Home

Talk

Barnstars, Food, Kittens...

My DYKs

My Good Articles

Please help get these British people up to GA

Guestbook

Adoption Homepage

Userboxes I've Made

Funny Stuff

Things I have CSDed

Please help out creating these vital pages

Archives

Archive 1:May 2013-June 2013 Archive 2:June 2013-July 2013 Archive 3:July 2013-August 2013 Archive 4:August 2013-September 2013 Archive 5:September 2013-October 2013 Archive 6:October 2013-November 2013 Archive 7:November 2013-December 2013 Archive 8:December 2013-January 2014 Archive 9:January 2014-February 2014 Archive 10:February 2014-March 2014 Archive 11:March 2014-April 2014 Archive 12:April 2014 Archive 13:April 2014-May 2014 Archive 14:May 2014-June 2014 Archive 15:June 2014-July 2014 Archive 16:July 2014-

If you are here to speak to me, please take a minute to visit my guestbook. It is greatly appreciated.

##M007 ^connect

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:42, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:43, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Matty, Thank you again for your help on references, think I have done it. Can I now ask about how to load a picture and get the page activated? Meltemkocak (talk) 11:09, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk. Thanks, Matty.007 11:14, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you almost instantly revert my fact that Sherlock never shoots anyone in the head point blank in the novels? Why can't someone add something that says that goes against canon? I don't know what "not a reliable source" means, the source is CONAN DOYLE's BOOKS, I was just giving an article as reference. You also could just delete the web reference instead of undoing all my changes, there are critic reviews in the writing section where they don't belong. 71.226.135.22 (talk) 15:46, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The reviews in the writing section are more relevant there. Saying that 'in the books Holmes never killed anyone-except in his most famous moment with Moriarty and a guy who didn't count in self defence' sounds like fan trivia, given that he did kill people in the original, and one on purpose then that point seems fairly null. A reliable source is one which comes from an established source, not the first Google result which comes from a bloke on Tumblr. Lastly, we revert then discuss before simply edit warring, which isn't a good policy. I think the fact that in the books Magnussen survived can be added. Moving the chunk from the writing section isn't helpful, it talks about Moffat's writing style, making it more relevant in that section (and you simply moved it to an unrelated part of reviews). Thanks, Matty.007 15:57, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and just to warn you of the three revert rule, three reversions on the same page in 24 hours will likely result in a block, just a heads up in case you weren't aware. Thanks, Matty.007 15:58, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not trying to edit war, I'm sure you can spin edits around me, I just think it's a pretty big difference from the source material but you aren't allowing anything mentioning it. Who specifically (which story) did he kill in the original that you're thinking of? Because if Sherlock was shooting at someone trying to kill him, that's different than executing an unarmed man. And I still say the reviews from specific people belong in the review section, many reviews talk about the writers. Also "Milverton" didn't survive, he was murdered. Thanks. 71.226.135.22 (talk) 16:05, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you mean by spin edits, I have no problem with leaving the article how it is until we resolve discussion. Ugh, sorry about saying he survived, I meant was killed by someone else. I'm not "not allowing anything menttioning it", but Sherlock kills people in both the original and this, he executed Moriarty not long before this episode. In the books, Sign of Four had him killing someone, he killed passively and actively, when Watson got shot I seem to remember he shot someone... Moriarty in the TV series was unarmed, he was shot-executed. I know you say the comments go in the review section, but why? Thanks, Matty.007 16:19, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I meant to say you can edit circles around me, I'm slow and don't know all the edit language. It's been a long time since I read Sign of Four, but it seems like he just shot at Tonga because he was an assassin. Anyway, I removed that part of my edits since I don't know how to not make it sound like an opinion. It just seems to cross the line of what Sherlock was, a detective, not a murderer -- like if Batman just walked up and shot Joker in the head. Moriarty shot himself in the head in the show, and started the fight to the death in the book. The other point isn't hugely important, I've just never seen review excerpts in any part of an article but the Critical Reaction, whether they talk about the writer and director or not. Thanks for discussing, I'll stop editing now. 71.226.135.22 (talk) 16:37, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I've put you off, I hope you stick around editing. Do you mind if I tailor your edits a little please? Thanks, Matty.007 16:39, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. 71.226.135.22 (talk) 16:51, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, always best to work these things out with talking. Please correct any errors I induce, I will leave the reviews in the section you put them in and let someone external move it if they want to. Best, Matty.007 16:53, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Civility is always appreciated. By the way, the NorwoodBuilder site I quoted seemed to be an expert on all things Sherlock Holmes, not just a random tumblr post, but I'll check my resource procedures. Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.226.135.22 (talk) 17:00, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

