User talk:Karbuncle

Welcome!

Hello, Karbuncle, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Edith Piaf[edit]

Please check your edits to this article. You have mixed up 10 Nov and 11 Oct. Ian Cairns (talk) 16:39, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Edith Piaf[edit]

I'm not sure what you mean. I haven't mixed something up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Karbunce (talk • contribs) 17:41, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you have. It would take me only a second to correct - but it's more important that you spot your incorrect date change. You changed 10 10 to 11 10 thinking you had changed it from October 10 to October 11 - you didn't - you changed it to 10 November (assuming no-one else has corrected this in the meantime). Also, please sign all correspondence with ~~~~ - thanks, Ian Cairns (talk) 19:55, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just spotted that you have now corrected this. Thanks, Ian Cairns (talk) 19:57, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Joey Lauren Adams[edit]

Please provide good sources to verify the 1971 birth year for Joey Lauren Adams. hbdragon88 (talk) 01:15, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.nndb.com/people/134/000030044/

What is your source for that 1968 is the correct date? Do you have a birth certificate or similar? I searched the Google before I changed and I found plenty more sources which gave 1971 than 1968. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Karbuncle (talk • contribs) 04:28, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, even one of the External Links is to a page that gives 1971. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Karbuncle (talk • contribs) 04:32, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I found a source – an article that listed Adams as a 31-year-old actress in 1999. I'll put it in the article. hbdragon88 (talk) 04:58, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~) and I prefer to keep conversations together, which is why I've posted your answer to this talk page. hbdragon88 (talk) 04:59, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the same article or if it's another one (at least it's written by the same journalist) says she was 29 in 1999 which is linked right under your change. However, I cant't see that you have provided a link to the article that listes her as 31. Karbuncle (talk) 14:27, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(I´ve written this in my talk page too, didn't knew if you could see it there. Also. Did I do it the right way with the sign-thing?)

I'm watching this page. Just reply on this page and keep the conversation going. You're signing the posts correctly.

I used the Lexis Nexis engine and copied the quote as is: it says 31-year-old actress in that article. I don't know why you changed it to 29-year-old, that's not what the article says. hbdragon88 (talk) 18:32, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is. Click on the links under "References". The same sentence that you quoted says "29-year-old actress" in the article. Karbuncle 19:15, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I see that now. Hmmm. I'm pretty sure Slotnk's article originated in the Toronto Sun, though, and was reprinted by that website, which might have introduced the error. Let me fire up the search engine and look for more confirmation. Can you leave it as is right now while I look? hbdragon88 (talk) 20:23, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Found another Sun article that lists her as a 32-year-old actress in 2000. Also, when signing the posts yourself, don't use the nowiki tags; just the tidles. I used the nowiki so it wouldn't sign my post. hbdragon88 (talk) 20:30, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please provide a link to that article so that I can check it out for myself? Karbuncle (talk) 21:56, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken a screenshot of the article. I have the subscription to Lexis Nexis because I'm a college student; I'm not sure how you could get a hold of a subscription. hbdragon88 (talk) 22:27, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I´ve found another reliable source which states her as being born in 1971. According to the swedish version of www.ancestry.com (www.ancestry.se) US census reports her as being born in 1971. I've taken a screenshot since you can't get access to the information without a payed membership http://i49.tinypic.com/2cicmxk.jpg Karbuncle (talk) 03:33, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Birth date changes[edit]

I've made some comments at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Actors_and_Filmmakers#Date_of_birth_changes about the changes you have been making to birth dates on actor articles. Betty Logan (talk) 16:18, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Warning for edits on Rebekah Johansson[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:46, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

Please ensure you include a reliable source (note - not IMDB!) when adding personal information to biography articles. I've removed the edit you made to Henry Silva as no source was provided for verification, which is Wikipedia policy. --Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 15:00, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have again removed the birthdate you added to Henry Silva as the source provided, per consensus at the reliable sources noticeboard, does not meet reliable sourcing criteria for personal information in BLPs (archived discussion). I see from the messages here on your userpage that you make many changes to personal info in BLPs. Please do ensure that the references you use meet WP:RS criteria, and when in doubt it is best to clear the source via the noticeboard.Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 20:04, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have also reverted your change to the Macy Gray article. You are essentially performing original research and "connecting the dots" to assume that the record is specifically related to Macy Gray; this method of research via Vermomi.net has been rejected at the reliable sources noticeboard (archived discussion) Even in our edit summaries you state "possible relatives". That's certainly not good enough for a BLP. --Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 20:29, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock[edit]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Karbuncle (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have not "abused" multiple accounts. I was banned after a discussion with Ponyo where he reverted edits despite reliable sources which had been accepted many times before and I expressed my opinion that I didn't thought he was suitable as an administrator and that someone should look over his admin priviligies. I also said that he was inconsistent since he didn't remove all previous references to the source in question. He also insinuated that the only good source would be free web pages to etablished media only, which would make books etc unreliable as a source though he refused to answer if this was exactly what he meant. He then asked me if I had edited under some other account and I replied that it was none of his business since it's not against the rules to have several accounts.

Decline reason:

Multiple accounts Confirmed by checkuser. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:53, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

For any admins reviewing the block, the pertinent conversation referred to above is here. --Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 00:43, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]