User talk:PeterZumthor

Welcome

Better late than never, right? :-) Thanks for your update to Christina Paxson -- keep up the good work! :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:35, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rattner

So what you're saying is that ANY blog is not approved source material? I'm glad I know that, I'll be making the required changes to Wikipedia...unless, of course, you meant that any blog that disagrees with your POV is not approved, in which case I'll give up now and spare myself the injury from banging my head against a wall by trying to debate an uber-partisan. 173.73.17.241 (talk) 05:09, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Response

I am not an uber-partisan, nor do I have any slanted point of view. Personal attacks are unacceptable on Wikipedia. You keep inserting a sentence on Steven Rattner's page that is highly speculative, and your only attributable source is a random blog post. I will continue to delete it until a proper citation is given. PeterZumthor (talk) 03:29, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Summaries

Hey Peter, I just thought I'd point out to you the importance of using edit summaries. Basically every time you make an edit on Wikipedia, and certainly every time you make a non-minor edit to an article on Wikipedia, it helps other editors considerably if you use an edit summary to describe what you changed and give a short reason why. First, this helps people who may glance at the edit to understand that it probably isn't vandalism since most vandals do not use edit summaries. Specifically, I am referring to your second edit to Jon Huntsman, Jr. When I viewed your edit, I only saw the last change which consisted of the removal of some small pieces of information. When information is removed without an edit summary, most editors, including myself, conclude that the edit should be reverted. After looking at your previous edit, I knew you were making valuable additions so I didn't take any action. I hope you take my advice into consideration. Cheers, Ryan Vesey Review me! 04:36, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

November 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Aby Rosen may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

other properties. Rosen is also a noted collector of modern and contemporary art.<ref name=artnews>[http://www.artnews.com/2013/07/09/the-2013-artnews-200-top-collectors/5/ ArtNews: 200 Top

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:39, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GE Building "move"

Don't ever copy and paste the text from one article to another title. That's not how we do page moves because it destroys the edit history. See WP:MOVE for more information.

On the merits of the move, 30 Rockefeller Plaza has been a redirect to GE Building for over seven years now, and I see no talk page discussions even suggesting a move might be appropriate or consensus-supported. And as you failed to give an edit summary, I can only guess as to your reasoning. So if you think the article should be at "30 Rockefeller Plaza", make that proposal at Talk:GE Building to see if there might be a consensus for that move, and then if so the article will be moved properly. postdlf (talk) 23:45, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]