User talk:Orangemike/Archive 27

Archive 20

←

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

Archive 28

Archive 29

Archive 30

User:Rocknrollhalloffame

Not sure if your approach is quite justified. From their edits, there is not the slightest bit of evidence that the person has any connection at all with the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame - but clearly they've chosen a stupid user name (which they've been warned about, and asked to change), and made typically noobish unreferenced edits (which they've also been warned about, and which have been reverted). But a block for that seems a touch extreme and bitey. Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:08, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

It's either a spamusername (hardblockable), or an impersonation of a living institution (again, hardblockable). --Orange Mike | Talk 22:25, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Not the first, and probably only thoughtlessly the second. Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:41, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

You may like to look at User:Dakb003. It's getting a little annoying now (even though I do still think your first block was a little over-weighty.) Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:46, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Romeo and Juliet

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Romeo and Juliet. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Edit war Banc De Binary

Hi, my strategy was to use a stub first and then build only when we had consensus. I liked your edit (Bilby's version) at 14:40 (5,000 bytes) as a reasonable baseline and thought you did too. I think if you go back to that one it would prevent edit war. If you have any advice for HistorianofRecenttimes, or if you know where I should go with my growing concerns about this editor, please advise. Also, I'm treating myself as a COI editor per my talk. Okteriel (talk) 20:32, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

I decided to contribute one undo myself (one only), as NeilN has also been won over to a short baseline draft. I'd really appreciate your commenting on your short draft vs. your long draft. Okteriel (talk) 21:15, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

great old bulgaria

CHAPTER CXX the oldest documents about Bulgaria and Kubrat are from the chronics of JOhn of Nikiu in early 600 AD:

47. And when the inhabitants of Byzantium heard this news, they said: 'This project is concerned with Kubratos, chief of the Huns, the nephew of Organa, who was baptized in the city of Constantinople, and received into the Christian community in his childhood and had grown up in the imperial palace.'

CHAPTER LXXXIX 74. But immediately on his return to the emperor, the latter removed him from his command, and appointed in his room another general, named Cyril, of the province of Illyria. 75. And he also gave battle to Vitalian, and there was great slaughter on both sides. Cyril the general retired into the city named Odyssus, and stayed there while Vitalian withdrew into the province of Bulgaria.

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/nikiu2_chronicle.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.70.251.91 (talk) 23:42, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Pahlavi dynasty

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Pahlavi dynasty. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Banc de Binary

Hello, there's been whitewashing and promotional editing on the Banc de Binary page by CorporateM, could you rollback to Blackkite? Is there anything that can be done about users like CorporateM who see Wikipedia as a cashcow?HistorianofRecenttimes (talk) 11:46, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for editing, but I meant can you revert to how it was yesterday at 17:48, just before CorporateM began whitewashing. I'm a bit of a newbie, so how does that happen?HistorianofRecenttimes (talk) 15:15, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

This is the version he's referring to, which uses a lot of extremely low-quality sources both for promotion and attack content.

I do not have a COI, but there seems to be quite a few COIs in play (see here). I've seen a couple disclosed accounts from Banc in a prior AfD and at COIN. I saw somewhere that one of the editors works for a competitor. There is allegedly a post advertising a $10k reward to return the article to a promotional version. And there is another ad offering $5 per edit to add negative content that may or may not be related to this article.

CorporateM (Talk) 17:10, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

There's nothing to indicate that CorporateM has a COI here; but he definitely went overboard in slashing back on the article. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:09, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

It may look extreme seeing how many bytes were cut, but it was a huge load of junk sources on a marginally notable company. It was not cut frivelously, but culled through with detailed edit summaries to explain exactly why each source was inappropriate. CorporateM (Talk) 20:16, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

CorporateM describes themselves as a COI editor on their own page and their sudden and overwhelming interest should be enough evidence that they are just doing it for money. HistorianofRecenttimes (talk) 20:43, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

And your obsessive behaviour leads me to ask this question; do you have a conflict of interest, User:HistorianofRecenttimes? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:56, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I just asked that question at User talk:NeilN who has just reverted Historian. We've got an WP:SPA accusing another editor of having a COI, so I can't help but wonder. Dougweller (talk) 21:07, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

We also have accusations of banned editing [1] and insinuations of an admin being paid to use his tools. [2] What a cluster. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:17, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Tool abuse! Oh, dear, I didn't mean to start with those two words.

Mike, does it help to know that, if you look at the last edit to Talk:Banc De Binary/Archive 1, you'll see where HistorianofRecenttimes met an IP who identified as the CEO of BDB, and Historian called him a criminal to his face? Don't think he was even autoconfirmed at the time. Historian is a happy SPA ever since October, and I think that that one link alone suggests Historian has significant unmanaged anti-BDB bias. I am almost out of time and need to log out. Can you review my own edit history to see what my concerns are, if not those of Historian and Smallbones? I hope there will be a good community consensus result when I get back. Maybe templates on Historian's page. Thank you for paying attention. Okteriel (talk) 22:02, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Considering Black Kite called them[3] "a very dodgy company" and "morally dubious" and has made edits to the article, I think they are too involved to have just added article-protection. I realize after protection is added there is always petty arguments about which version should be protected - but... CorporateM (Talk) 23:13, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Frankly, it's hard to look at this company and 'not' come away with such terms as "dodgy" and "dubious" coming to mind. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:21, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Meh, the problem with an article like this is that there just aren't enough reliable secondary sources to know for sure. Basically the only thing that has media coverage is the lawsuit. Full tilt poker comes to mind as a gambling website that is more notable - betting on cards instead of stocks, but I would bet if they were bigger, their article would look similar to that. CorporateM (Talk) 03:48, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Kamehameha I

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Kamehameha I. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Help with apparent self promotion

I am asking for your advice or direct help (action) regarding Alexandru Darida. I tried to sanitize the article a bit(in the current version) but I see there are major issues with it:

The article was first declined as non notable. Even now the major citations are from Art Work News which "is focused on making you the art publisher, framing supplier, gallery owner and director, custom framer, and artist successful". Another citation is behind a pay wall and the third is a book which I have no access to.
The main contributor Special:Contributions/JTLofton to the article is the artist himself according to his own uploads of the artwork in wikimedia: Contributions/JTLofton
Lastly large sections of the article are copied from the artists' bio (compare this version with http://alexandrudarida.com/newsite/biography/.
This all reeks of self promotion. Thanks for your help N1of2 (talk) 18:45, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Problems with Stardog Management

Hi Mike, last year you blocked Stardog mgmt (talk · contribs · logs) as a promotional account, after they had a long history of pushing WP:MEMORIAL content at Speedy Haworth‎ and also trying to promote a non-notable relative named Stormie Haworth. Whomever is behind that account has been plaguing the article still, pushing the same content anonymously and through two different sock accounts I believe were created to circumvent the Stardog mgmt account block. I've tagged them in Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Stardog mgmt. A different set of IP addresses has been trying to reinsert the promotional sentence about Stormie Haworth, but I believe that might be Stormie herself. Could you please take a look and consider blocking the sock accounts? Thanks. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 13:28, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Mexico

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Mexico. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Banc De Binary request

Regards, Orangemike. I am a manager at Banc De Binary with a disclosed conflict of interest. Banc De Binary is concerned that the article continues to violate various Wikipedia policies in its present protected state. It also appears I am unable to edit the talk page, so I have decided to ask administrators familiar with the case to review some of the most obvious edit requests.

This request is for the removal of the misidentification of BDB in the lede. The text "formerly known as BO Systems Limited and also known as BDB Services Limited and ET Binary Options Ltd.," and its footnote should be removed as inaccurate. As discussed at talk, the footnote quotes the CFTC's inaccurate statement. After we requested they amend their statement, they released a correction at [4]. Last week, several editors affirmed the removal of this inaccuracy from the article, but due to an edit war the statement was frozen in its present incorrect status. The four organizations constitute a unified enterprise but have separate identities and legal charters and it is a gross misconstruction to regard them as "formerly known as" or "also known as". It is my opinion that consensus has been demonstrated already and that the brief edit war does not constitute a denial of that consensus because it was not specifically related to it. Not one person has denied that the CFTC's original statement was in error. This edit request essentially dates back to one of 18 April 2014, at the top of the present talkpage.

My intent is to facilitate discussion on the talk page if I am allowed to edit there. I believe, based on discussion with an OTRS volunteer, that there is consensus for "stubbing" the article, and that "stubbing" would also reduce the number of requests and potential for cross-talk. I would like your assistance with the edit request and your advice on bringing the article into Wikipedia compliance by "stubbing" or other means. BDBIsrael (talk) 16:04, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Partly done: I haven't made any edits to the article, but I have made BDBIsrael's account confirmed, so that they can now edit Talk:Banc De Binary. Edits to the article should be proposed there first so that other interested editors will see them. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 18:05, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Blue Army (Poland)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Blue Army (Poland). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Airepingshow

Greetings.

I would like to appeal your blocking of User:Airepingshow for promoting a business. I understand that promotion and advertisement are not permitted on Wikipedia, and I do not disagree with these policies; however, this user has not performed any action that could be taken as hostile or destructive, and they have not vandalized any article or page. Based on their otherwise-clean record, I do not believe their intentions were to contribute non-constructive material to Wikipedia. I am quite concerned that they were not warned for their advertising first.

Also, the user was warned for violating a copyright by plagiarizing material from a webpage into an article titled "Pingshow, Inc." After this warning, no such infringement occurred again, which I would view as the heeding of this warning.

I do not believe this user would ignore a warning, or even a temporary block. They were not warned prior to receiving an indefinite block for advertising, and as such, I would like to appeal that block. I am Quibilia. (talk) 03:50, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)I am Quibilia.. is there any reason for User:Airepingshow not to appeal him/herself? It's unusual to grant an unblock appeal when the blocked party hasn't made the appeal. And all they've been asked to do is to get a new account as we don't allow role accounts. John@Airepingshow would be an example of a username we would accept.Dougweller (talk) 14:02, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Apologies. I seem to have misunderstood some of the policies. Yes, that would be fine. I was appealing on their behalf because it did not appear they intended to do so themselves, and the block appeared unjust. Thank you for explaining, I appreciate it. I am Quibilia. (talk) 16:58, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

This account created an article about Pingshow, Inc. which included the sentence, "Our commitment is to guarantee the best access, lowest latency and highest voice and video quality possible no matter where our customers are located"; and another about a Pingshow product, AireTalk. At that point, they've just plain crossed the line into shameless spammers. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:37, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Revilal90's new accounts

Hi, Mike, can you create Sockpuppet Investigation for Revilal90? I found his/her new accounts.

He/she has two accounts Special:Contributions/Mr. LuxeTH (for same Avril Lavigne edit pattern as Revilal90) and Special:Contributions/Cajalden (for Taylor Swift edit, but same attitude as Revilal90) and one IP address Special:Contributions/74.96.189.88. I guess he/she has two different computers. Make sure you mark both Mr. LuxeTH and Cajalden as cannot edit own talk page same as Revilal90.

