User talk:Flodded

DYK for Jared Lee Loughner

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 06:04, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for requesting RFPP on the earthquake

I came to RFPP to do the same thing for the Sendai earthquake article and for Fukushima 1 Nuclear Power Plant. --NellieBly (talk) 00:53, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Death toll in CA

Sorry, but this is incorrect in the next section of the article Four people were swept out to sea by the tsunami off the coast of Crescent City, California, United States, near the Oregon border, with two of them later found alive, one still missing, and one dead. A man who was taking pictures of the tsunami waves on the Northern California coast was also swept out to sea and later found dead. If it is really just one casualty, this must be corrected.Antonio Carlos Porto (talk) 01:18, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I would like to thank you for being civil and discussing via talk page rather than via edit summary. I approve your edit to remove the improper content altogether. Antonio Carlos Porto (talk) 01:42, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Tsunami article

My mistake on the move, thanks for pointing that out! NYyankees51 (talk) 04:14, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Excuse me? Where is this information? I added it because it wasn't there.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 18:37, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Now I did see the California man listed under "Casualties", but considering there has been damage in the United States, I think it should be covered. It wasn't enough detail, in my opinion.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 18:48, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

{{start date}}

Per Talk:2011_Sendai_earthquake_and_tsunami#Timezone_in_infobox, please follow the template's documentation and don't use "UTC" like in your last edit. Thanks! -- gtdp ^(T)/_(C) 12:42, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Flodded. You have new messages at Coffee's talk page.
Message added 18:28, 12 March 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sendai earthquake

Your campaign to remove any mention of the effects of this event outside of Japan is offensive and POV. If you desire more detail added on the effects inside Japan, please add it. The article is sorely missing it and I complained about it on the talk page many hours ago to no avail. But do not remove the actual facts about the worldwide effects of this disaster. Rmhermen (talk) 20:39, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Absolutely. I should have just added my facts back. I didn't read carefully enough to see that the one death off the Oregon coast was already there--and done better than I did it--but unless there are other articles about the tsunami that include what happened in the United States, then I think we deserve some mention.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 22:20, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Here is the reply I left for both of them, for anyone who happens to bother reading this:

Hi, can you please point out what edits are so offensive specifically? I am not on a campaign to remove any mention of non-Japanese events in this disaster; however, one of my goals HAS been to remove non-NPOV material, a lot of which seems to be added by folks who think that things like a couple of subs tossed around in Guam is worthy of mentioning in the article. If you'll notice, I've only removed specific events like that, which are not relevant. The other stuff I've removed are the mentions to excessively specific detail (e.g. that table listing out tiny islands that had no damage, just warnings/evacuations), while leaving things like the coastal warning for the West Coast. I've brought up MANY topics on the talk page if I thought they might be controversial. Not to mention other topics there, just in the spirit of community editing. If you look at my own talk page, you'll note that I've resolved disputes and so forth in a pretty reasonable fashion, not by calling people offensive...

I am trying to write from a long-term perspective and avoid WP:RECENTISM as well. The fact is, most of the non-Japanese language news has been reporting on these minor things, but in the long run things like a misc non-notable city having had storm surges is NOT going to be relevant to this article. (Sorry, but Brookings, OR, which appears to have about 6000 people and is only reported as having had a "storm surge" and nothing more, is not notable.)

Oh, and btw, I can't really add more detail about the Japanese side of things than your average editor...because I'm an American, don't speak Japanese, have lived in the US my entire life, and have no ties to Japan! (Well, I did once visit Tokyo for a week, but I've visited a lot of places.) Though I have tried to add what I can, on both sides of the equation. (Edit: I will gladly admit I have removed more non-Japanese related material than I have added...simply because there has been an undue amount of it added to the article by others.) –flodded ☃ (gripe) 03:34, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

I'll just leave this here...

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		It almost seems like every time I've refreshed my watchlist over the past three days there's been a thoughtful edit made or an insightful comment left on the various Japan earthquake articles and talk pages by you... excellent job, please accept this barnstar for your tireless efforts :) -- gtdp (T)/(C) 20:07, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Allow me to decorate this barnstar with a (textual) thank you cluster. Your tireless, thoughtful and civil contributions to this challenging event article are appreciated. --joe decker^{talk to me} 17:53, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Smile

