appropriate. Just keep in mind the noteworthy aspect in relation to Wikipedia policy—I can't remember the policy exactly, but I know that he needs to have a significant body of work, at the very least.--Soulparadox (talk) 06:26, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Toby Zoates (artist).
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the reviewer's talk page

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Sionk (talk) 17:45, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your ..erm ...thanks :) As some one who's active in WikiProject Graffiti and WikiProject Visual arts I agree, it would be good to have an article about Zoates. The one good news source suggests he has been of some note in the past. I had a look online and couldn't see any other good news/book coverage myself, unfortunately. But obviously if you know of any other coverage yourself, either online or offline, please add it to the article to back up the claims. Best of luck! Sionk (talk) 22:08, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed you added the copyedit tag back on Whataburger. Did I miss some work on the article? AngusWOOF (talk) 19:17, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AngusWOOF, I didn't use a specific tag—have changed it now to the Expand article tag due to the tags that are further down the page.--Soulparadox (talk) 01:53, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Soulparadox. This is just to draw your attention to the fact that both you and User:HarshAJ have marked yourselves as working on Michael Peterson (surfer) for the GOCE drive. Please could you negotiate with HarshAJ on what to do? I'm putting a similar request on their talk page.

The best way to avoid this kind of thing happening is to remove the {{copyedit}} tag from the article before you start the copy edit. This will remove it from the category list and make it less likely someone else will pick it up. It's also a good idea to put {{GOCEinuse}} in its place (replacing this with {{Under construction}} if you take a break of several hours or more).

Kind regards, --Stfg (talk) 13:50, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up; I will get onto it now.--Soulparadox (talk) 14:29, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just seen your helpful message there. Thanks. Best, Simon. --Stfg (talk) 15:02, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem.--Soulparadox (talk) 15:04, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Please go ahead with the copy-edit. I realized I wasn't going to be able to come online owing to a sudden increase in School-work. Thanks! --HarshAJ ^{(Talk)(Contribs)} 03:26, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update HarshAJ.--Soulparadox (talk) 03:43, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here are a few links if you wish to go through them: 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 --HarshAJ ^{(Talk)(Contribs)} 03:58, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure :-) --HarshAJ ^{(Talk)(Contribs)} 04:06, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the way you've managed this, Soulparadox. Stfg (talk) 10:19, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem.--Soulparadox (talk) 16:50, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		The Half Barnstar
		Here's the other half of the barnstar for your collaborative work on the Briggs (rapper) article. Thanks for helping it become all that it can be! —sroc (talk) 06:18, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I've adapted the info you provided on the Robert Hunter Cup in the Briggs article and added it into the article on Hunter which was sadly lacking in that respect. Thanks again! —sroc (talk) 11:15, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! Thanks again sroc.--Soulparadox (talk) 02:48, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		The Cleanup Barnstar
		Thanks for participating in the September 2012 backlog elimination drive! For copy edits totaling more than 12,000 words (19,242 to be exact), you have earned The Cleanup Barnstar from the Guild of Copy Editors. Great job! We hope to see you again in November! —Torchiest talkedits 16:34, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi—thanks for your contributions to Da Nang! I've replied to the note you left on the talk page about sister cities. --dragfyre_ʞןɐʇc 14:12, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification; I have checked the Talk page and have responded accordingly.--Soulparadox (talk) 03:46, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Soulparadox. Racism in Israel, like all articles related to the Arab–Israeli conflict broadly construed, is subject to a one revert restriction (1RR). That means no editor can make more than one revert in any 24-hour period. See the box at the top of Talk:Racism in Israel for more information.