I'm afraid he/she will watching your talk page. Can you move to SPI that you create. 183.171.172.219 (talk) 02:24, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Can you look?

Can you look at this and make improvements? Brian Evans (singer) is borderline soap opera, I helped start the article with a now banned user who has self identified as Evans and then said he was someone else and is most recently block evading via ip. He's using the article to self promote any number of various causes and it could sure use some assistance and you are quite a bit better then me lol. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 20:49, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Persian poetry

Hi. Right now, the topic for Persian poetry redirects to Persian literature and is a subdivision of that article. But it has the capacity of having a separated article. What should I do to create Persian poetry article by itself? Bbadree (talk) 22:09, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Germany–Poland border

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Germany–Poland border. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Navarre-geo-stub

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Navarre-geo-stub. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Setomorp - Possible PR company account

Hi Orange Mike. I saw you had previously dealt with a user bothyventures recently regarding corporate accounts and edits to Dan Wagner. Unfortunately it appears that yet another PR connected account has made a large revision to the page, removing sourced material in order to turn the article into an advertising/pr piece. No attempt to discuss the changes have been made. The user in question is setomorp. I have challenged them on their talk page, citing the twitter account of the same name (https://twitter.com/setomorp) which a) show's their are a pr company, and b) have done work for powa technologies. They're details have been added to the CIO case raised against the page. Can you look into it or advice me on and steps I've missed. Thanks. 151.226.140.40 (talk) 16:57, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

In addition to the above note, it is worth looking at the full list of users posting in breach of COI [[5]], in addition to bothyventures and setomorp, there is also Bobfelicce identified as an employee of Venda which is company the in dispute page Dan Wagner referenced and Dan Wagner is chairman. Additionally Techtrek has been identified as having a COI, believed to be Flame PR. As I believe this indicates a concerted effort to turn the piece into a puff piece I have requested an extension to the current protection [[6]] due to end on the 22nd. Also OrangeMike I have attempted to write the Dan Wagner page in a balanced fair way and include sources / references, would appreciate any comments if you have any as a more experienced user. Many Thanks Ol king col (talk) 17:20, 19 June 2014 (UTC)Ol king colOl king col (talk) 17:20, 19 June 2014 (UTC),(talk)

Also looks as thought setomorp has had another CIO regarding Christy Lee Rogers. I posted a message here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Laval#Christy_Lee_Rogers_-_Setomorp. 151.226.140.40 (talk) 17:55, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:The Shock Doctrine

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:The Shock Doctrine. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Dan Wagner page

OrangeMike, the revision you just made on the Dan Wagner page is misleading and one sided. The references are not credible versus the Financial Times, Management Today, Open University and the Telegraph. I have reversed them but would accept a reasonable edit if you feel strongly regarding the promotional elements which I do not see. Techtrek (talk — Preceding undated comment added 00:10, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

OrangeMike, I have just seen that you have been canvassed to get involved with the Dan Wagner page by Ol king colOl king col (talk) who has been vandalizing the page for over a month now. Ol King Col is a disgruntled former employee of one of Dan Wagner's companies and he/she has been active in changing the page to discredit Dan Wagner where possible. If you look at his/her edit history you will see it is a recently created account for this specific purpose. I would be grateful if you could either lock down the Dan Wagner page or bar Ol King Col from Wikipedia. Techtrek (talk — Preceding undated comment added 00:17, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

OrangeMike, I want to point out that the reference to share price decline and 'dialadog' are contained in the article at the appropriate place in the paragraphs about Dialog.Techtrek (talk — Preceding undated comment added 00:21, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

There is a standard, neutral, non-promotional format for the lede of a biographical article. Your preferred version is a piece of braggadocio, as most of the editors working on this article concur. Please take this up on the talk page of the article before editing this article again, as most folks are convinced that you work for Wagner in some capacity but have not had the honesty to admit it. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:25, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

OrangeMike, firstly I can confirm that I do not work for Mr Wagner nor am I retained by him or advise him. I am simply an admirer. I do think the page reads fairly apart from the introduction which, aside from the obvious spelling error in the company name 'Dialog' (shown as Dialogue) is biased to negative articles and not reflective of the body of the page and the achievements of the man. I would welcome your considered intro instead of the one re-instated. Techtrek (talk — Preceding undated comment added 00:32, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm going to point out the obvious so I apologise in advance to OrangeMike and any other experienced editor reading this. Techtrek edit history is exclusively Dan Wagner related since 2009. No other article has been edited by this user. Suggests a relationship exist to me. Of course, being relatively inexperienced editor myself, I could be wrong and this could be a commonly observed pattern of behaviour.66.249.93.141 (talk) 08:28, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

no connection he/she says,http://m.wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/File:Dan_Wagner_-_UK_Tech_Entrepreneur.jpg, flame pr photo uploaded by techtrek

66.249.93.233 (talk) 23:51, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

OrangeMike, I also see that Dan Wagner is named 'Daniel Maurice Wagner' Is this a fact that you have determined or something that was provided to you. I was not aware that this is his full name. Techtrek (talk — Preceding undated comment added 00:36, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Huh? That's all over the record; take this random filing with the SEC or this or dozens of others easily found if you look. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:48, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Operation Defensive Shield

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Operation Defensive Shield. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Thomas Shaughnessy, 1st Baron Shaughnessy at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 04:49, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Dan Nainan

The user Halfdoghalfdeer has recently vandalised the wiki page i created he has done this in the past and would if possible have him banned and the lock on the page be extended past July. If you view Halfdoghalfdeer contribution to wikipedia you would see that the user name has been created for one purpose to Vandalise this one page. He has very little other contribution. More so can you undo the vandalim

In addition to this a user known as Hell in a bucket vandalised the page including removing your protection tab, i don't think this is allowed. I have reverted the page to its original context as it appeared on May 12 2014. Is there a higher level of protection that this page can receive and can it be extended

Thanks you

Nerdypunkkid (talk) 19:08, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

I would actually argue that Halfdoghalfdeer and Hellinabucket have made the page more unbiased. It seems to me that Nerdypunkkid is trying to make this page appear to be a sell-sheet rather than simply unbiased fact. I agree that the page should be locked, but I think the issue is with Nerdypunkkid, who clearly has an agenda. Thanks, Mike.

DesiBabe (User talk:DesiBabe) 19:00, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

DesiBabe is cleary a vandal he deleted large chunks of the page including part of the infobox so when the page is displayed no info box is displayed but rather the remaining code for the info box. If you look at what he deleted the citations for Nainan performing for Barac Obama and being invited to the white house. I put this in because it helps proof notability

Nerdypunkkid (talk) 16:21, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:East Germany

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:East Germany. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Help requested: Inappropriate page

Mike, I have a page I'd like to recommend for deletion, but I have no idea how to proceed. As an SF page, this seems down your alley. In linking SF series from ISFDB to corresponding articles on Wikipedia, I ran across The TECH Project, listed as a science fiction "series". It consists of a single book, by Feliza Casano, published by "Glass Tower Press". Glass Tower Press is owned by Feliza Casano, and the edit history shows that essentially all work on the page was done by them. The book is unknown to Amazon, Abebooks, and even to bookfinder.com. WorldCat reports no library in the world owns a copy of that book (or anything by Casano, or anything published by Glass Tower Press). The home page for Glass Tower Press has not been updated since May 2012, and clicking the "titles" link on that page shows they published only that one single title, which apparently was only available directly from them. This page clearly has insufficient value to be on Wikipedia. But, as I say, I have no idea how to go about nominating it for deletion. Thanks, Chaveyd (talk) 18:48, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. Chaveyd (talk) 03:23, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Extant Organizations/Noticeboard

Someone suggested at the Village Pump that I boldly create Wikipedia:Extant Organizations/Noticeboard, a noticeboard to discuss articles about organizations that may be subject to non-neutral editing. Basically it's the corporate version of BLPN, where both adverts and attack pages can be brought to the community for broader scrutiny. Except this board does not currently relate to a specific policy like BLPN does, except NPOV, V, etc. (though it could refer to this essay I wrote or something). You participated in the prior village pump discussion that led to consensus for Template:COI editnotice, which is now widely used. Although this noticeboard is not COI-related, I thought you might have an interest in this as well, in whether the noticeboard should be kept and/or in participating in it generally. CorporateM (Talk) 18:35, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Đurđevdan uprising

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Đurđevdan uprising. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Friendly request

Good day Mike! I'm not sure if you are aware or not, but the <font> tag you are using in your signature is obsolete. There are quite a few users that are using this tag, and I've been going around offering the code for them to be able to do a free update (most have accepted the offer). If you're interested in updating your signature to use new code, I suggest replacing:

--[[User:Orangemike|<span style="color:darkorange;">Orange Mike</span>]] &#x007C; [[User talk:Orangemike|<span style="color:orange;">Talk</span>]]

with:

--[[User:Orangemike|<span style="color:#F80">Orange Mike</span>]] &#124; [[User talk:Orangemike|<span style="color:#FA0">Talk</span>]]

which will result in a 134 character long signature with an appearance of: --Orange Mike | Talk
compared to your existing 132 character long signature of: --Orange Mike | Talk
— Either way. Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 01:38, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Alex J. Raineri

Hi-Would you please look at the Alex J. Raineri article? Raineri served in the Wisconsin Assembly and later became a circuit court judge. He was later convicted in federal court of corruption. Subsequently, the Wisconsin Supreme Court removed him from office. Raineri was from Hurley, Wisconsin. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 16:05, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 27 June

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 Ann Wigmore page, your edit caused a cite 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) 00:29, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Blocking users

• I am an admin. Please, do I need permission to block users whose usernames are listed as queryable in Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention/Bot, or is any admin allowed to block such users? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:15, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

If they seem clearly to need blocking, that's one of the things an admin does; please feel free. If they are marginal cases, then warnings and discussion on their talk page may be the way to go. As with so many things we wielders of the Mop-and-Bucket do, we should strive to do the right thing in a flawed world. User:SamsUsedDildos is an easy one; User:ILoveElvirasCleavage is more marginal, unless they claim to be Cassandra Peterson herself; User:HurrahForFlowers not so much, UNLESS they are spamlinking to a website called... hurrahforflowers.com. The bot-detected portion of WP:UAA does generate a fair amount of false positives, which you will come to recognize if you patrol that page regularly; the algorithms are robotic, over-literal and unreliable, but they do provide some advance pointers to possible violations. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:13, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Great power

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Great power. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

June 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to UW–Milwaukee Panther Arena may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"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:

• the [[Legends Football League]] will start playing home games at the U.S. Cellular Arena in 2014.{{cn""

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:07, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Harry C. Martin 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:27, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Walworth (town), Wisconsin 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:

• H. Lown]] was elected as Chairman of the "Supervisors". Also elected were two assistants to Lown (listed as Supervisors, but also as "assistants"; a [[Clerk]]; a [[Treasurer]]; three [[school board|

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:02, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Thomas Shaughnessy, 1st Baron Shaughnessy

Hello! Your submission of Thomas Shaughnessy, 1st Baron Shaughnessy at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:26, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Chip Berlet

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Chip Berlet. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

I found a citation for Don Sakers. Only 2 years and 3 months later. :-)

Bearian (talk) 17:34, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Adreno

I have suggested the article be deleted, because it is not the subject of multiple, credible independent sources. There is a discussion on Talk about it. I think what is needed is an AfD discussion and/or some heavy trims of non-encyclopedic material, but have not done so boldly because I have a COI. Was wondering if you had a minute to take a look. CorporateM (Talk) 15:36, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Germany

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Germany. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Iraqi Kurdistan

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Iraqi Kurdistan. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

User:UFHealth

Mike, I have just left a message on this new user's talk page, with an offer to explain the Wikipedia rules and resolve the user name and COI issues. Hopefully, you will not think that I am out of place in doing so. Please let me know if you have any issues here other than the obvious ones presented by the user name and obvious COI. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:01, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Elizabeth II

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Elizabeth II. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

User:Supreme_Lord_Jesus_Christ

Why did you block a user as WP:NOTHERE when they had no edits? There seems to be a trend of blocking Christian-related user names, but not other religions... EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 01:17, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Actually, he had dumped onto his now-deleted userpage 4,026 bites of drivel, of which this is a representative sample:

"Supreme Apostle Baksay Ivo, Is Supreme Apostle Of Supreme Lord Jesus Chris!