I second that (= the above!)! Flodded, you are a great asset in the current Japanese E&T article! I also <3 your snowman-figure! Diversity at its best! Well, take your involvement with the Sendai E&T and your snowman-figure, and you get the thing that follows right down below, something that this user sure likes to encourage you to spread all around (since it's not like an STD ;))! Signed with all the best regards possible: Ρόμπστερ 1983 ^{☞Life's short, talk fast ☜} 23:53, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello Flodded, Robster1983 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

PS Involving your snowman: don't be icy; please, stay involved in a warm conversation! :) Ρόμπστερ 1983 ^{☞Life's short, talk fast ☜} 23:56, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit descriptions at the Sendai earthquake page

Dear Flodded: Just a thought your way. Did you happen to read the Wikipedia posting on their survey reporting decreasing numbers of editors joining/staying with the project? If not, perhaps you might take a few moments to: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Editors_Survey_2011.

I was trying to make the very same edit you were to a recent addition of flight specific detail on Chinese aid being announced. Yours beat mine by seconds. When I saw it was the same change I was gratified, but reading your description of it (and others below on the History page) it occurred to me that you might consider toning down how you describe your edits some. Taking such an aggressive stance (including using head-bashing all caps) tends to either incite the affected edtior into an edit war, or if they are new not to continue editing. Consider a more neutral approach (which I learned to adopt through the above trial and error). For example, the description I had used to the same content excision as you was simply "Sufficient detail", describing the entry in its truncated fashion. Ideally that gives an explanation for the edit without being overly contentious.

Just some food for thought. Good luck. Wikiuser100 (talk) 13:48, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Saw your positive response at my Talk page. Understand your frustration. Nothing is more so than editing either the daily feature article or one on breaking news. One really does get to the point of wanting to crack others on the head. Resisting asks alot. When there is blowback or a tug of war when one is already being moderate is more than twice the challenge. Glad to see you're up for it. Wikiuser100 (talk) 14:55, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

I hope you guys are getting paid for this, devoting so much effort policing how the 2011 Sendai earthquake is being edited, which seems like a very stressful devotion! Good luck!!! 66.214.170.230 (talk) 14:27, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

sendai template

Hello, Flodded. You have new messages at Talk:2011_Sendai_earthquake_and_tsunami#template?.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

184.144.160.156 (talk) 13:59, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 14:58, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Oregon ports

Hi there. I see you have added info about the tsunami to the Oregon port articles that exist. Since I created several of those, I'm wondering if you could look at this list and let me know if it would be useful for me to start any of those articles if the ports have been mentioned in the news, especially on a national or international level. I know that Gold Beach and Port Orford, near Brookings, were also badly affected. Normally I wouldn't create articles just to stash info about recent news, but it's a good incentive to do some expansion work. Thanks! Valfontis (talk) 05:55, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

2011 Sendai Earthquake

Please be logical and try to stop your harsh control of the 2011 Sendai earthquake and tsunami article. "Japan's request" for international aid, as oddly and unusually small as it was, was merely a governmental statement. When countries like Australia, China, South Korea, etc, responded with commitments to provide manpower and relief aids, that's INTERNATIONAL RESPONSE. Therefore that Reuter's article of Japan's initial response, of which you're obviously a huge fan of, DOES NOT FIT in the "International response" section of the article. Please understand and release you stranglehold on this Wikipedia article. 66.214.170.230 (talk) 14:55, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

• @Flodded: Per your earlier page move, you need to let it go (as adviced by 66.214.170.230) and trust it to the Admins to handle it. Note that this is beginning to look badly on your part if you carry on with such potentially controversial moves in future, the Admins are there for a reason, you know? Also, might you be interested to read up on WP:OWB? Best and out. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 17:26, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

• The reason I undid your move was because you hadn't made your edit to the earthquake page's talk page yet, thus I did not check your user info to notice you were an admin. So, I thought I was continuing the consensus of the same people who reverted ME earlier, by performing the same reversion. Once I saw that you did edit the talk page and that it was an admin decision to make the move, you'll notice I undid my change and went back to the name you moved it to. So please don't construe this as me not "letting it go", I simply didn't realize it was an admin decision on the move discussion as the talk page hadn't been updated yet, and once I did realize it I heeded that and even went and changed the name references within the page to conform to the new name. –flodded ☃ (gripe) 17:36, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

• Well, what is done is done. Still, I hope you'll learn from this instead of letting it go this way back to me. Go slow and learn the ropes, nobody is asking you to be perfect, right? We were all newbies once. Best. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 17:42, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

• Sorry, obviously I accidentally connected your comment on my talk page with my accidental reversion of the admin page move. As to your comment on my own move earlier, I really just didn't understand the page move process well, and will try to be more cautious of other folks' views of what should be included in general. –flodded ☃ (gripe) 17:44, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

• Otherwise, why would've I asked you to go slow and learn the ropes? You don't have to fast-acting or perfect, you just need to be more consistent and then everything will come easily for you, eventually. Best and... really out. PS:I really need to catch some Zzz now... PPS:I ain't no Admin and I don't want to be one, in any case. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 17:52, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Tsunami

I WILL BRUTALLY DISASSEMBLE YOU IF YOU CROP PHOTOS THAT I UPLOAD TO COMMONS AGAIN!