Please consider self-reverting your latest edits to the article, because they seem to be in violation of the 1RR restriction. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 04:24, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, I am presuming that you are referring to the manual reinstatement of the Chomsky citation, which I immediately removed. I tried to undo the initial insertion anyway, but the system requires me to do it manually and, given that I have already removed it, I guess that the point in moot. Please let me know if there is anything further required.--Soulparadox (talk) 04:33, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just wondering if you've considered joining the Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian music. I reckon you could make some great contributions. —sroc (talk) 04:59, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you kidnly for the recommendation, asd I have gladly joined the group!--Soulparadox (talk) 06:36, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		The Modest Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Soulparadox for copy editing articles with a total of 2,041 words during the Guild of Copy Editors October 2012 Copy Editing Blitz. Thank you for your contribution. --Stfg (talk) 14:32, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Live insect jewlery, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Northamerica1000^(talk) 11:27, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw your comment about putting a lot of work into improving Bob's page, and it needing a rewrite. I'm happy to work on that with you. Where/how would you like to start? Bill G. Evans (talk) 21:39, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bill, I think the best way to proceed will be if I do an overall copyedit of the article as part of the November Drive (including repairing the bare URLs), and then I think someone like yourself, who is knowledgeable on the topic, can fine-tune the article (e.g. updates, correcting accuracies, etc.). I will start on the copyediting today.-Soulparadox (talk) 02:00, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds great, man. You contribute a lot of writing, here...Bill G. Evans (talk) 23:43, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's in the blood :-)--Soulparadox (talk) 02:17, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I fact-checked the article; everything was correct. Nice! I showed the year on two recent projects, and cleaned up the wording on a line. That's all I can think of, unless you think other content stuff be written about. (If so, let me know.) Looking at the remaining warning tags, I don't see how any of them apply to the article. What do you think? Bill G. Evans (talk) 21:31, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bear with me Bill, as I have had a lot on this week, so I will get around to looking at this article during the next week. Thanks for your patience.--Soulparadox (talk) 16:07, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can see you do a lot of work here; please excuse my tenacity. In the mean time, I removed the remaining warning tags, and started a talk section for discussion thereof. Bill G. Evans (talk) 14:41, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your understanding Bill. I will have a look at the page now.--Soulparadox (talk) 14:54, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bill, as I replied to your message on the article's Talk page, I have reinstated the "refimprove" tag as there are further citations that are needed (and that have been identified with tags throughout the article). Also, the section on the list of music that he has been involved with will need citations, in line with Wikipedia policy. I also edited the layout for consistency and Wiki standards.--Soulparadox (talk) 15:29, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great work, as always. Thank you for showing how it's done. I'll get on those citations. Bill G. Evans (talk) 17:09, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just a note that I further replied on the page to your message. (Is there a way to PM in Wikipedia?) Bill G. Evans (talk) 23:57, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I realize you're busy—I went ahead and changed the name of the discography section and removed the personal section (since it can't be referenced). Is it cool to then remove the reference tag? Bill G. Evans (talk) 21:41, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, again. Hey, I referenced all the citations you flagged...hopefully all is good. Could you please have a look when you have a chance? Cheers and thanks. Bill G. Evans (talk) 20:59, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have reviewed the page and have made a few changes after a little bit of cleanup—see what you think. Great work by the way.--Soulparadox (talk) 22:25, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	The Copyeditor's Barnstar
	Fast and furious! Bill G. Evans (talk) 23:46, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Soulparadox for copy editing 8 articles for a cumulative score of 30,985 words during the Guild of Copy Editors November 2012 Backlog Elimination Drive. Thank you for your fine contribution. --Stfg (talk) 14:24, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy! I'm getting in contact with those members of WikiProject Skateboarding who seem to have been recently active on Wikipedia generally.

The project seems to have been fairly inactive over the last year or so and I was wondering if anyone in particular would have any interest in helping me "re-activate" it?

If you still have an interest in the Project and/or an interest in a bit of a Project-related editing drive, let me know.

Cheers, Stalwart111 01:32, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Would love to do this, as I am continuing to copyedit skate-related pages anyway. Let's do this!--Soulparadox (talk) 07:36, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome! Thanks for getting back to me. I've posted a note about getting the project restarted on the Project talk page. You might want to suggest some things that need work or point out some things you're working on. Once we have a good list we can add everything to the general {{to do}} list on the Project page. Stalwart111 22:56, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the barnstar! Very nice of you! Stalwart111 06:47, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problems—let's get this thing back up-and-running--Soulparadox (talk) 06:54, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No worries mate! Both were me - the new page and the redirect. The older DVS Shoe Company goes to the new DVS Shoes article. So the old link still works; just thought it would be worth updating them. But you should feel free to use whichever you think works in each article. In many cases it was the "old" company that was the sponsor so using the new name might not be accurate. That's why I "recreated" that title and redirected. Feel free to revert/edit as you see fit. You'll get no argument from me! All good! Stalwart111 08:39, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The blitz starts tomorrow. --Stfg (talk) 14:20, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is Saturday evening where I am, so I thought it had started from the "this weekend" that had been written. My apologies, I will start again tomorrow, but it appears to also be Saturday in your part of the world, based on the time of your comment?--Soulparadox (talk) 14:27, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Aha! I have just read the finer details, stating that the Blitz begins on Sunday, December 16, 2012. My apologies. Should I remove the article from my section, or can I just finish on Friday?--Soulparadox (talk) 14:29, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Let me think about that. Please note that blitzes and drives start and finish at UTC times. This matters because we want to be able to close them promptly, without considering when days of the week may start and end in different locales. I'll get back to you later. --Stfg (talk) 14:37, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank kindly :-)--Soulparadox (talk) 15:14, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Torchiest and I both think you should count today's edits, which are very useful after all, and your idea of finishing on Friday is good. As an alternative, you could also miss tomorrow if you prefer. Good luck. --Stfg (talk) 16:27, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the support and will finish on Friday, as I had planned to edit for the entire day today. Thanks again and I will ensure that I pay attention to the details for any future Blitzes or Drives.--Soulparadox (talk) 00:54, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Please accept this barnstar for copy editing articles for a grand total of 13,971 words during the Guild of Copy Editors December 2012 Blitz. Merry Christmas! --Stfg (talk) 15:45, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The RFC for TAFI is nearing it's conclusion, and it's time to hammer out the details over at the project's talk page. There are several details of the project that would do well with wider input and participation, such as the article nomination and selection process, the amount and type of articles displayed, the implementation on the main page and other things. I would like to invite you to comment there if you continue to be interested in TAFI's development. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 02:32, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

