Mindbuilder

Welcome!

Hello, Mindbuilder, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Anna Lincoln (talk) 10:31, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Reversion - Ryan Reynolds

Hi

Whether or not people discussed what to put in the lede, the fact still remains it is too long.

Please see the guidelines I pointed you to.

Thanks Chaosdruid (talk) 21:00, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

I looked at the guidelines in [WP:LEDE](only a guideline by the way). What part do you think suggests the Garner lede is too long?

[WP:LEDE] starts out: "[The LEDE page] in a nutshell: The lead should identify the topic and summarize the body of the article..."

Then: "The lead serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important contents."

And: "The lead is the first part of the article that most people will read. For many, it may be the only section that they read." [this is why I think the most important points should be squeezed in there if possible]

"As a general rule of thumb, a lead section should contain no more than four well-composed paragraphs..." [The Garner lede currently has 4] [Emphasis added]

And from the length section: "The length of the lead should conform to readers' expectations of a short, but useful and complete, summary of the topic." [Emphasis added]

"It should...summarize the most important points,..." [Emphasis added]

One of the most common complaints about the incident was that the cops and EMS just let him die and didn't do CPR. So I think one of the most important points is that they immediately took some care to ease his breathing(by rolling him on his side) after realizing he was unconscious, and explain why they should not have done CPR.

You might be interested to know the timeline of Garner's care as can be determined by the videos. It is clear, though not obvious, from the video, that Pantaleo had his arm around Garner's neck for 15.3 seconds. Clearly that chokehold/headlock was not primarily what killed Garner, regardless of what we know about the medical examiner's conclusion, as he was not only still alive, but still conscious and talking after the chokehold/headlock was released. From when Pantaleo's arm first went around Garner's neck, to when they finished handcuffing him was about 1 minute and 20 seconds. Seems slow, but they reportedly had some difficulties due to his weight, and ended up having to use two pairs of handcuffs. About 10 seconds later they can be seen pulling Garner up on his knees to get him to walk. They obviously didn't think or realize he was in any great distress until then, or they wouldn't bother trying to get him to walk. When they realized he couldn't walk, they laid him down and immediately rolled him on his side to ease his breathing, and presumably called for an ambulance at that time. About 4 minutes and 10 seconds after they laid him down, the first ambulance personnel are seen arriving. That seems like a reasonable response time for the ambulance. However, it then takes about 2 and a half minutes for the stretcher to arrive. I'm not sure why that took so long, but it was reported that the ambulance had to park a long distance down the block due to traffic. The EMS may have been told over the radio that Garner was breathing and may not have planned taking the stretcher until deciding whether Garner needed transporting to the hospital. They try to talk him into getting onto the stretcher, but when he is unresponsive, they start putting him on the stretcher about 10 seconds after it arrives. It takes them about 1 minute and 10 seconds to get him on the stretcher and start rolling him away. That's almost 4 minutes from the arrival of EMS till they start rolling him away. That seems too long to me, but I've personally seen paramedics here check out a person with chest pains for about 30 minutes before deciding to take them away. I don't know why they take so long. Mindbuilder (talk) 07:21, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Mindbuilder. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:LeonhardEulerByDrsDotChRadio.ogg

Thanks for uploading File:LeonhardEulerByDrsDotChRadio.ogg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. B (talk) 14:14, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Mindbuilder. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)