Practicing Faith In Supreme Lord Jesus Christ! Equivalent To Favorite Lord, Or Favorite King Of Supreme Lord Jesus Christ! Exceeding Constitutional Judge! Exceeding Supreme Judge! Even He Learned In The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter - Live Saints, His Teachings Are More Towards Early Ascensions Of Modern Disciples Of Supreme Lord Jesus Christ, Into The Home Of God In Highest Heaven!"

He seemed to be here to rant and rave about this Ivo character, who is apparently some sort of Mormon heretic-prophet-leader wannabe (heretic, that is to say, even to the LDS themselves) he seeks to promote. These were his only edits. As a devout Christian myself, I assure you that there is no such trend out there. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:42, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Okay. The trend I was seeing was apparently that religious-related names were once against username policy back in 2006 and 2007. There are still a number of names blocked from that time period. Thanks for explaining your block to me.  :) EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 19:05, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Most such names, in my experience, end up blocked because those who bear them are crusaders for The Truth™ and tend to massively violate our NPOV and reliable source requirements.--Orange Mike | Talk 00:19, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Geographic reference

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Geographic reference. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

A block evasion?

On 4 July 2014 you blocked YahwehSaves for a period of two weeks. I noticed this edit by 66.10.94.35 which is very similar to edits recently made by YahwehSaves: [7] [8]. There is also some overlap by article editing between him and the IP. YahwehSaves has a history of using another IP to sock 75.79.31.20. This IP also shows article editing overlap with 66.10.94.35. In looking at who 75.79.31.20 is you see the geography is similar to this new IP . I am not sure this is airtight, but it looks to me like block evasion. As the actions themselves are not counter productive, I am not sure if any of this is actionable. EricSerge (talk) 22:06, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of wars and anthropogenic disasters by death toll. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

July 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Elena Ochoa Foster may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"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:

• {{{autobio}}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:58, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Thomas Shaughnessy, 1st Baron Shaughnessy

Orangemike, your DYK submission has been reviewed further, and the remaining significant issue is the comparative lack of inline source citations based on the standard for DYK nominations. Please stop by and let us know how you plan to address this. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:01, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Category talk:Antisemitism

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Category talk:Antisemitism. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Creation Museum

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Creation Museum. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Ansel Elgort

Would you consider dropping down the protection to a semi as the disruption is coming from new/IP editors? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:55, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Ansel Elgort

Hello Orangemike,

I think that semi-protection should be adequate for this article. Most of the problems are coming from newly-created accounts. The handful of older accounts that did silly things have backed off, it seems. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:55, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

User talk:Lor hit by an autoblock

Please see User talk:Lor#Auto-block lifting request. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 23:03, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Orangemike. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 02:21, 16 July 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Nikkimaria (talk) 02:21, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Bruce Rauner article question.

Hey! In the Bruce Rauner article I see a neutrality dispute tag that has no supporting information in the talk page. I am inclined to remove it for that reason. What do you think? BenBurch (talk) 16:28, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:1950–51 Baghdad bombings

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:1950–51 Baghdad bombings. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Is there a way to completely remove a username?

Mike, you recently blocked a username for two reasons--a violation of the username policy and an edit that you saw as self-promotion. The block was entirely deserved and the offending edit has been removed. The edit was done by a new user and there was no malicious intent. The violations were entirely unintentional and should have been blocked. Unfortunately, the username is a recognizable organization (which is why you blocked it) and the block could have an adverse affect on the organization's reputation. Is there any existing mechanism to completely remove the username and all of its edits? There was only one, other than on talk pages to understand the block. I am asking on behalf of the organization because they are currently blocked. In addition, I am intentionally omitting the username and organization name because I am only requesting general information and not any special treatment. If you require any additional information, I will be happy to provide it. Thank you. Bazerko (talk) 21:45, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Generally the only reason for "oversighting" (as it is called) is when the material suppressed is grossly offensive or defamatory. This situation does not really fit that description. The fact that the incident occurred is part of Wikipedia history now, albeit not a serious one, and is not subject to censorship.--Orange Mike | Talk 01:49, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

@Bazerko: also try WP:RTV, although some of the requirements there do not fit this circumstance. (Ultimately it would be at the discretion of a WP:BUREAUCRAT, I assume.) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:35, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Operation Protective Edge

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Operation Protective Edge. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Alex Konanykhin

Could you keep an eye on the above article? Despite all Wikiexpert employees, contractors, etc. being banned, a SPAnon keeps removing the fact that Wikiexperts is banned from the lede of the article. He/she then shuffles the content, adds a small bit of promotional info, and when I revert quotes Wikipolicy to me. I've now asked whether he/she knows about the new ToU. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 12:47, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

The Times Polical Party Support

Whilst I would agree that the Times is generally thought to be a supporter of the Conservative party and indeed historically have been a regular supporter of that party the facts are that The Times newspaper has declared support for Labour in two of the last three general elections (General election newspaper support). To put it another way they have supported Labour in 66% of the general elections held in the UK this millennium.
Of course we don’t yet know which way they will go at next years election but given their recent record it is not unreasonable to describe them as a Labour supporting newspaper, I would also venture that it would not be unreasonable to describe them as a Conservative supporting newspaper, depending upon how one wishes to bait the hook on any particular day.
In future please check the facts before making asinine comments about other editors contributions. Vanzil (talk) 13:53, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Okay, perhaps you consider Tony Blair to be a Labour politician. I do not, nor do most of my UK friends. Nonetheless, your point is well made. They endorse "Labour" in some general elections, but maintain a reactionary editorial policy the rest of the cycle. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:05, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

User:Southwest Monarch Study

Hi Mike. I'm inclined to accept this user's unblock appeal, but wanted to run it past you first; do you have any objections? Cheers, Yunshui ^雲_水 10:56, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

On the contrary: having read the appeal, I'd be delighted if you did so. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:09, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

On the log of edit history of the article Monarch buttrfly the following edit was posted: 07:49, July 15, 2014‎ Mdann52 (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (68,291 bytes) (-635)‎ . . (→‎top: rv link to copyvio material (Ticket:2014071510000218))

I would like to maintain that no copyright infringement was done. I referenced a url to a website, a normal and typical practice. No copyrighted material (the raw data itself) was/is used in this section of the article. No word-for-word text was copied from the reference and then pasted to the article.

I would suggest that User:Mdann52 may also be known as User:Southwest Monarch Study. There seems to be some confusion of what constitues a copyright violation. I can only say that this/these users are well-intentioned and are responding in good faith, wishing to enhance and improve the article. I have been privately contacted by a representive of Southwest Monarch Study via email. I would rather resolve this issue with the assistance other editors who have the expertise of determining copyright violations here on wikipedia rather than thru private corespondance.

bpage (talk) 02:23, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Galicia (Eastern Europe)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Galicia (Eastern Europe). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Shuja'iyya Incident (2014)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Shuja'iyya Incident (2014). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Quick question

I just reverted some vandalism to a BLP (here). However, this particular vandalism was filling in the date of death field with a date a few days from now. Can/should I simply treat this as vandalism (in other words, is my revert-and-warn sufficient) or is there anything else I need to do, such as request revdel? Mainly asking because while I personally feel it's just vandalism to a BLP, it could be seen as a death-threat, I suppose. Asking you because you're the most recently active admin I could find and if more needs to be done than just this reversion/warn, it's probably best not to attract unnecessary attention to it by linking from one of the large places like helpdesk. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 02:47, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

I'd say "don't feed the trolls". That's too subtle to be an actionable death threat. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:50, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Good, that's what I figured, but it never hurts to make sure (if done in a non-troll-feeding way, of course). Thank you for your quick response. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 02:52, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Page Got Deleted

Hello,

My page did not get deleted because a conflict of interest, it got deleted because the CorenSearchBot told me I plagiarized a spam website. My questions and concerns have still not been answered. Does this bot check for the authenticity of the websites they say people plagiarize off of. I was not writing my article biasedly and I was merely using the facts about the show, just as any other show.

I really wish someone could actually HELP me instead of linking me to more and more irrelevant talks. I just want to know in real words not in syntax or links, how to prove the website I am accused of plagiarizing is an illegitimate website. Most likely a spam website. Due to the fact I intern with the people who own the rights to the show, it is disturbing to them that Wiki requests I cite a source that is very obviously a spam site, when we own the rights to all the content of said show.

I never knew how difficult it would be to gain help on this situation and I am really just trying to achieve the task at hand. If the page was deleted for conflict of interest, thats when I would do everything in my power to fix it because I have extensively read Wikis user guidelines. Since that was not my problem, I have no interest or need in looking into all of the links the editors have sent to me, because they are unhelpful to my problem.

I have always known Wiki was user generated content and extensively checked to make sure bogus articles are not published, but its disheartening to be called out for plagiarizing a spam site by the very website that extensively checks all articles. This wikipedia page is important to us because we understand how many users look to Wiki for information, including myself.

If you could help in any way solve this problem, I would be utterly grateful.

