User talk:TinyMark

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Archive
Archives
1, 2


Contents

[edit] User keeps vandalising/misquoting the Ibrahim Hooper page

The user by the IP address 4.241.21.190 keeps changing the quote made by Ibrahim Hooper from:

  • Ibrahim Hooper has said that in 20 years worth of trips to mosques, "I've never heard violence preached; I've never heard anti-Semitism or anti-Americanism preached."


to

  • Ibrahim Hooper has said that in 20 years worth of trips to mosques, "I've heard violence preached; I've heard anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism preached."

They have done this twice already, and both times I had to undo their edit. You had warned this user before about vandalism on the wikipage "Camels," and yet they still do it here.

Here is the page that shows where they edited the text:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ibrahim_Hooper&oldid=196432989

[edit] Undo:Bruichladdich

Moved discussion to User talk:TinyMark/Scotch Whisky

[edit] Lacky =\

If you have a comment directed towards me, please use my talk page and not someone else's. If you believe that wanting grammar to match throughout the article constitutes ownership then I think you need to flip through the policies and guidelines again. If you look up from our conversation you'll find that I'm not the only one that thinks Ant's edits are arbitrary and without direction. --AeronPrometheus (talk) 12:30, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

When I saw the edit she was making. I thought, "Thank God, someone has the guts to do that." I wouldn't because I'm aware that it's an American thing and I'm a Brit. However, as far as I know, this "off of" thing is considered bad style in North America as well. Do we have to write the way we speak? Who knows, maybe it will become acceptable some day, and if you want to go for it then do it!
My main concern was that you were more or less telling him to ask for permission to edit the article. And that definitely sound like WP:OWN to me, not because I think you think you own the article, but perhaps that a particular group does!
I made my comment there because I like to keep discussions on one page, just so that the conversation can be easily followed in case arbitration is required. Happy editing TINYMARK 15:51, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Etaples

Sorry Mark, I don't know what you mean by "International format" or what your reasoning is for changing the order. Grant | Talk 12:19, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Grant. I have been away for a few weeks, sorry. Because this article has a very obvious British connection the "non-American" date form should be used. I also linked dates that were not linked. See here for details. TINYMARK 21:44, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I would make two points about that:
1. the American/non-American divide is spurious and tends to rest on an assumption that British forms are normal for "non-Americans", which is not correct. There are actually a lot of different forms of English grouped under Commonwealth English and Canadians, for instance, often use "American" forms.
2. "Month-day" is not "American"; it is the format used, for instance, in Australian newspapers and magazines. Grant | Talk 03:16, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi Grant. While I agree with what you say, it does not conform with the guidelines. For the article in question, I would say that there is also a non-British but still Commonwealth connection. So there is no need to change to British format if the Aussies use month-day. But some form of consistency would be nice. I don't really mind. I wish we could all agree to use one (any) format—but that will never happen! Happy editing. TINYMARK 20:27, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

Hi there. I just wanted to say thats for reverting the vandalism on my page! Sorry i dint say thanks sooner but you only really notice what has happened when you look in the history. Thanks again. ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 12:31, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jason Statham

So how come you view this as vandalism? I removed comments that I'd made previously. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.103.238.56 (talk) 21:52, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

So don't make the comments in the first place! Article pages are for verifiable information and not experimental comments. TINYMARK 00:31, 25 April 2008 (UTC)