Talk:Tony Penikett

message: I note that this article does not have a single valid reference. Wikimedia received a communication suggesting that it contains inaccuracies. I have requested more details, and suggested posting them here. In the meantime, i hope other editors will work on adding some references to make sure the existing information is accurate.--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:35, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need more references 

message: The government no longer refers to itself as "the Yukon" but just "Yukon".  The entry in the Infobox should be edited to "3rd Premier of Yukon":  Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 17:50, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Correct, the government no longer refers to itself as "the Yukon". However, this change was only in 2003, Penikett was premier in 1985. 117Avenue (talk) 02:53, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Premier of Yukon, not "the Yukon"

message: Although a protected page, this article does not have the lock icon in the upper right hand corner. The appropriate lock should be added.Naraht (talk) 15:00, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Lock" missing 

message: Could you unblock the article of Tony Penikett tomorrow please?  
41.69.14.209 (talk) 07:09, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: As you were advised last time, you have to give a specific reason for your request. The article has been subject to a campaign of persistent vandalism in the past — and, for that matter, it's only under a "autoconfirmed users" protection, not a blanket protection. Which means pretty much the only people who can't edit the article are anonymous IPs. If there's a specific edit you want to request, then request it already — but "total unblock because an anonymous IP asked for a total unblock for no specific reason" is not a thing that's going to happen on an article that's been the victim of major vandalism problems. So you need to request a specific edit you want made to the article — which means the details and sourcing for a specific piece of information that needs to be added or corrected, and not just "unlock for no specific reason". If you're not prepared to offer a specific edit that's needed to the article, then kindly just go away. Bearcat (talk) 13:39, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 18 October 2015 

message: can you please undo the indefinite protection tomorrow so I could add more details please? 
41.69.14.209 (talk) 19:55, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: As has now been pointed out to you twice before, this is not how the edit request process works — the article will not be unlocked to IP edits no matter how many times you ask. If you provide the specific details of a specific edit you want made to the article, then an autoconfirmed editor can make that edit to the article for you if it's suitable and appropriate and properly sourced — but "total carte blanche unlock" without any detail about what you want to add or change, is simply not happening. Either provide the complete details of a specific edit that you want made to the article, or go away. Bearcat (talk) 21:52, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 18 October 2015 

message: Could you unlock the article had been protected so I could add some details, not for vandalism is for own right please?
105.199.109.193 (talk) 17:44, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: For the last damn time, this is not how the "edit request" process works — "blanket unlock plz" is not an edit request. An edit request is the specific details of a specific change that needs to be made to the article, which a person who can get past the lock will then make for you if they're appropriate and correct and properly sourced. No matter how many times you repost to ask for a blanket unlock again and again and again, you will NEVER receive a positive answer, because this is NOT WHAT THE EDIT REQUEST PROCESS IS FOR. Either provide the SPECIFIC details of a SPECIFIC change that needs to be made to the article, so that somebody with autoconfirmed edit privileges can actually do something with the "request", or buzz off. Bearcat (talk) 00:37, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 26 October 2015 

message: I begging you for your trust and dignity please I,ll show you who worthy to be a descent editor to my work if you unlock the article as I could?
41.69.92.19 (talk) 16:36, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not the right page to request additional user rights, as has been explained to you numerous times above.As Bearcat stated above:- If I ever see another "edit request" on this talk page in which you just ask for blanket unlock, without telling us the specific details of what you want added or changed, then I'm going to semiprotect this talk page too, so that you can never edit it again anymore either.If he does not semi-protect this page, and you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 16:53, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 3 January 2016 

message: I have a request for you unblock article it's for sake for my blocked user page
41.69.15.17 (talk) 21:06, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: As has already been pointed out to you the last eleventy trillion times, the edit request process entails posting the SPECIFIC details of a SPECIFIC change that needs to be made to the article, so that somebody can DO something with the request. "Unblock please" is NOT an edit request, and you are NEVER going to get an affirmative answer to that. As I warned you two times ago, this talk page has now been locked for two weeks so that you cannot edit it at all — once the block expires, you may post the SPECIFIC details of a SPECIFIC change that needs to be made to the article, so that I or another editor can MAKE the necessary edits. But the block will be renewed again, for longer than two weeks, if you keep posting "unblock please" requests without the details of a specific edit that needs to be made. Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. Bearcat (talk) 21:49, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 6 January 2016 