		The Cleanup Barnstar
		Awarded for your impressive efforts at The Berrics. Keep up the great work! Stalwart111 11:13, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely, couldn't agree more. Between his entry in the X Games and Maloof Money Cup as well as sponsorship deals and general coverage, I'd say there's more than enough to justify an article. The significant coverage he has received over the last 24 hours puts "significant coverage" beyond doubt and his previous coverage means I don't think we would have WP:BLP1E concerns about his passing. I say go for it - I'm more than happy to help. Stalwart111 04:21, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Stalwart—I am onto it.--Soulparadox (talk) 06:42, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Had not much else to do so I created a place-holder stub at Lewis Marnell with enough info/refs/cats for it not to get SD'd. I know you were looking into what else could be added. There's at least one "hidden" reference in the code. It's not great but there are others from TWS that would likely give more biography-style info. Cheers, Stalwart111 01:22, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, this is much appreciated. Will try to start today.--Soulparadox (talk) 02:24, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome! I have linked to the article from some of the articles where you added a section about him. Might be worth adding at least that info so we can "main" tag across from some while keeping a section in Almost Skateboards and others where he was directly relevant. Stalwart111 02:53, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. Thanks again.--Soulparadox (talk) 02:58, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re. your recent note at my talk page: I'm afraid that I know almost nothing about skateboarding, so I don't know how notable Lewis Marnell is, although I see that his name is redlinked. At the Nike Skateboarding article, he appears as one of a list of 22 professional members of the team, only three of whom are bluelinked. This leads me to question his notability. That being the case, it doesn't seem appropriate to devote so much emphasis to him in the Nike article.

The tone of the subsection on Marnell also seems entirely wrong, like a violation of WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Phrasing like "passed away" and "global skateboard community was shocked by the news", the rather extraneous detail about his recent marriage, and the blockquote from Nike's tribute site all make the subsection read more like a eulogy for Marnell than an encyclopedia entry.

If Marnell played a particularly significant role on the team (as opposed to being 1/22nd of it), it'd be appropriate to include a bit about his part on the team. If his death had a serious impact beyond the emotional on Nike—for instance, if it forced the cancellation of a major promotional tour, or occurred just when a Lewis Marnell shoe was about to hit the market—then it'd be appropriate to include a well-sourced passage on that.

I'll let you consider this and edit the page accordingly, since I assume that you're far more familiar with the skateboarding world than I. I'll watch the page, and will only stick my oar in again if it looks like it still fails WP:NOTMEMORIAL, or if there's something obvious that needs fixing. Ammodramus (talk) 02:32, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds fair to me and I have learned something through this process. Thank you and I will get onto the editing process for not only this page, but others that I have inserted this content into. Regards, --Soulparadox (talk) 02:34, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. At your talk page, I see that it looks like you and another editor are working up a Lewis Marnell article. Hope that turns out well for you. Ammodramus (talk) 02:42, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just looked at the new Lewis Marnell article. I'm afraid that the "Death of Lewis Marnell" section strikes me as problematic. At any time that an athlete or other public figure dies young, there's going to be an outpouring of sentiments such as those quoted—it's a tragedy; he/she had so much to give; we're all devastated; etc., etc. Quoting them doesn't add anything meaningful to the reader's knowledge about Marnell, just because such sentiments, however deeply and genuinely they're felt, are so common.

