User talk:208.114.63.4

Hello, I'm Yamaguchi先生. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Boomer (nickname) has been undone because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 19:40, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hi, when you update the stats in football players' infoboxes please remember that you should also update the |pcupdate= (or |club-update=) parameter. This shows when the stats were last updated and prevents editors from accidentally updating the stats again. Thank you. --Jaellee (talk) 22:26, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Virginia-class cruiser page, your edit caused an unsupported parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:17, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Yintan. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Grizzly Man, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Yintan  14:45, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please use the talkpage to propose changes of the kind you've been making. "Fearing an obviously tainted jury pool" is an inappropriate statement of opinion in Wikipedia's voice. Characterizing reports of abuse that took place earlier than the ones that were charged as "fairy tales" raises concerns about the neutrality of your edits. Apart from content issues, the way you've been trying to reference them doesn't follow referencing standards. Acroterion (talk) 11:41, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Ultimograph5. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Boomer (nickname) have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Ultimograph5 (talk) 20:14, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hello, 208.114.63.4. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the article Westinghouse Electric Company, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. Editing for the purpose of advertising or promotion is not permitted. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. !dave 15:17, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hello, I'm CLCStudent. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Penn State child sex abuse scandal have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. CLCStudent (talk) 18:10, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hello, I'm Orphan Wiki. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Pittsburgh Panthers football have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Orphan Wiki 22:28, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Penn State child sex abuse scandal, you may be blocked from editing. Acroterion (talk) 23:32, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

You've been doing this since 2017. Please stop. Acroterion (talk) 23:33, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked temporarily from editing for continued disruption, addition of personal analysis, refusal to discuss.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 00:17, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

Hello, I'm Frost. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to NTFS—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Frost 15:13, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In what way was this edit "not constructive"? I saw that the article used incorrect units, fixed them to use the correct units, then it got reverted back to the wrong units. They referenced MOS:COMPUNITS, which I read, only to find out that the section of the referenced policy itself discussing a prohibition on IEC binary prefixes is rooted in the very short-sighted notion that "the majority of sources do things this way, so we do things this way".

I am an engineer and policies like these are severely troubling to me. It is well known that many of Wikipedia's policies (WP:NPOV, WP:NOR, and WP:V) backfire in cases of an incorrect majority, and this fact is well known to both people within and outside of Wikipedia. Specifically, if the majority of sources state things that are inaccurate, incorrect, or misleading, Wikipedia will inadvertently perpetuate that.

What's even more inexcusable is the fact that your article on the byte even explicitly mentions that the use of "KB", "MB", etc. to refer to powers of 1024 is "confusing and incorrect", yet in your policies you knowingly insist that things must be done this way. Is it not obviously apparent that this is massively hypocritical?

The computing industry suffers from a long-standing misuse of units and prefixes, and the MoS's opposition of use of the IEC prefixes is making things worse, not better. 208.114.63.4 (talk) 15:18, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Locke Cole. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Reliability of Wikipedia that didn't seem very civil, so it may have been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. —Locke Cole • t • c 14:10, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

...and if you can provide a source that prove that helicopters do, in fact, 'flap', I would love to see it, and it will just be another reason for me to never fly in one. JeffUK 14:47, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article clearly does not state that helicopters flap, nor does the section I edited state so. Not before I edited it, not now. I don't know where you're getting this from.

It's the rotor blades that flap up and down in order to prevent dissymmetry of lift. 208.114.63.4 (talk) 14:54, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I actually thought you were joking! Helicopters are weirder than I thought. That said, that entire section is devoid of references making it hard for non-experts like me to tell fact from fiction. If you could find some sources talking about anything in there that would be a great help to improve the article. (see WP:V) I've undone my reversion.15:06, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

To further substantiate this, I've found an article that discusses soft-in-plane rotors by NASA: LOAD AND STABILITY MEASUREMENTS ON A SOFT-INPLANE ROTOR SYSTEM INCORPORATING ELASTOMERIC LEAD-LAG DAMPERS. I'll make sure to include it on the page. 208.114.63.4 (talk) 15:09, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]