He may be an expert, but he is anonymous (named, it would seem, The Adventure of the Norwood Builder) and we cannot take him as a reliable source unless he has been used as such I don't think. That's my understanding of policy, but I may be wrong. Thanks again, Matty.007 17:36, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Matty, Congrats on the Millie Knight GA! FWIW, I think that when we make edits like this following a GA-pass, it confuses the bot that goes in and adds the icon to the article and such, I think it might also upgrade the wikiproject tagging. I might be wrong about this, but this time I manually added the icon to the article, but normally I haven't needed to. Not sure what's up with that, but just a FWIW for future note. Montanabw^(talk) 17:24, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Odd that, here I had to add them as opposed to the bot doing them, but it did do the icon. Strange forces... Thanks again for the review, Matty.007 17:32, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Silly bots! Can't live with 'em, can't live without 'em. LOL! Montanabw^(talk) 18:28, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've deleted this response of yours at the Teahouse. The query you were responding to had received a response and was archived; but an editor, apparently inadvertently, restored it to the page of active questions. If you want to revisit the query and response, they are here. Sorry to have deleted your work. Deor (talk) 20:37, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, thank you for being so polite as to give a heads up: I hadn't noticed the date of the question anyway! Thank you again for your politeness, best, Matty.007 20:38, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:17, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any particular reason why you suddenly decide to tag bomb my article and slap a BS WP:OR allegation on it, you've never even bothered to discuss any concerns with me or identify what is WP:OR you just slapped a load of tags on it just after it had been promoted for DYK. There was a lot of work went into writing that from scratch and I see you actions as absuing process for no good reason. WCM_email 16:39, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that there was no clear source for the sections I tagged? Thanks, Matty.007 16:41, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense, every paragraph has a source identified, its a DYK criteria. WCM_email 16:43, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I know it is DYK criteria, which is why I brought it up. For example, the last paragraph: He originally married Wilhelmina y Igarzábal and later married her sister, Dolores y Igarzábal.. The last paragraph of the article, no citation. Thanks, Matty.007 16:44, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

what differece is there in health benefits of eating raw vs. toasted carob powder raw?

I'm afraid I have no idea, the help desk may be of more assistance. Sorry to not be of any help, Matty.007 08:04, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For your thorough reviews of my DYKs for Victor Vifquain and Luther Kaltenbach, I award you this cookie. Thanks a lot. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:02, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, my pleasure to review such good articles, they were people I hadn't heard about. Thanks, Matty.007 08:05, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 21:36, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply] Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:37, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply] Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:53, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply] Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:09, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Guild of Copy Editors May 2014 backlog elimination drive wrap-up Participation: Thanks to all who participated! Out of 51 people who signed up this drive, 33 copy edited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: We reduced our article backlog from 2,987 articles to 2,236 articles in May, the lowest backlog total since we began keeping records in 2009! Since at least 300 new articles were tagged during May, that means we copy edited over 1,000 articles in a single month. Amazing work, everyone! Blitz: The June blitz will run from June 15–21. This blitz's theme is Politics. Sign up here. Election: You can nominate yourself or others for the role of Coordinator for the second half of 2014 here. Nominations will be accepted until June 14. Voting will begin on June 15 and will conclude on June 28. Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, and Miniapolis. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:27, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]