message: === Tony Penikett ===
* 
Unprotection: Expiration. Mo
41.69.78.147 (talk) 10:05, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Same reason as the last eleventy billion times: this is not an edit request. Provide the SPECIFIC details of a SPECIFIC edit that needs to be made to the article. Bearcat (talk) 15:47, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 21 January 2016 

message: * 
Unprotection: Expiration. Mo
41.69.78.147 (talk) 10:05, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Same reason as the last eleventy billion times: this is not an edit request. Provide the SPECIFIC details of a SPECIFIC edit that needs to be made to the article. Bearcat (talk) 15:47, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Tony Penikett]] 

message: Dear User:Bearcat I am apologizing for causing trouble and accusation. I was User:Kww who blocked the article. Can you tell him to unprotected the article?
197.132.250.59 (talk) 05:52, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 27 January 2016 

message: Can I have request to unprotect the article with a gratitude ?
41.69.96.236 (talk) 17:57, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not the right page to request additional user rights.If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 18:18, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unprotected edit request on 2 March 2016 

message: 
Can I have permission to unprotect the article?
Mo
: Read the answers you got the last 100 times. Keep reading them over and over again until you understand what's being said to you, because you are never going to get a different answer from anybody until you start complying with what you were told all those other times. And the fact that I've had to go in after you and clean up every single edit you've tried to make to Prince Edward Island's electoral districts in the past week, because you're actually breaking the tables every time you touch them, is not helping you look like a reliable or trustworthy editor either. Bearcat (talk) 19:11, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unprotected edit request on 3 March 2016 

message: === Tony Penikett ===
* 
Unprotection: Expiration date. Mo
Mo
:This is not an "edit request". Stop misusing the process. Bearcat (talk) 18:33, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not asking you to "stay quiet" — I'm asking you to make a proper edit request, i.e. the specific details of a specific change that needs to be made to the article, so that somebody can do something with it. Bearcat (talk) 16:45, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: As this is , I'm asking him to stay quiet. Any edits I catch from this long-term vandal will be reverted on sight. --Yamla (talk) 11:45, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 4 April 2016 

message: * 
Unprotection: Expiration date. Mo
Mo
:This is not an "edit request". Stop misusing the process. Bearcat (talk) 18:33, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not asking you to "stay quiet" — I'm asking you to make a proper edit request, i.e. the specific details of a specific change that needs to be made to the article, so that somebody can do something with it. Bearcat (talk) 16:45, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: As this is , I'm asking him to stay quiet. Any edits I catch from this long-term vandal will be reverted on sight. --Yamla (talk) 11:45, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Tony Penikett]] 

message: This request is to add recent work experience to the "Later Career" Section. Please add the following:
Since 2014, Penikett is a Visiting Professor at the Simon Fraser University School of Public Policy in Vancouver. 
From 2015-2017, Penikett was a Mentor for Jane Glassco Northern Fellows, at The Walter and Duncan Gordon Foundation. 
From 2016-2017, Penikett was a Mentor for the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation.
In 2016, Penikett was a Ministerial Panel Member, appointed by Natural Resources Minister Jim Carr to engage communities and Indigenous groups on the proposed Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion Project, with Kim Baird and Dr. Annette Trimbee. 
Twylamariesmith (talk) 16:42, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: Source needed and currently sounds far too promotional EvergreenFir (talk) Please  21:39, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 24 May 2016 

message: In the "Later Career" section, please change the sentence "From 2001 to 2005, Penikett was a senior fellow on native treaty issues and a visiting professor for the Undergraduate Semester in Dialogue at Simon Fraser University." to "From 2001 to 2005, Penikett was a senior fellow on native treaty issues and a visiting professor for the Undergraduate Semester in Dialogue at Simon Fraser University, and then was appointed a Dialogue Associate of SFU Centre for Dialogue in 2017."— Preceding unsigned comment added by Lindswu (talk • contribs) 1 June 2017 (UTC)
: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —KuyaBriBriTalk 19:31, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Posted 1 June 2017

message: Please change "La patrouille perdu" to "La Patrouille perdue" in the last section on personal life as patrouille is feminine. Any google search on "La Patrouille perdu" (other than the error/typo on the Writers' union of Canada page) will show the proper spelling. Also note the proper French capitalization of the title, where words after the first noun are not capitalized.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.234.52.134 (talk) 22:29, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Patrouille is feminine