I'd suggest paring the section down to some very limited details about the date, place, and cause of his death. If some kind of permanent public memorials are created—a park, a statue, or a mural on a public building—it'd be appropriate to mention them. However, an extensive collection of tweets and Facebook posts threatens to turn the article into a memorial website rather than a legitimate encyclopedia article. Ammodramus (talk) 04:16, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The only reason I entered that content, is to document the public response to Marnell's death. The various publications are the key media sources in the area, SbA is the govt-funded organization for skateboarding in Australia, his Almost teammates are particularly significant due to the position that the board company holds in skateboarding, and O'neill and Rodriguez are not only senior Nike team members, but they are among the top-rated skateboarders globally today. I will remove the Fast Times Skateboarding section, but given that I will be expanding the remainder of the article and the Memorial policy applies specifically to user pages, shouldn't it be okay to keep this? Also, I will review the article again for emotive language, as I have been careful to not avoid the "he/she had so much to give; we're all devastated; etc., etc." sentiment you have mentioned. After consideration, I came to the conclusion that such content would not only facilitate the reader's understanding of the impact that Marnell had in the international skateboarding community, but also provide some insight into the organisations/individuals who published the tributes. I think it would also be useful to include the discussion of the Wikipedia Skateboarding group, so I will paste this into the Talk section of the page. Thanks again for the contribution and I look forward to your reply.--Soulparadox (talk) 04:34, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This isn't a big deal, but in my opinion, I don't think comments on discussions like this are necessary or helpful. The discussion is more than two years old, and it if happened to be on a talk page of a more heavily discussed article, it would have been archived long ago, meaning that continuing the discussion would have been prohibited. Currently it is still on the talk page but it's not helpful to contribute to very old discussions, since the original participants have long left it and are likely no longer tracking it. Trinitresque (talk) 23:34, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for choosing to remove it. However, outdated and obsolete discussions can still remain on talk pages. The only way to remove them from the talk page is by archiving them, which means moving them to an archived page. And this should be done only when the talk page is too long (larger than 75,000 bytes; the talk page is about 15,000 bytes now). So for now there is no reason for the outdated discussions can remain on the talk page. Trinitresque (talk) 02:20, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, got it. Thanks again.--Soulparadox (talk) 02:22, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for correcting my mis-correction! I wasn't aware of this "no hyphens after adverbs ending in -ly" rule, but it seems to ring true. Not sure how I didn't know this one. Anyhow, thanks! —sroc (talk) 03:42, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, someone will probably find information contradicting this before you know it.--Soulparadox (talk) 03:49, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

		The Modest Barnstar
		I award this barnstar to Soulparadox for copy editing four articles for a total of 5157 words in the GOCE January copy edit drive. Thanks for participating! --BDD (talk) 02:21, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again! We have some neat updates about the Teahouse:

• We’ve added badges! Teahouse awards is a pilot project to learn how acknowledgement impacts engagement and retention in Teahouse and Wikipedia.

• We’ve got a new WikiLove Badge script that makes giving badges quick and easy. Add it here. You can give out badges to thank helpful hosts, welcome guests, acknowledge great questions and more.

• Come join the experiment and let us know what you think!

• And...for all of your great work and all of the progress that you've helped the Teahouse make, we hereby award you the Host Badge:

	Teahouse Host Badge
	Awarded to hosts at the Wikipedia Teahouse. Experienced editors with this badge have committed to welcoming guests, helping new editors, and upholding the standards of the Teahouse by giving friendly and patient guidance—at least for a time. Hosts illuminate the path for new Wikipedians, like Tōrō in a Teahouse garden. Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here

Thanks again! Ocaasi 02:03, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi mate! Given your excellent work at Lewis Marnell, I was wondering if you had any interest in having a look at Tas Pappas and Ben Pappas, two other Australian skateboarders. I've added what I can from "mainstream" sources, but you seem to have a penchant for finding some of the less accessible stuff. Cheers, Stalwart111 08:48, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