Just kidding... keep up the good work on the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami‎ article! Have you found out how to block IP ranges yet? BurtAlert (talk) 00:36, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Guess who's back? BurtAlert (talk) 21:46, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Flodded. You have new messages at BurtAlert's talk page.
Message added 00:48, 17 March 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Vengance?

I'm sorry that you see it that way but i'm not being personal in any way. I just think that you're removing information for it's own sake. Maybe Equador, British Columbia, etc aren't the 'main' areas of the disaster, but the impact of the quake/tsunami there still deserves a mention. Please don't remove information just because you can. Swalgal (talk) 02:52, 17 March 2011 (UTC) Edit: Also, this is not vandalism. Surely you can see that this is a good-faith edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swalgal (talk • contribs) 02:54, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

True, i can see your viewpoint, and i can admit that my interest in the Vancouver Island area stems from me having a friend there, but i still think that all information about any area is worth mentioning. Besides, i added one sentence, it wasn't like i wrote a massively detailed report. Swalgal (talk) 02:58, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Wrong user?

You left a message on my page about vandalism. Perhaps you got the wrong user? Benjwong (talk) 06:26, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Not vandalism

edit conflict While astrology has no business being presented in an earthquake article unless it got a LOT of media mentions, this diff should not have been referred to as vandalism. It is insulting. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)

I left a message on the talk page of that article in hope of further discussion. At first I didn't know what was the vandalism cause Flodded messaged me before he made the deletion. I am not insulted, but I saw this at the least a cultural view. Benjwong (talk) 06:54, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Note: Discussion moved to the article's talk page. I incorrectly assumed vandalism instead of assuming good faith, since the edit seemed out of place to me. My apologies. –flodded ☃ (gripe) 03:49, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Earthquake+Tsunami+Nuclear crisis

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

25m wave in 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami article

I think you intended to revert Zdavatz, not me. I just moved a sentence about ports within a paragraph. Each edit is taking me 3 or 4 attempts with new error messages I have never seen before (Too many people are reading this article! Cache failure.) So I haven't been able to fix this. Took me 10 minutes to put in, after another 10 minutes of trying I can't get it changed. It took me 5 minutes to put in a one comma earlier today. What a mess. Rmhermen (talk) 17:21, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

I just got an error trying to save this! Rmhermen (talk) 17:21, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Earthquake prediction

Hello Flooded: I am new at Wikipedia and would like to contribute. I am not sure how best to proceed. I am contacting you because I have seen some well reasoned remarks regarding the Tohoku page, and think that perhaps you can give me advice.

The problem is the poorly documented, poorly written article on Earthquake Prediction. It lacks references, contains errors, and is generally slanted toward uninformed, sensationalist news articles as sources. Forgive me for saying this, but at the moment this article is not a feather in the cap of Wikipedia.

Steps I have taken so far: I have added about 2 dozen high quality references in the beginning paragraphs of the article, and have corrected wrong and inaccurate statements, trying however to keep the structure and as much of the original text as possible.

Looking down the page, I see some serious problems coming up. If I go in there and change what I know to be wrong, misleading, or slanted, I will be on a major collision course with the original author.

How should I proceed? Is it possible to form a little group to get this embarrassment for Wikipedia straightened out? Please understand, I am seeking guidance for how tactically to proceed and how to formulate facts inoffensively. I do not need help with the science itself (if you need more credentials than what I put into my wikipedia page, I can supply them).

Sorry, for the length of this message Maxwyss (talk) 17:29, 25 March 2011 (UTC)MaxWyss

More sorry: I just discovered that there is a wikiproject "Earthquakes". Have to figure out how to join it and who in it is a person committed to quality (Do you know?). The current article on "prediction" is more like an article in the Boulevard press, than in an encyclopediaMaxwyss (talk) 08:20, 26 March 2011 (UTC)MaxWyss

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:12, 24 November 2015 (UTC)