Lissheff (talk) 09:23, 24 July 2014 (UTC)Lisa

(talk page stalker) There are 2 separate issues: 1) when you signed up to this private website, you agreed not to write articles about topics where you`re related, especially if you`re getting paid to do so. 2) Copy/pasting from ANY source is unacceptable due to WP:COPYRIGHT. the panda ₯’ 10:13, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

I am not getting paid to do so, and I did not copy and paste from ANY source. Thats why this is an issue. It is my internship requirements to help create content such as wikipedia articles for the show, which I have not been affiliated with for more than a month. Also, why in the world does wiki accept articles from people who ARENT directly affliated with the shows or things they are speaking about? I'm so confused as to WHO can write such articles, because anyone writing a factual article has to be affiliated with what they are writing about somehow? Maybe that is what I need explained to me further, and polietly please. I don't understand how anyone who edits content for wiki could make such rude remarks to someone who is merely asking for help...because of actual confusion and misunderstanding?

REGARDLESS, none of this answers my original question as to how to combat the plagiarism?

Lissheff (talk) 13:04, 24 July 2014 (UTC)Lisa

As I said on your talk page, the people for whom you are interning have assigned you to do something you are not supposed to be doing here. I'm sorry, but I don't know any more polite way to say that. If these shows are genuinely notable, then somebody without a conflict of interest can compile articles about them from reliable, impartial third-party sources such as newspapers and magazines which have reported about the shows. The plagiarism issue is way, way below this in importance, which is why folks have not been addressing it. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:58, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Article One of the United States Bill of Rights

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Article One of the United States Bill of Rights. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Username block

Hi. I note that you placed a username block on User:Art at Madsqpark. Would it be possible to do the same for User:Madsqpark, who, in fact, preceded the other? BMK (talk) 23:26, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. BMK (talk) 01:11, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Ghost Stories (Coldplay album)

User:FilBenLeafBoy added alternative rock without source, two times. 183.171.164.243 (talk) 17:58, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Shaughnessy

Hey Orangemike, given the concerns raised at the DYK nom, could you please make sure going forward that anything copied or closely paraphrased from a public domain source includes an appropriate template, and that material from non-PD sources is either quoted or paraphrased? This article and a couple of others seem to have some issues in that regard. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:52, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Arranged marriage

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Arranged marriage. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Traduksciigo: Wikidata:News

Saluton Orangemike,

vi ricevas tiun ĉi mesaĝon, ĉar vi registriĝis kiel tradukisto de la lingvo Orangemike ĉe Wikidata. La paĝo Wikidata:News estas tradukpreta. Vi povas traduki ĝin ĉe:

• traduki al Esperanto

La prioritato de tiu ĉi paĝo estas meza.

Ni tre aprezos vian helpon. Tradukistoj kiel vi helpas al Wikidata funkcii kiel vere multlingva komunumo.

Dankon!

traduk-kunordigantoj de Wikidata‎, 07:02, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of aircraft accidents and incidents resulting in at least 50 fatalities

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of aircraft accidents and incidents resulting in at least 50 fatalities. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Cleon Skousen

Greetings Orangemike!

The problem that is developing on the Cleon Skousen page is that a New Yorker article on Skousen is being cited for a great deal of material that describes the man as a "nut case" and "off" on the facts. It loses its credibility by not informing on the opposing viewpoint. Those agreeing with the "nut case" position will support the inclusion of that material. Those opposed will just be angry, wondering why other facts are not addressed. While you cite the materials removed as well sourced, sourcing a biased article does not advance truth, only a personal point of view. The tone is not neutral. Controversies, if they must be addressed, should have both positions represented, or leave it off until opposing viewpoints can be prepared. I am in personal contact with the family, and have been given access to opposing viewpoints that they said I may put on-line. Until that point, I will be anxious to see that personal agendas on this page don't turn what should be a neutral presentation into a forum for character assassination.

A few things that I've learned so far:

Fired from Chief of Police: The mayor's charges against Skousen were all dropped and never proven in subsequent audits and investigations. He called Skousen names. This too unravels because of a letter from all the police officers and staff that thanked him for his leadership and acknowledged that personal agenda politics was the driving force in his being fired, not personal character.

FBI: Ernie Lazar has a personal problem with Skousen, for unknown reasons. The FBI files assertions do not present the full facts, and as presented give a biased viewpoint. The official memos connecting Skousen to extremist right-wing groups was initially quoted in a memo as a personal opinion of one individual who was later dismissed from the FBI. That opinion became circulated in follow-up memos without the clarification that it was a personal opinion, thereby giving the appearance that the conclusion was the official FBI position.

I am told by the family that much of this is being included in a new introduction to The Naked Communist.

There is more, but it will take me time to dig through the material. In the meantime, please contact me if needed. I don't want to see Wikipedia credibility tarnished by POV issues clouding the facts, and the New Yorker article and the Salon.com article have many factual errors that I am laboring to bring to light. Corrections2014 (talk) 20:03, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

You're going to have to provide reliable sources, not claims by his family and personal anecdotes from folks who used to know him. The New Yorker is famous for the quality of its fact-checking, and Salon.com is pretty darned reputable. The talk page of the Skousen article seems to be littered with challenges from people who think that FDR loved Reds and the SPLC is a bunch of liberal commie Jewboys, and consider that a valid critique of our sources. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:57, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:War of the Pacific

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:War of the Pacific. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

July 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Arthur J. Balzer may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. 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:

• former Republican Assemblyman [[Louis Hicks]]. He was assigned to the committee on [[labor]]<ref>{http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1711.dl/WI.WIBlueBk1956 Toepel, M. G.; Kuehn, Hazel L., ed. ''The
• Hazel L., ed. ''The Wisconsin blue book, 1956'' Madison: State of Wisconsin, 1956; pp. 57, 753]</ref>. Balzer was unseated in the 1956 Democratic [[primary election]] by [[Richard J. Lynch]],

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:04, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Markit

Hi Orange Mike,

I noticed that you are an active Wikipedia Editor and was wondering if you might be able to help me. I have recently posted on Markit's talk page suggesting some updates and changes to the article. I have disclosed that Markit is a client of mine, therefore I am very keen to follow the correct procedures in terms of suggesting any edits via the talk page in order for other Editors to discuss. I was wondering if you could have a look at my posts and see if you thing that the changes would benefit the article and are something you might be able to help me with.

Thanks

SarahLouiseRoberts (talk) 14:36, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Israeli–Palestinian conflict

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Andreas Kaplan self-promotion

Previous comments removed pending research on potential COI contributions. Some of the inlinks to Andreas Kaplan seemed peculiar, very SEO-like in fact. I'm looking into it further. - Brianhe (talk) 04:44, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Public opinion on climate change

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Public opinion on climate change. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Timeless Journey

Hello OrangeMike,

I have huge respect for all you do at Wikipedia. But I am wondering whether you have slipped up for once. I refer to this edit in which you renamed a subpage of a userspace from "Timeless Journey (Musician)" to "Timeless Journey". However WP already has an article Timeless Journey. Not that it is likely to matter – the intended article appears destined for eventual deletion. Maproom (talk) 13:04, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Good catch; fixed it. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:45, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Duck?

Directly after you blocked SRManager, this single-purpose editor was created and engaged in making the same adds that SRManager had made, to the same article. --Epeefleche (talk) 21:14, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Prem Mandir Vrindavan

Hi, I saw maintenance tag on Prem Mandir Vrindavan article and saying that verge in speedy delete. Please help me understand the problems I would be happy to improve. KuwarOnline^Talk 18:18, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

The article is weak on external sources which discuss the temple from an impartial point of view.

The use of honorifics, from Sri/Shri to "the Lord", is against our manual of style.

The list of amenities and the schedule belong on the temple's website, not in an encyclopedia article.

The gallery is excessive, and makes the article look like a four-colour tourist pamphlet.

Will that do for starters? --Orange Mike | Talk 20:50, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Sure will do that KuwarOnline^Talk 11:12, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Verification, creds, links

Orange Mike, I have several books including two anthologies I edited, won two NJ State Arts Council Fellowships, one in prose and one in poetry, won the Kinereath Genseler Award for my book Panic (also a BOTYA finalist) with Alice James Books, and there are a ton of links to my work on line. A quick search pulls these up. If they need to be linked on the page, then that would be great, but calling the page into question is inappropriate as my creds are in line with many other poets' pages:

some Books and anthologies I have written or edited:

http://www.blacklawrence.com/rigger-death-and-hoist-another/ http://syracuseuniversitypress.syr.edu/fall-2013/room-and-the-world.html http://alicejamesbooks.org/ajb-titles/panic/ http://www.blacklawrence.com/speech-acts/ http://www.ugapress.org/index.php/books/index/sense_of_regard

Reviews or comments on my work:

http://www.wordforword.info/vol18/Pollard.html http://thelinebreak.wordpress.com/2010/11/30/laura-mcculloughs-speech-acts/ http://thepotomacjournal.com/issue9/laura_mccullough.html http://contrarymagazine.com/2011/laura-mccullough-speech-acts/ http://www.guernicamag.com/daily/laura_mccullough_reading_recom/

Interviews of me or by me:

http://nanofiction.org/weekly-feature/interviews/2013/10/five-questions-with-laura-mccullough http://tcjww.org/2014/02/10/interview-laura-mccullough/ http://www.poetsandartists.com/laura-mccullough/ http://realitysandwich.com/389/what_men_want_interview_laura_mccullough/ http://poems.com/special_features/prose/essay_hicok2.php http://poetsonadoption.blogspot.com/2011/04/laura-mccullough.html

Radio or Videos of me or me interviewing other writers:

http://www.leahbrowning.net/Apple/Fall_2009/Laura_McCullough.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LAYKLSZVWo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfTrWCIJ8_4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15sRlWAN2fU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GP0hTQee-9w

Examples of poems online:

http://goodmenproject.com/author/laura-mccullough/ http://www.tupeloquarterly.com/everywhere-i-havent-been-anywhere-by-laura-mccullough/ http://solsticelitmag.org/author/laura-mccullough/ http://www.leahbrowning.net/Apple/Fall_2009/Laura_McCullough.html http://www.versedaily.org/2014/aboutlauramccullough.shtml https://www.aprweb.org/poem/speaking-malagasy-isle-vanilla http://www.anomalouspress.org/8/26.mccullough.bowie.php http://www.diodepoetry.com/v4n2/content/mccullough_l.html http://www.drunkenboat.com/db18/laura-mccullough http://www.fishousepoems.org/?artist=mccullough-laura http://referentialmagazine.com/contributors/m-o/laura-mccullough/ http://www.connotationpress.com/a-poetry-congeries-with-john-hoppenthaler/2010/february-2010/307-laura-mccullough-poetry http://anti-poetry.com/anti/mcculloughla/ http://www.pebblelakereview.com/archive/2009_v6_1_health_wellness/poem_SweetSick.html

http://www.2river.org/2RView/11_4/poems/mccullough.html http://www.wordriot.org/template.php?ID=743 http://baltimorereview.org/index.php/fall_2013/contributor/laura-mccullough http://www.tarpaulinsky.com/Summer03/LMCunt.htm

http://www.madhattersreview.com/issue13/fiction_mccullough.shtml

I teach in these two writing venues, one an annual conference, the other an MFA program:

http://www.sierranevada.edu/academics/humanities-social-sciences/creative-writing-mfa/mfa-faculty/ http://wintergetaway.com/poetry-faculty.html

Other things I have written that appear on Web:

http://www.blacklawrence.com/title-as-invitation-poetry-contests-as-dinner-party-by-laura-mccullough/

http://www.cortlandreview.com/features/14/spring/mccullough.php

http://hub.gmnews.com/news/2006-04-06/Front_page/028.html http://hub.gmnews.com/news/2006-04-06/Front_page/028.html How does this get resolved? Lmccullough (talk) 20:45, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Move America Forward NPOV dispute

As the single issue IP editor seems to have gone away once you semi-protected the page, and given the new sources I've added to the lead which shed some light upon this strange mishmosh of an organization, I'm wondering whether you still consider this dispute to be ongoing?[9] -- Kendrick7^talk 23:43, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bosnian War

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Bosnian War. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Priorities

Orange Mike, Art is actively squashed or commercialized in our culture. I try to manage a life of the mind and aesthetics while helping other artists and writers. IN a few minutes, I head out to meet a writer who wants advice. He's a retired person who can't enter the Po-biz race of those who came up through the top flight MFAs or other university programs. I donate my mentorship to folks like this man all the time, young and old, who are trying to write, who are trying to have art in their lives. I also teach a full load, and usually overloads, and raise a family, but have managed to be an artist, and somehow, people have published me. My contributions to the poetry community are not at the NBA level. I'm considered mid career. Like a lot of poets. Like a lot of people in any field. Yet I am contributing to the literary scholarship in my field (not for money, either) with two anthologies I edited for university presses.