More than heppy to do this and they were on my radar too—great kinds, huh? Will start today.--Soulparadox (talk) 01:16, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I figured you might have seen both articles :-) Check out Tas' Albury day-release vid on YouTube. Crazy stuff. Stalwart111 21:51, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Holy skateboard Batman! Awesome; hats off. Stalwart111 08:32, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks kindly, but I still have a fair amount to add. I just wanted to move to some other pages in the meantime to keep myself motivated.--Soulparadox (talk) 08:49, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Even better! I'll look forward to further additions, ha ha. Stalwart111 09:18, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, In the past few days, Today's Articles for Improvement has gone through many changes. We have modified the process for adding Nominations, which now uses a template/table format and requires only 3 supports for an article to be selected. There is now a Holding Area, where articles are kept for discussion before being selected for a particular date. The TAFI schedule now involves adding 10 articles weekly, chosen from a variety of topics. We now have an Accomplishments page where we will be highlighting our older TAFI articles which have now become quality articles on the Wikipedia. The Project is almost ready to hit the Main Page, where it will be occupying a section just below "Did you Know" section. Three article from the weekly batch of 7 will be displayed randomly at the main page, the format of which can be seen at the Main Page sandbox. There is also an ongoing discussion at the Main page talk over the final details before we can go forward with the Main Page. If you have any ideas to discuss with everyone else, please visit the TAFI Talk Page and join in on the ongoing discussions there. You are also invited to add new nominations, and comment and suport on the current ones at the Nominations page. You can also help by helping in the discussions at the Holding Area. Above all, please do not forget to improve our current Today's Articles for Improvement Thank you and hoping to have some productive work from you at the Project, TheOriginalSoni (talk) 11:17, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply] (From the TAFI team)

It's been an exciting year for the Teahouse and you were a part of it. Thanks so much for visiting, asking questions, sharing answers, being friendly and helpful, and just keeping Teahouse an awesome place. You can read more about the impact we're having and the reflections of other guests and hosts like you. Please come by the Teahouse to celebrate with us, and enjoy this sparkly cupcake badge as our way of saying thank you. And, Happy Birthday!

	Teahouse First Birthday Badge
	Awarded to everyone who participated in the Wikipedia Teahouse during its first year! To celebrate the many hosts and guests we've met and the nearly 2000 questions asked and answered during this excellent first year, we're giving out this tasty cupcake badge. Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges

--Ocaasi and the rest of the Teahouse Team 22:34, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your comment on the talk of Lem Villemin, I have nominated it for deletion. Would you care to comment and help it guide towards a consensus? Thank you. Mr T^{(Talk?) (New thread?)} 14:49, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Given where I linked to it from, I imagine you'll see this in your watchlist. Am struggling to build a narrative - as always your contributions would be welcome! Stalwart111 08:52, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this edit. The statistic is an important one and deserves to be in the article, but you changed it so that it is objective and not misleading. Good job. --GHcool (talk) 18:53, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's a good question, sorry I don't have a firm answer. Different areas of wikipedia seem to hew to the citations standard in different ways - the fiction sections are rife with stuff that is often uncited but since it's all written by fanboys it is perhaps assumed to be correct. I think your best bet is to hang out with some of the music editors and get their sense of how much they require in terms of citations; I suppose if their name is listed in the album cover, that itself can serve as a citation, so the album itself is citation enough? Honestly I don't know - sorry I can't help more. --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 20:34, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this.--Soulparadox (talk) 04:32, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You need to re-evaluate what you're doing on wikipedia here. In the case of Mark Gonzales or Lance Mountain, a single sentence does not need its own header. Similar biography articles have maybe 4-5 sections, not the 20 you have designed. In the case of Transworld Skateboarding, your additions are just not appropriate for an encyclopedia. The extensive section on only 1 year of the TW awards does not make sense when there is no mention of any other year the awards were given. The 30 most influential skaters too is not appropriate and could even be violating copyrights. Just try to use some better logic. Cosprings (talk) 14:34, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up Cosprings. I have been editing the articles in this way with a view to developing them over time and I thought the sub-sections would help with clarity, but it looks as though I am going into too much detail. It would be great to get further insight into the copyright issue, as I am unsure of where you are coming from with this. Regards,--Soulparadox (talk) 06:22, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Magazines object to when "top lists" are published publicly. Such is the case with lists from Rolling Stone, etc. Much better. Keep up the good work.Cosprings (talk) 12:35, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Was not aware of this—thank you kindly Cosprings.--Soulparadox (talk) 04:28, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So a print encyclopedia, a strawberry shortcake, and a sycamore walk into a bar - wait, have you heard this one? (talk) 22:39, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No I haven't, but thank you all the same!--Soulparadox (talk) 00:12, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:ENGVAR as to why a plural is needed for collectives, e.g. bands, in British English. Hence "Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds ARE a rock band", "Queen ARE a rock band", etc. Articles in American English treat collectives in the singular (e.g., "Nirvana IS a rock band", etc.) Also, please be more specific about references that you are looking for in the article. CN tags are more helpful than a Refneeded tag at the head, especially for an article with 19 sources. I don't see the lack that you see. CCS81 (talk) 00:34, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, I have read the section (thank you for the link) and in British English the application of the rule is based upon the meaning; that is, if the numerous components of a collective noun are being referred to, then "are" is appropriate. You will see that this applies in a latter part of the Lead section, where "have" is appropriate, as the members are being discussed. However, the first sentence is an explanation of what the title "Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds" is, and that is clearly the single entity of "a band"—otherwise, this would be more appropriate as a sub-section of the Nick Cave page, as the use of "are" implies that the "Bad Seeds" are a separate entity. Also, I am in the process of enhancing the tone of the article (so that it reads less like a fan page) and inserting citations (where I can find them), or tags when I cannot find a reputable citation.--Soulparadox (talk) 00:44, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote this before I saw your reply: Re: the first sentence of the Bad Seeds article, see also WP:PLURALS and Collective noun. Also, compare the opening sentences in the Queen and Smile articles, British bands with singular noun band names, to the opening sentences of Bad Brains and The Dead Milkmen, American bands with plural noun band names. Trust me, this issue comes up a lot. But I assure you, you have misinterpreted the sentence in the MOS and you are thinking in terms of American English only (which is also what I speak and think in.) Bands are perceived as collectives in British English, it is not singular. Again, please look at some other articles in British English and you will see what I mean. Also recommended: The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, etc. All of these have plural verbs in their opening sentences. As for the Bad Seeds article, fix away. CCS81 (talk) 00:50, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All I am asking is that you interpret the MOS excerpt that you sent me and apply it to the band-related issue—is it really that difficult? Apologies, as I considered the request straightforward. Thanks anyway (I will ask another copyeditor for assistance).--Soulparadox (talk) 01:37, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I did that. Let me try again: "Some collective nouns may refer either to a single entity or to the members that compose it." This is referring to the possible verb conjugations in American or British English, respectively. A collective noun could be a band name. "In British English, such words are sometimes treated as singular, but more often treated as plural, according to context." This tells us that they should be plural. Your problem is that you are hung up on this issue of context: you think the context here is treating the band as a singular thing. But this does not happen in British English. This is not what is meant by "context". The context is what follows: "Exceptionally, names of towns and countries usually take singular verbs (unless they are being used to refer to a team or company by that name, or when discussing actions of that entity's government). For example, in England are playing Germany tonight, England refers to a football team; but in England is the most populous country of the United Kingdom, it refers to the country. In North American English, these words (and the United States, for historical reasons) are almost invariably treated as singular; the major exception is when sports teams are referred to by nicknames that are plural nouns, when plural verbs are commonly used to match. See also National varieties of English above." So the problem is your hangup on the phrase "according to context." Does this help? CCS81 (talk) 01:44, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is clearer, but the use of the words "could" and "usually" means that exceptions exist and, as the band matter is not specifically covered, how can you be sure?--Soulparadox (talk) 02:19, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The exceptions are what follows (beginning with the word "Exceptionally..."). Band names are not listed in the prose that covers the exceptions. The other way to be sure is to step away from the MOS and look at the language in action by reading the other articles. If you're going to be in the Copy Editor's Guild, you're going to need to look more closely at the precedent in articles and also take seriously talk page consensuses, not merely stumble over the opaque wording in the MOS. CCS81 (talk) 02:34, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

		The Cleanup Barnstar
		For your working cleaning up 12,000 words during the Guild of Copy Editors March 2013 Backlog Elimination Drive, please accept this token of appreciation from the Guild. We hope you'll be back in May to help again. —Torchiest talkedits 01:04, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you put the two references together, 7:30 report is stating that MCC did not issue a pocket: "What's unclear is who was responsible for ensuring the wall was safe and whether the attached hoarding had a permit. Early this week, Melbourne City Council said it didn't issue one and sheeted responsibility for the site home to the State Planning Minister." And The Australian states that Planning Minister Matthew Guy said he had approved a permit for the construction of Grocon's "Portrait" apartment development on the site but not the hoarding. Does this not establish that neither the Planning Department nor Melbourne City Council had issued a permit for the hoarding? The CFMEU blog you added is a good reference, but their reluctance to be specific about the permit issue is them being over cautious about stating their case, which is not surprising seeing as they are engaged in such a big legal battle with Grocon. I think based on the first two references it is reasonable to state that there was no permit. Djapa Owen (talk) 22:21, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the clarification.--Soulparadox (talk) 03:28, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm curious as to why you reverted the two column format used for the references in the Chrissy Amphlett article, back to one? Not criticising, just interested. I can see you are a very experienced editor, I have only been actively editing for about 3 months & continually learning about layout/formatting etc. Cheers Melbourne3163 (talk) 18:54, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad that you have asked this question, as I have intuitively created two columns when the number of references is over twenty. This is based on what I have observed in more notable pages, but I need to find out if a policy exists for this topic. If you find anything, please let me know.--Soulparadox (talk) 10:13, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see you added the Urthboy#Smokey's Haunt (2012) section to the Urthboy article last October. In November, Jax 0677 created the Smokey's Haunt article as a redirect to the Urthboy#Albums section (curiously, not to the section for the album, but I'll fix that for now). I was wondering whether either of you might be intending to turn Smokey's Haunt into a full-blown article? Someone should, but I thought you might be better placed given the work you've put in to date. —sroc (talk) 14:35, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi sroc. I have not given thought to this idea, so I will need to undertake some research and take it from there. I am open to doing it, but will need to find out more on the topic, as I have not even heard the album.--Soulparadox (talk) 17:58, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The beauty of Wikipedia — No original research means you don't have to! Adapting the section from the Urthy article should be a good start, add an infobox and the tracklist and we should be there! I'll have a crack if you don't get to it first. —sroc (talk) 06:15, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What about notability sroc?--Soulparadox (talk) 06:40, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What of it? Addressing the criteria at Notability:

• "Significant coverage": your section in the Urthy article already has six citations specifically about the album or the accompanying tour;
• "Reliable": sources include Triple J and ARIA;
• "Sources": only one source is Elefant Tracks, and only two citations are from the same source (Triple J), so good diversity;
• "Independent of the subject": see above;
• "Presumed": the range of information and sources is comparable with similar articles (e.g., other Urthy albums) and more information/sources may become available over time as the album continues to garner exposure.

Do you agree? —sroc (talk) 11:23, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, see for yourself! Smokey's Haunt —sroc (talk) 11:45, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, great job! I will continue to add to it if anything else comes up.--Soulparadox (talk) 19:58, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I was really just working from the building blocks that were already there and the content you had already provided. Please do keep improving it wherever you can. —sroc (talk) 23:08, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Will do sir!--Soulparadox (talk) 23:40, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to the Hawking article. I hope you understand that this is a featured article, and the information about the man's political opinions on this particular issue is a bit of a minor issue and not really due a whole section in the general scheme of things! He has hit the headlines a few times about such things, but based on what we know so far, it certainly doesn't need much of a mention- and a brief mention as been included already. I do appreciate that you have improved the article even after your edits has been reverted a couple of times. Thank you very much !! --Slp1 (talk) 00:41, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem—your reasoning is sound. However, I spaced out some of the paragraphs as there were several particularly long sections.--Soulparadox (talk) 01:24, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I created an article for the Golden Era Mixtape 2013 — someone had to — but I could use some help padding it out and inserting some references. Reckon you could have a looksee when you get a chance? —sroc (talk) 11:00, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, someone definitely had to—great work! I will look at it this week sroc.--Soulparadox (talk) 11:45, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great work, thanks! FYI, I noticed you've replicated an error I was making for ages and only recently picked up on. When using the {{cite}} template (or using the template tool in the editor), put the whole date of the cited page in the date field, not separated over the date, month and year fields.

This:

{{cite web|title=Golden Era Records Cypher - Featuring Briggs, Vents, Funkoars, Hilltop Hoods & K21|url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrlSeKv9AOs|work=YouTube|publisher=Google, Inc|accessdate=20 May 2013|author=GoldenEraRecords|format=Video upload|date=24|month=January|year=2013}}

produces this reference:

GoldenEraRecords (24). "Golden Era Records Cypher - Featuring Briggs, Vents, Funkoars, Hilltop Hoods & K21" (Video upload). YouTube. Google, Inc. Retrieved 20 May 2013.

whereas this:

{{cite web|title=Golden Era Records Cypher - Featuring Briggs, Vents, Funkoars, Hilltop Hoods & K21|url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrlSeKv9AOs|work=YouTube|publisher=Google, Inc|accessdate=20 May 2013|author=GoldenEraRecords|format=Video upload|date=24 January 2013}}

produces this reference:

GoldenEraRecords (24 January 2013). "Golden Era Records Cypher - Featuring Briggs, Vents, Funkoars, Hilltop Hoods & K21" (Video upload). YouTube. Google, Inc. Retrieved 20 May 2013.