You have ruined my morning, but you have not ruined my life. If you get my page deleted, you know what happens in my life? Nothing. I keep writing. I keep trying to develop my soul, my art, my community. Still will help mentor other writers. Still will write. I write because my soul and spirit are called to, not because of any perceived glory or reputation.

So if you really want to nix the page, go for it. I have a webpage for promotion. Wiki is not supposed to be that. It's supposed to be just the bare facts. The "real" ity. If you get me deleted, it's not about that. It's about something else, dude. But go for it.

Good luck.Lmccullough (talk) 15:53, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Most minor poets, like most journalists, labor activists, teachers and librarians, are doing noble work, but do not meet Wikipedia's threshold for notability among seven billion people. That's not a reflection on you, or a judgment of you or your work (as author, teacher, or mentor). In fact, this article might have gone un-noticed if your publisher had not started a spamming spree across the articles of all their writers. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:46, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

You've been canvassing very heavily elsewhere. Ironically, if you would stop canvassing and engaging in false accusations of sexism and COI edits and general clueless thrashing about, the article might be userfied and re-created in an acceptable fashion. Sadly, your current behavior is interfering with that process. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:15, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Well, I have to admit,

OrangeMike, that you are right about my reckless thrashing about. I'm not so sure about the sexism, as there has been a great deal of talk about that regarding Wikipedia, and it seems as if Wikipedia reflects the winds of the larger society, but I did send you a rough message, and I sure did thrash about, and you are very, very right about that. In fact, this has been a very interesting learning experience. I see now that I had no idea, clueless, I think you said, and you are right, what Wikipedia was really like on the inside. It's rather like a world, a bit of a wild west, with no sheriff in town, but everyone is equally armed. It's a fascinating thing, beautiful in a way, but also scary. Beautiful in that is seems to represent a kind of pulsating, growing, hive of human data, and people are scuffling, skirmishing, negotiating, reasoning, testing, thinking, arguing about the edge of the human data collection. Kind of cool indeed. Scary, too, though, maybe just for someone like me, a poet, because I can see that it also means all the good and all the bad of humans in reflected there: we all bring our good qualities and also our prejudices. I am duly amazed and chastened. And I understand now what you are calling canvassing is not how Wiki works, but in my naivete, it seemed to me to tell third party people--fan base, professional contacts--what was happening and that they should weigh in--which is what I thought the note on the top of the page was requesting (people's feedback)--was exactly what I should have done. But that's not right, right? Wiki wanted the people who are actively involved in Wiki, not people who are knowledgeable in particular areas. Again, kind of elegant and scary at the same time. But anyway, OrangeMike, I appreciate that you responded to me. Really. I am not going to do anything else, and if the page is deleted, that's life. But it has been a fascinating thing, and I may not be super smart, but I am smart enough to know I am out of my depths here, should honor that and step away. In some strange way, I have faith, hmm, how do I mean this? All there ever is is this skirmishing, right? No exactly right way forward in any human endeavor? Why would this big virtual repository, which is more than a repository be different? In fact it's rather metaphoric of the human condition overall, and that is something I do have faith in, that nothing is perfect, and no one, but that things tend to work themselves not just out, but toward collective intelligence--maybe not in a straight line, but over time, and the page on me and the little skirmish over it, for example, is one of thousands (I was so surprised!!), and so terribly inconsequential, but the process, the debating between people, the testing, that's the key, that's the beauty, and I have faith in that over time.

What I mean is, the page may be deleted, but that's okay. It was worth what I came away with in new understanding, and I have more respect--and a bit of fear, the way one would of a wild animal in its habitat--for Wikipedia then I did before. But it's not an animal I will try to feed again!

Anyway, page gone or no, from where I sit this minute, I am sending you --and all the Wiki folk--a virtual hug. Take care. 107.107.58.92 (talk) 20:59, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Well, it may be hard for you to detect it from the noob's point of view, but the entire process may lead to the deletion (temporarily) of the current version, followed by the creation offstage of a new, cleaner and crisper article about you, purged of the promotional efforts of your publishers and the naive but well-intentioned efforts of yourself and your supporters. I have discussions like this all the time with people stunned to learn that when I'm in my melanti as Wikipedian, my political, spiritual, literary and aesthetic opinions are rapidly trumped by Wikipedia's rules and principles, which as you have recognized constitute a flawed, human effort to bring order (but not too much order) to this effort of ours to portray a chaotic and crowded universe. Mayhap you will end up creating an article about the whole thing, for some poetic or academic journal: Should I Have Been Deleted?: Held Hostage at the Hands of the Savage Wikipedians! Or perhaps your muse will help you turn the experience into poetry, mutating frustration into art once more. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:34, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Mesrop Mashtots

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Mesrop Mashtots. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Editing on page Edward Griffin

I noticed you have undone my editing on the page of Edward G. Griffin. After looking at your user page and I have concluded that you are probably a nice and well-intentioned person. I would probably like you when I would encounter you in real life. But in the particular case of the page of Edward G. Griffin I sincerely do not think you are correct.

I will admit that I am new to Wikipedia editing (I have far more experiencing using Wikipedia than editing), so I am struggeling to find the right form, and I appreciate help from more experienced editors such as yourself. That being said, I would like to engage in an open discussion and explain why I think my actions were correct. So please, let us engage in an open, civil and possibly even friendly discussion. I think I can learn something here, and I think you can too.

First, you posted 3 comments in short order om my Talk page: 1) Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to G. Edward Griffin. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. 2) Hello, I'm Orangemike. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Talk:G. Edward Griffin that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia needs people like you and me to collaborate, 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. 3) Please do not insert fringe or undue weight content into articles, as you did to Talk:G. Edward Griffin. An article should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject. Please use the article's talk page to discuss the material and its appropriate weight within the article. Thank you.

The only thing I did was to revert the page just before User Steeletrap started his/her editing. That is all.

Comment nr. 1) Therefore, I did not add personal analysis to Wikipedia articles as you state in your comment nr. 1. I repeat: I added nothing to it. The ONLY thing I did was to merely revert it to an earlier page, namely the page that already existed before user Steeletrap started his/her editing.

Comment nr. 2) I am sorry if I made a remark didn't seem very civil. That was not my intention, and I truly do not want to convey uncivilness. But here is the thing: although I do not know Edward G. Griffin personally, I do know a lot of his writings and his other material. If you check out the alterations that user Steeletrap has made, I really and sincerly think THOSE edits are slanderous. I am new at Wikipedia-editing, but I am learning. Maybe I should have used another word, such as not NPOV regarding user Steeletrap edits. But I think I have a very good point. If you look at his/her edits, those edits are not NPOV. And after a little research I found out I am not the only one that thinks so. He/she HAS been banned regarding articles/pages relating to the Austrian school of economics, and there are other Wikipedia editors that think so too. So I am a little confused, and I don't understand why you are saying to me that I am making an uncivil comment, while user Steeletrap is the one who is making unjust remarks. The bottom line is this: You obviously know a lot, a lot more about Wikipedia-editing than I do, but it is statistically very improbable that you (or user Steeletrap for that matter) know more about Edward G. Griffin than I do. And I am telling you, user Steeletrap's edits are not OK. Please, I am begging you, bear that in mind.

Comment nr. 3) Again, the only thing I did was to revert the page just before User Steeletrap started his/her editing, therefore I did not insert "fringe or undue weight content into articles" as you state.

So, those were my comments on the 3 comments you made. User Steeletrap has made it known on the Talk page of Edward Griffin that he/she thinks his views are fringe, so how can his/her views on Mr Griffin be considered NPOV? I think user Steeletraps views cannot be considered as such. And how can user Steeletraps edits be continued to endure? Especially since she has actually been banned from the pages regarding the Austrian school of economics, a school Edward Griffin adheres to. For the last 5 years, I have been reading about Austrian economics related topics for lets say 10 or 15 hours a week. So I have a really hard time when I see someone like user Steeletrap going about it in the way he/she does. How should I adress these issues, where I sincerely think user Steeletrap is not NPOV?

Again, there is no doubt in my mind that you are obviously a far, far more experienced Wikipedia-editor than I am, and that you are a nice and likable person (I liked your photo anyway), but I think it is highly improbable that you (or user Steeletrap for that matter) know more about Mr Griffin's work than I do. I would be grateful to you if you could answer my questions above.

All the best, and kind regards, Truthseeker1001

P.S. I got another remark from Wikipedia-editor S. Rich on why my reversion and remark was not optimal. I must say his/her remarks are more helpful. I will follow his/her remarks and do what he/she said. I would still appreciate though, if you could please answer my questions.Truthseeker1001 (talk) 16:31, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

1. As far as the substance of the edits, that discussion should take place on the talk page of the article.

2. As far as fringe beliefs, Griffin goes well beyond your normal Austrian school/Chicago school folks (I say that as somebody who's been on a first-name basis with David D. Friedman for over forty years) and is generally regarded as very much a fringe figure. To say so is not by any means slanderous, and calling it slanderous is not only a personal attack, but borders on a legal threat. Discuss the substance, not the editor.

3. Our Neutral Point of View policy does not mean that we have to give all persons claiming to belong to all schools of thought equal weight in an article, or pretend that they are equally well-regarded. Griffin's views take him far beyond the sane extremes of the Austrians, Randites, etc., into the cloud-cuckoo-land of the conspiracy theorists and the miracle-cure medical nutbars. We are under no obligation to treat his assertions with the seriousness we would those of, say, a Murray Rothbard.