I've bolded the differences so you can see them clearly. I was doing the same thing for as long as I can remember before I realised anything was amiss. The fields in the template tool are rather confusing about this and I've already raised it as an issue elsewhere.[1][2] —sroc (talk) 11:26, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[3] —sroc (talk) 12:19, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

sroc, you have resolved an issue that bothered me for so long that I ended up forgetting about it. Finally! Thank you sir.--Soulparadox (talk) 14:05, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to help. It was so obscure I didn't realise what was happening for the longest time. I'm working on getting the RefTemplate tool fixed but I can't fix it myself! —sroc (talk) 10:10, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is not my area of expertise, but be sure to let me know if I can help out in any way.--Soulparadox (talk) 14:07, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to invite you to assist me with a large comprehensive edit I have been working on for the skateboarding article since Oct 2012 located in my sandbox here: User:Tinkermen/SandboxGH

This edit has turned out to be very large based on the amount of history in skateboarding & I could use some help in completing the edit by having other editors to collaborate with me during this time, as I have have not had any time to work on the edit since around Dec 2012. I hope you will join me in this effort, I will also leave a couple of other editors this same message.Tinkermen (talk) 21:47, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the invitation—I will try my best to contribute.--Soulparadox (talk) 05:26, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You asked for a reason for the edit. The reason is WP:BRD, see the talk page for a discussion. The page is under 1RR, would you mind reverting back to my version with the BRD edit summery? TippyGoomba (talk) 21:00, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the clarification, as it was not evident in the Edit summary.--Soulparadox (talk) 21:06, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Soulparadox. You have new messages at Talk:Renovation.
Message added -- Trevj (talk) 10:10, 20 June 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Good pick-up on disambiguating the link Paul Kelly → Paul Kelly (musician) in the Smokey's Haunt article. I've replicated this in the Urthboy article, which I think is where it came from (I probably copied it without realising). —sroc (talk) 09:12, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I have made this error innumerable times!--Soulparadox (talk) 11:00, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is underway at [4] about whether more detail needs to be added to the boat arrivals image to improve its POV. Please have a look and contribute. Djapa Owen (talk) 04:58, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Day Translations (2).
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
• You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! RadioFan (talk) 01:15, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. We're organizing an office hours session with the Teahouse to bring in mentors from across the wiki to try out Snuggle and discuss it's potential to support mentorship broadly. The Snuggle team would appreciate it if you would come and participate in the discussion. We'll be having it in #wikimedia-office ^connect on Wed. July 17th @ 1600 UTC. See the agenda for more info. --EpochFail^{(talk • work)}, Technical 13 (talk), TheOriginalSoni (talk) 18:57, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What are the remaining "bare URLs" in this article? You reverted my deletion of the template after I fixed them. AfricaTanz (talk) 10:57, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Citations 4, 5, 6, 9, and 10.--Soulparadox (talk) 11:06, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you should review the meaning of "bare URL" for this purpose. None of the citations you listed fits that definition. I am eliminating the template on that basis. AfricaTanz (talk) 11:20, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You may find those acceptable, but I will fix them today.--Soulparadox (talk) 05:21, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What you find acceptable has nothing to do with the proper use of the template. AfricaTanz (talk) 06:23, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In which case, you should have inserted the more accurate template, rather than try and over-protect the status of an article in an unusual manner. Did you write the article, or do you have some other kind of connection to it? Over-zealous may be understating it.--Soulparadox (talk) 06:27, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That is okay, I have done it for you, as per the last occasion. Keep flying the flag sir!--Soulparadox (talk) 06:32, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know how to check the edit history of an article? Do you know what WP:AGF requires? I suggest you study up before you get blocked for incivility. Cheers. AfricaTanz (talk) 08:06, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your tone is not civil sir/madam. That is simply the point I was making.--Soulparadox (talk) 08:10, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! from Adrian. You have reverted my addition to the Nike, Inc. article, where I added a simple pronunciation guide of "nigh-kee". You said that the "IPA hyperlink is sufficient". I disagree, I think my simple guide should be there as well. Why not give the reader the phonetic pronunciation AND the IPA? The more interested reader can check the IPA while the general reader can pass on and not be distracted by going away from the article on a link. I imagined that the reader would be helped by my addition so why was it not acceptable? Best wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 16:23, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the communication, but let's discuss it on the Nike Talk page. I will ask about your query there.--Soulparadox (talk) 14:35, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that was some of the neatest copy-editing I have seen in 8 years of doing this. The shortness of your User Contribs page is nearly confounding. But excellent work, really nicely done. Eaglizard (talk) 00:12, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]