4. I'm sure folks like S. Rich have this one under control; I'm weary of Griffin and his kind, even the ones who aren't toting guns into daycare centers for laughs, or trying to sell laser weapons to Central American colonels to raise money for laetrile farms. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:55, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your answers to my questions. Those were helpful and I appreciate it. I will now give a short reply to your comments.

1. You are right. The substance of the edits do belang on the talk page of the article.

2. You are also right regarding the word slanderous. In the meantime I have read the document legal threat. Thanks for refering to that. Therefore I have corrected myself and I have striken out the word slanderous.

On your assessment regarding Griffin, I do not agree at all. If you are talking about discussing the substance, and not the person, I would say your comment on Mr. Griffin going well beyond the normal Austrian school/Chicago school folks in terms of fringe are not exactly NPOV.

3. Thank you for referring to Our Neutral Point of View policy. I have read it. You are right (as you don't need me to tell you of course) that not all schools of thought should have equal weight in an article, or pretend that they are equally well-regarded. And I agree with that. Not everything should be regarded equal. However, although Griffin's views indeed take him beyond the mainstream, and in some aspects even beyond the Austrians as you call it, that on its own doesn't mean that he isn't correct. For example, the mainstream media did not see the crisis coming, but the Austrians did. Did you know that 90% of the mainstream media in in the hands of only 6 mega-conglomerates? Do you think you will get a promotion as a mainstream reporter, If you report anything that goes against the wishes of the monied interests? I think not. I could go on, but for brevity's sake I will stop here.

4. Come on now. With your comment under point 4) you surely should know that your comment isn't anywhere near NPOV. Comparing Griffin with people who are 'toting guns into daycare centers for laughs'? Or 'selling laser weapons to Central American colonels to raise money for laetrile farms'? I don't even know what you are talking about. But it sure isn't NPOV by a long shot.

Look, I will explain honestly the way I see it. I'm not an American. I am a middle aged higher educated man from a Western European country. I am not a redneck or anything resembling that. I am only saying this so you sort of know where I am coming from. I am from a liberal country where you are not allowed to carry guns. I mention guns, because you yourself use it as an example in your response. And I think it is a good example to discuss. I grew up in this Western European country (I don't want to give to much away publicly, sorry) convinced that we where on the right track, and that - with respect to guns - Americans were a little bit crazy. But now I don't think that anymore. On the contrary. In the meantime, I have read a lot about American history. I daresay I know a lot more about American history than the average American. Among a lot of other things I have read about the constitution, the founding fathers, the reasons for the amendments in the constitution. I am not going to lecture you on history, I am sure you know your history I hope. But the reason for the second amendment was that America was born in the fight against tyranny. The reason for the second amendment is that if the government turns into a tyranny again, the people do have the guns to overthrow the government. And if you look at the last 15 years (or even before) you should admit the direction the U.S. is turning is indeed towards tyranny. It's not quite there yet, but it is very close. You should read 'Fascist America, in 10 easy steps' by Naomi Wolff (see: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/apr/24/usa.comment). You should know this already, by the revealations of the Snowden documents, the National Defense Authorisation Act (NDAA, see Chris Hedges on http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_last_chance_to_stop_the_ndaa_20130902), etc. etc. Thats what people supporting the Second Amendment worry about. So please, people who are "toting guns into daycare centers for laughs"? Come on. And it's getting worse. Do you really think that if the next terrorist attack in the U.S. hits, the U.S. government isn't going to declare martial law? Don't you think that the U.S. warmongering over MH17 isn't a little suspicious. You really should read Naomi Wolff's piece above. The mainstream media is for the most part hubris. That 90% of the mainsteam media is in the hands of only 6 mega-conglomerates really does show. You should check out some good alternative media sites, such as http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.nl/ or http://www.jsmineset.com/

I'm sorry for the long story, but I didn't have time to make a shorter one. My point it is way too easy for other people to put Griffin away as a conspiracy nut, even though they haven't read his material and even if he does have some very valid points.

I have only written this long piece explaining my point view and insights because you were so kind in answering my questions, and because I do appreciate an discussion and I think you are probably a nice guy so I want you to have a chance as well.

Take care, thank you for your answers, and thank you for the friendly discussion.Truthseeker1001 (talk) 20:36, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

I work in a bookstore where we sell lots of Rand, and more than a little of the Friedmans, and yes, Jekyll Island. You should have followed my link about James R. Lewis (legislator), the Republican state legislator who wanted to fund a laetrile farm; I gave you the link right under the words. The evidence is that to the extent the U.S. is tending towards tyranny, it's because of the idiot who came to power in 1980, and the cover he gave to some very scary people. None of this has anything to do with improving the Griffin article. I tag Griffin the way I do because there are no reliable sources, even conservative ones, who take him seriously, between the laetrile and the Noah's Ark gibberish. You would be better off improving the coverage of influential figures like Rothbard and his school. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:22, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

I value your comment, although for the most part I do not agree with it. I am taking it seriously, and that is why I write a somewhat extensive reply back. Here she goes:

You said that you "tag Griffin the way I do because there are no reliable sources, even conservative ones, who take him seriously, between the laetrile and the Noah's Ark gibberish." Well, apart from your uncivil and obviously POV statement (don't you agree?), that statement simply is not true. Here are, for example, two reliable sources that do take him seriously: http://mises.org/daily/5345/content/ and http://mises.org/daily/4631.

So, if you actually are a person that means what he says, doesn't that mean that you can now untag Griffin? This is a serious question.

Those two sources led me to 1) a very long article which mentions one Griffin book in one sentence; and 2) an article which quotes, not Griffin, but two anecdotes from one of his books. Neither of those constitutes the kind of serious respect I mentioned. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:40, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Ok, next topic. I have now in the meantime followed your link about James R. Lewis, and I have even followed the links that refered to the original articles. I don't see why that is important. He has no link with Edward Griffin.

You said: "I'm weary of Griffin and his kind, even the ones who aren't toting guns into daycare centers for laughs, or trying to sell laser weapons to Central American colonels to raise money for laetrile farms."

I hope I have explained in my previous note why the 'toting guns into daycare centers for laughs' remark is very superficial. As for the second part of your sentence, it would be similar to me saying: "I'm weary of OrangeMike and his kind (meaning Quakers), even the ones that are no serial killers" (http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Boy+who+grew+to+be+serial+killer+From+Quaker+to+Ripper%3B+LIMBS+IN+LOCH...-a079098640) (The article is about William Beggs who grew up as a Quaker and turned into a serial killer)

That is the same thing. The fact that you choose the Lewis-article to send to me and you even reiterate this, frightens me a little. Because you emphasize smearing someone by mere association with a term, while there is no direct connection. I hope I have gotten that point across.

That doesn't mean I am not open to new information. I really am open to new information, and this is also true in the case of Edward Griffin, including critique regarding him. Until a few years ago I had not even heard of him. Although I was have always been an avid renewspaper reader and follower of the news, until five years ago I was still naive in some respects regarding political, economical and financial matters. Then it hit me, the veil over my eyes came of, and I have been ferociously been reading up ever since. I have been reading the work or multiple dozens of other very intelligent people. A lot of whom are ignored by the mainstream media. I already explained that 90% of the media is in hands of 6 mega-conglomerates, and that does have an enormous influence on your "reliable" sources. The military-industrial-complex is now so enormous that it is invisible. The best analogy is with the film 'The Matrix'. In this regard Griffin has only been a minor contributor for me thus far in the grand scheme of things.

Regarding new information, I believe that in order to separate the chaff from the wheat it is crucial to simultaneously a) be openminded about new information, and b) be critical of this same information. I believe that is the scientific way, and I believe it is a good way.

So I am open to new information, and that includes critique on Griffin. Like I said, I do not know the man personally. If he is indeed a charlatan, and you provide me with the information that proves that, I sincerely would be extremely grateful to you. And I mean that. Because in that case that would mean you would have saved me from potentially detrimental actions I would have taken on the basis of information his writings provide me. So, is he a charlatan or not? That is the question. Maybe you could still provide me with a direct link that he is. Up till now I haven't been provided with one. Up till now my own research, which includes dozens of hours of reading and watching material from him and about him, indicates that he indeed is a controversial figure, but I do think he is right on economic, financial and political matters. As scary as I sometimes find his findings to be. Being controversial doesn't - on its own - mean you are wrong. The fact that there are no "reliable" sources that support his view, only means that we have in effect lost the real freedom of the press. It may look like we have a free press, but we really don't (I'm not going to make the 90% remark again). I am not just relying on that statistic, but I see it every day (whereas five years ago I did not see it). The descrepancy between the analysis between every day mainstream-media (MSM) news and quality alternative financial/geopolitic/economic sites is huge. Listen, if there is one link I urge you to check, it is this: it is about the 'Quigley Formula' and it can be found on YouTube [1h,13min]. It might be a little long, and you might be extremely shocked, but you won't be disappointed you watched the link. Ignore the audience in the video. If you indeed watch the link, and you do have remarks of any kind including critique regarding the content, I will be more than happy to seriously consider and think about your remarks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynVqPnMQ2sI

The first time I came in contact with his material (Jekyll Island), I thought great what a good book. Then I heard a lecture from him at a Casey Research conference in 2012 on 'Navigating the Politicized Economy'. BTW, maybe that isn't a "reliable source" in your book. But I can assure you it is a heck of a lot more accurate than the 90% of the hubris the Western World is following. Anyway, I thought, wow this man is very good. Then I read and saw a lot more material from him, including the link above about 'The Quigley Formula' (again: if there is one link you should check, it is that one) and it was very insightful for me. I also discovered other topics of his, such as amygdalin/laetrile and documentary on 'Noah's Ark'. I was not waiting for that to happen. I would have prefered if he sticked to his analysis about economics, finance, the Fed, geo-politics and totalitarism. I would have prefered that he didn't promote laetrile and Noah's Ark. I am just not into those subjects. Besides, if you are going to be controversial on a subject, I think it is wiser to stick with one subject. Because being controversial on several subjects can hurt your credibility. Look, I am honestly giving you my personal findings of Griffin here. But again, on its own it doesn't mean Griffin is incorrect. You would really have to check Griffin's material itself to conclude that. I have indeed checked out his material. If you look at his profession, he was a documentary maker. If you are a documentary maker, you can cover different subjects during your career (it wouldn't be much of a career if you didn't). And one thing I have found is that his gift is to take a very complex subject, and to explain it very well to the public. In short: On the Fed, economics, finance, politics and totalitarianism, I think he is brilliant. On laetrile, I really don't know if it works or not, but in his lecture about it (see YouTube) he makes some very good points. Points that the Wikipedia article does not cover or dismisses. If you really want to have an informed opinion, please also watch his video on YouTube on this subject(witch I bet you haven't and therefore you probably do not have an informed opinion, only an uninformed one. I'm sorry, but that's the way it is). On 'Noah's Ark', I don't know. I have not checked it and I probably will not check it either in the future. I'm not interested in it. If I think about it, it might have happened that there was an enormous flood in a certain region of the world, and that this flood was so huge that legends were written about it and where also the basis for the bible-story. I don't know, maybe some Christian groups (Quakers?, like I said I don't know) are offended by that hypothesis? I don't know and I don't care, not my topic.

Finally, you say: "The evidence is that to the extent the U.S. is tending towards tyranny, it's because of the idiot who came to power in 1980, and the cover he gave to some very scary people. None of this has anything to do with improving the Griffin article."

Yes, Reagan played his part, and you are correct in that, including your comment about giving cover to some very scary people, such as Bush. But if you are phrasing it like that, you are missing a extremely big piece of the puzzle. Every president from Reagan on (and I daresay even before) has been instrumental in marching the U.S. to totalitarianism, not only Republican presidents, but Democratic presidents as well. And that definitely includes Clinton and Obama. You would understand that if you watched the link about 'The Quigley Formula' (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynVqPnMQ2sI). And that has EVERYTHING to do with improving the Griffin article. But as of now, you don't even know what I am talking about do you? To paraphrase 'The Matrix': So, OrangeMike, are you going take the blue pill, and wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe? Or are you going take the red pill and find out how deep the rabbit hole goes? Your choice."Truthseeker1001 (talk) 10:30, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation/Aviation accident task force

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation/Aviation accident task force. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

The XML in the uploaded file could not be parsed.

Hello! I am a long time user of Wikipedia, but I always been limited from actually contributing to it, due to a nasty error that always eludes me about why it happens.

When I am trying to correct errors in image files (be them world maps, logos, or whatever), I always suffer from the same error which prevents me from uploading anything, at all: The XML in the uploaded file could not be parsed..

I looked for weeks, months and years on the web for help. I asked moderators. But still no help. Perhaps do you have any advices that could help me understand why I get this error when trying to update an existing image? Any ideas appreciated! --SilentResident (talk) 00:42, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

It sounds like you're trying to upload files that are in formats we don't support. What we generally need is files in simple, uncomplicated versions of formats such as .jpg and .svg. I am told that some file managers, for some incomprehensible reason, will tack a .png onto the end of a .svg file! I also have a very vague impression that .svg filenames should not have parentheses in them. Beyond that, I fear I cannot help. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:16, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Really thinking about this

HI OrangeMike, I'd stepped away and only came back today as I have been getting many emails and messages that the 'process' has kind of taken over, which I surmise is exactly how things are supposed to work. Stunned and humbled would be a first step toward describing my reaction at seeing that so many people have donated time to assemble a wiki persona out of the jetsam and flotsam of my literary and critical efforts. Wow. I am indeed thinking about the metaphoric resonances of this and surely will write about it. Thank you. I might use your handle in a poem? OrangeMike. I like that. Laura Lmccullough (talk) 14:36, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

You're more than welcome to tuckerize me, Laura. Here's a link to a recent article about me in a local paper. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:18, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Awake?

Hi Mike-I live in one of the housing authority high rises in La Crosse, Wisconsin. I get up at 2:30-3:00 am every morning to deliver the morning newspaper to my fellow residents especially those who are in walkers and wheelchairs. I am the de facto newspaper boy. Then I go back to sleep for 2-3 hours. I worked on Wikipedia a little before I went downstairs to deliver the papers. Glad you are doing well. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 11:01, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:West End Avenue

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:West End Avenue. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Editing Content for Chris Larson Page

Thank you for your comments. Feel free to edit content you think may be too editorialized, this includes word choice (ex. saying "expenditures" rather than "investments" or "wasteful spending." However, I have noticed content that has been properly cited being removed. For example, information about legislation that would decrease pay inequalities that currently exist between men and women. This is a major issue nationwide as it affects nearly everyone (women and their families) and I think people have the right to know what Chris Larson has done on the issue, yet information about this issue was removed. Again, feel free to change the content to meet the guidelines for Wikipedia, but I do not think such information should have been completely removed. The same goes for previous removal of county initiatives that I later reinserted with minor alterations. Rather than removing content, why not simply edit it to the point where you feel it complies with Wikipedia standards/guidelines? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 33Remington (talk • contribs) 18:18, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Because to do so constitutes undue emphasis on things which in many cases never had any effect. This is supposed to be a dispassionate, neutral profile of a notable figure, not an article on how and why Chris has been good for Milwaukee County and Wisconsin. That is not optional. Lots of feel-good stuff to inform (or remind) the reader of what Chris Larson has done on the issue is fine for his website or his newsletters, but has no place here, even though every word of it is true. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:51, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Pariah state

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Pariah state. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Renaming without leaving a redirect

Orangemike, renaming articles without leaving redirects is something that should almost never happen. This is the exact same thing as deleting a page, and so should only be done if the resulting redirect meets a speedy deletion criteria. I'm referring specifically to Lexi Noel. I've restored the redirect Lexi Noel (musician) and tagged as {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}}. Lexi Noel (musician) not only doesn't meet any speedy deletion criteria, there is in fact strong consensus that such redirects should be kept - numbers 1 through 4 all apply to this one. Thank you, Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:20, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Didn't realize I'd done that! Thanks. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:31, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Split, Croatia

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Split, Croatia. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

demet muftuoglu

can you delete the above page as it is full of self promotion and she is clearly advertising herself? she is not known or has any fame whatsoever — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.22.228.31 (talk) 03:26, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Creation Museum

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Creation Museum. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

You never block any user from editing or else I'll have an administrator block you from editing.

Eiji Mendoza (talk) 00:43, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Not sure what you're trying to say here, Eiji-san. Blocking users when necessary is part of what I do as an administrator here. Kittens, on the other hand, are always nice. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:41, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:September 11 attacks

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:September 11 attacks. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Amanda Eliasch

Hi mr orange. How do you do? Please could you help with the Amanda Eliasch page? She's a famous art personality in London. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.225.194.193 (talk) 22:46, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Amigo Loans

Thanks for the fast reply, I do not disagree with the deletion. My note was to try and allow the page of Amigo Loans to be re-written, in accordance with Wikipedia guidelines. I have read them and the importance of being up-front about close associations and will update my user page with a note, and obviously stating my employer being Amigo Loans. I want to work on and ensure that this page completely adheres to your guidelines that were not met resulting in its deletion. (please feel free to delete and continue this chat on my talk page) Thanks Davidatamigo (talk) 14:48, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

eliasch page ??

why was amanda eliasch page deleted? she is a notable person in the UK and has done a lot for arts. why did her page get deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.22.228.31 (talk) 03:21, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

AERATBAG (talk) 14:05, 17 August 2014 (UTC) I am sorry to see the Eliasch page deleted. I worked very hard with a person Pete Cater who I had never met before to put it up. It was previously up for 6 years. If you checked you would find that Amanda Eliasch has done many things for the art world in England and has worked to support many charities. She has all the correct press from Huffington Post, LA TImes, The Daily Mail, Guarding and The Times. I am sorry you did not like it. Personally I find it very difficult to keep everybody within Wikipedia happy. There are so many different factions. Somebody helped me within its walls. It was accepted. Then taken down without any encouragement to improve the page. It was not advertising. She does not need it. Like you she does not know of you, but now she does. If you can be helpful to people who are different from you, it would be greatly appreciated. Amanda does not wear orange, she wears black, perhaps that is the problem? AERATBAG[ (talk) 14:05, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

I would like this page to be reinstated. Why would you take down her page, please think about changing your mind. She has no need to advertise herself, she is entertaining enough. I would appreciated support. I will write the page if necessary. Glad you like colour. I am the original "Yellow bikini". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yellowbikini (talk • contribs) 14:17, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

If this person is actually notable, then a new article, neutral and reliably sourced, can be created, free of the marketing language and strange phrasings which left the deleted piece reading like a piece of promotion from some cutting-edge fashion magazine. I am not hostile to this person I've never met or heard of; I'm hostile to promotion and fluff. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:20, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Then you need to be much more professional and constructive in the way you handle matters. You disappointed us in the way you dealt with the whole thing and removed it entirely. It is not helpful at all. Your action contradict your message above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.22.228.31 (talk) 05:25, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

It surprises me too. I accepted the article from AfC on 23 July, so fail to believe it was a speedy deletion candidate (I've been working at AfD for over two years). It should have been taken to AfD if other editors had concerns. Sionk (talk) 17:21, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

User:AERATBAG, creator of that article, is blocked as a sock puppet of blocked User:Sedamjedan and has been blocked indefinitely. Sionk, if you'd like to recreate a less spammy version, I certainly won't be offended. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:27, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

81.5.179.26 (talk) 18:27, 20 August 2014 (UTC) Good that you replied Mr Orangemike. I am absolutely not a sock puppet. It is completely incorrect. I have no idea who this Sembenhan is. Orangemike I think you are going far to far with your comments. You are completely and utterly incorrect. All the people have fought for me and you still do not see that they could be right. You wield your power to happily. I can see that from other edits you do that frequently. Quite frankly I care, I think that it an abomination that there is no real help on Wikipedia and you do not contribute positively. How would you like me to edit your pages? Correctly I think?. Therefore you should treat me with the same correct behaviour. I had so many people fight for me. You might not think I should be on Wikipedia that clearly is your opinion. Many people on Wikipedia should neither be on it or edit it, they do, We all have different interests and that is the beauty of the site, which belongs to me as much as to you.. I might not like wood carving and your book shop or your orange clothes, but I would never do anything to stop you from succeeding on here. I think you and Davey 606, Snoop Creep are totally unprofessional. You may have valid point on my style of writing, but the difference is I would have helped you. Who the hell is Sedamjedan? I have not a clue?. I work under my name and my name only. That too may be incorrect, but a gentle conversation I would have understood. I think I am owed an apology. I certainly will write and have written to Mr Wales. I am also writing about the general appalling treatment. I was up for 7 years and then ….. I have done much much more since then. Peter Cater has nothing to do with me, he is a fan of my work and I was helping him out so he got it right. He told me that he is accused of being a sock puppet too. I think you should be stopped from editing and the rest too. Just an opinion, but a valid one.You are far from impartial and definitely not helpful.81.5.179.26 (talk) 18:27, 20 August 2014 (UTC)AERATBAG I am no sock puppet to anybody or anything81.5.179.26 (talk) 18:27, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

User:AERATBAG, if you claim you are not a sockpuppet, that appeal of a block which I did not impose would be conducted at User talk:AERATBAG, not here; and you would need to be signed in to do it. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:57, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

"Been created by a sockpuppet" isn't a speedy deletion criteria. I can only presume the article was added to after it had been accepted from AfC, in which case the solution would be to remove the spam. Sionk (talk) 18:22, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Sionk, my deletion was the seventh time an article on this person has been deleted since 2007, by a number of sound editors like Amatulic. Callanec has now gone so far as to "salt the earth" to prevent it being created again by anybody but a trusted admin. If you want to work on a non-spammy version, I would be delighted to see it. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:57, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Well, I'll have to repeat, it was a draft that was submitted in the correct way to Articles for Creation, it was reviewed by someone with over 30,000 edits to their name, who certainly wouldn't have allowed it into mainspace if it was purely promotional. It's bewildering. This isn't the first time I've come across your 'judge, jury and executioner' approach. It should have been taken to AfD. Sionk (talk) 22:41, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

It was taken to AfD, at which point it was subjected to heavy SNOWfall. I repeat, Sionk, if you think there is a salvageable version I am not opposed to it being restored. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:40, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

This is getting tiresome. It was taken to AfD, there were a variety of views (certainly not WP:SNOW), then you summarily speedy deleted it, leaving a non-admin to close the AfD. As I said, you act like 'judge, jury and executioner' regardless of other opinions. It gives admins a bad name. Sionk (talk) 17:10, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

It looked like snow to me, once you looked past the s.p.a.s and the invalid arguments. Which version would you like to see restored? The one you passed at AfC? I can live with that. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:40, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

81.5.179.26 (talk) 22:24, 20 August 2014 (UTC)Dear Orange Mike, Now that is helpful. There is no way I am a sock puppet. If the articles were deleted, it is because it is tricky as you will appreciate to update them and because of the nature of the person involved, who is a character, as you are. They end up being colourful, and are taken the wrong way by the editors, who then in turn believe it to be spam. There is so much to write. I can have another go at doing it but I was written to today and another person wants to do it too. I shall take a look at their writing. Perhaps you can all look at it beforehand giving pointers. As for the sock puppet I have no idea who it is. Can someone pinch your IP address? Obviously. Everything to do with me is AERATBAG13 or AERATBAG the same as the email address. Everything the same. A friend did write on my computer as she was upset for me, under yellow bikini but she has another email address entirely and lives in another part of London. I found the coding tricky. I am not an expert. I will try to be less flamboyant. thank you, and I am now happy to at least get somewhere. Incidentally many articles are spammy so tell me an article you like and I will try to adhere to that81.5.179.26 (talk) 22:24, 20 August 2014 (UTC)AERATBAG.

HI ORANGEMICHAEL- please see this neutral page with reliable media sources.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Amanda_Eliasch — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.22.228.31 (talk) 05:30, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

User talk:ACS Wisden

Good evening, Mike. I have replied to you on the talk page of the above account which you correctly blocked following my mistake in not realising the naming convention. This is my new ID. Thank you very much for your help. Music Troy (talk) 17:59, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Passengers of the RMS Titanic

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Passengers of the RMS Titanic. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

August 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Thomas R. Hudd 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:

• (politics)|independent]] who aligned himself with the Liberal Republicans in opposing Grant), was not a candidate.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:08, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "vivation". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 30 August 2014.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 02:49, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Sportsperson

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Sportsperson. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Ceresco, Wisconsin

Hey, Mike. I was gearing up to write up the Wisconsin Phalanx today and I noticed that you've already broached the topic as Ceresco, Wisconsin, which you characterize as a "ghost town" but seems to actually be a constituent part of Ripon, Wisconsin these days, unless I am misreading something... Anyway, see List of Fourierist Associations in the United States, which is the index to these communities. It strikes me as pretty clear that the main name in the literature for this community is "Wisconsin Phalanx" (a "phalanx" being a Fourierist term for "community") rather than the short-lived and rapidly liquidated "town name." Obviously, one of these is an article name and the other would be the redirect term.

I'm going to start writing it up today and when I get done please tell me if you're okay with the name change that I propose. If not, let me know your thinking. best, —Tim //// Carrite (talk) 19:48, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Ceresco qua Ceresco is dead, a former community whose territory was absorbed by another; "ghost town" is not the ideal terminology for places like this, Good Hope, and North Milwaukee. Nonetheless, a case can be made that the Phalanx and the town deserve separate article; otherwise, the town material can be incorporated into the Phalanx article as a "merge and redirect".

As I move along, I'm starting to figure this out a little better. "Wisconsin Phalanx, also known as Ceresco" in the lead, with Ceresco, Wisconsin as the article name (Ceresco already being a disambiguation) seems the smart play. This replicates on a small scale a big problem being faced with the New Harmony piece, in which the history of the Rappite colony, the Owenite community, the town, and a contemporary institute are all jumbled into one sprawling piece. That one needs to be broken up into constituent parts for sure. This one I think can be handled okay as a single piece. The Phalanx and the "village" both existed for about 7 years each, so there's no logical play in terms of duration. That the Phalanx called themselves "Ceresco" seems decisive. —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 20:41, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

• Hey Mike, I doubt you give a damn about any of this at this point in the game, but I've seen that the papers of Ceresco were donated to the Ripon Historical Society in 1900 and locked in a local bank's vault to protect them from fire. The Wisconsin Historical Society website is not particularly friendly to inquiries about specific collections; I have not been able to determine whether this precious archive was ever transferred to Madison. Can you figure this out? best, —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 23:37, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

• Another fun fact is that the Ripon Chamber of Commerce is touting the Ceresco crew as intellectual godfathers-once-removed of the (originally radical) Republican Party LINK. What's your take on that? Carrite (talk) 23:41, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

The stub tag is now down! ;-) best, —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 17:54, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

I found a GNIS citation for Ceresco, Wisconsin in the Ripon, Wisconsin GNIS. This makes reference to Ceresco and Morena. I hope this helps. It cal always be removed. Thanks-RFD (talk) 10:46, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Lynda Thomas

Hello, Mr. Orange Mike, thanks for your attention, and your help with the Lynda Thomas article; thats right, years ago, the article has been tagged for lack of sources, recently it has been provided of that, most of them in spanish language; I think the lead does mention about she had her breakout in the music scene before such pop divas did so, but, no blazed a trail for them, the article remarks she did it for later latin divas. So, I think thats not a fan page. However, i think this article (as you said) can be improved in many ways, meanwhile, by my hand, I'm fixing some points that may be ambiguous or confusing and also some peacock terms.

Only I apologize if I can't answer right away, some activities absorb me all day. Greetings to you and nice to meet you. Ajax1995 (talk) 20:26, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Meetup at the Hull House!

Hey Orangemike. Sorry that we've missed you at our meetups so far. The Jane Addams Hull-House Museum is doing an edit-a-thon later next week. Unfortunately, this one is kind of on a weird day of the week to accommodate students at UIC, but you're welcome to join us if you're free. Let us know if you can make it. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 22:48, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Alas, no. A trip to Chicago eats up an entire day for me. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:58, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Comment on Antia talk

Sorry but I find your comment to be dubious on the Anita Sarkeesian talk page, I suggest you retract your comment. It isn't conducive to the spirit of developing consensus, it is misinformed, you incorrectly assert citations aren't required in the lead this is erroneous. and with someone who has been around long enough as yourself it is either complete ignorance or plain trolling. Syanaee (talk) 23:37, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Both as an editor and as a Wikipedian, I found the arguments made in favor of cluttering up a clean lede paragraph with gratuitous references to be unconvincing. You clearly disagree. That's neither ignorance nor trolling on either of our parts, and I prefer to leave my statement unretracted and go about improving this encyclopedia. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:48, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Macedonia (ancient kingdom)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Macedonia (ancient kingdom). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Sarkeesian FAQ

Hello, Orangemike. You have new messages at DonQuixote's talk page.
Message added 23:10, 26 August 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Andreas Kaplan-related sockpuppet investigation notice

Hello, you are receiving this notice because you made a contribution at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andreas Kaplan (2nd nomination), now closed. Subsequent to the closure of the AfD, a related sockpuppet investigation (define) was opened. If you are interested, you can view or contribute to it. Thank you. — Brianhe (talk) 03:27, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Requesting review of Gennady Stolyarov II - Articles for Deletion

Requesting your review of the entry in question on notability grounds, given your recent votes for deletion on similar grounds on other entries. Please see: this article's deletion entry on the Articles of Deletion page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.141.205.252 (talk) 19:14, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Government of Louisville, Kentucky

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Government of Louisville, Kentucky. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Could you not edit through protection?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anita_Sarkeesian&diff=623120725&oldid=622068592

Article has been fully protected to August 30th. It would be helpful if you do not edit through protection as people cannot contest your edits. Please revert. Thank you. Tutelary (talk) 03:38, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes they can. I just did. Seems to still allow any editor the ability to request an edit and address it directly to the admin. If he had placed the protection and then edited...it would be a little different.--Mark Miller (talk) 03:47, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

? It is protected; it is not locked down without possiblity of improvement. If you think the edits made are inappropriate then of course start that discussion in the appropriate place: the talk page of the article. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:37, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Surname issues

Hello Michael, I am interested in getting some help to consolidate surname references on Wikipedia but do not know where to being. I noticed that there are a myriad of references to the same persons where only perhaps a single character in the spelling differentiates the name from other names. Apparently, there are hundreds of surnames that report some sort of paternal relationship to Conn Cétchathach. What is the best way to being to reconcile these documents, or consolidate the information into the main document for Conn Cétchathach? Best VoodooShamen (talk) 16:47, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't think you really can, as that's going to involve a degree of synthesis and original research, something which has no place in this project. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:04, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Plurals in WP:ENGVAR

You were right to revert my edit from "Healthy Plant is a company" to "Healthy Plant are a company". It is clear in Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Plurals what the rule is. And yes, I did know that one, I remember it when applied to bands, I just forgot that it also applies to companies.

But I am puzzled by the existence of the rule. I have lived in England all my life, and it is not how people here speak or write, in my experience. As evidence, using "parliament" as an example because there's one in the UK and not in America, a Google search for \"parliament is in session\" done from my home in England gives 549,000 hits, while \"parliament are in session\" gives 124,000 hits. I am perfectly happy to write "color" for the sake of the American majority. But writing "are a company" for the supposed sake of the British minority does gall somewhat. Maproom (talk) 18:34, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

But don't the newsreaders say, 'Manchester United are...' (whatever they're up to)? --Orange Mike | Talk 20:00, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

A quick look at the BBC web site finds "Man Utd need new faces" and "Everton face Lille"; but "Virgin Australia Holdings has posted a ... loss" and "Malaysia Airlines is to cut 6,000 staff". Maproom (talk) 20:17, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Fellow-travellers

Hi there. I apologise if my use of the term offended you; it wasn't intentional. I also apologise for misinterpreting your posting to my talk page as a complaint, if it wasn't meant to be. I hope your parade goes well. Tevildo (talk) 20:23, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Gaza flotilla raid

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Gaza flotilla raid. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Apesanahwat/Joseph Wall

Hi-the Apesanahwat article had no citations about his political career-tribal chairman of the Menominee Nation. I added the citations. There should be no problem there. I am wondering about Joseph Wall. You put a Joseph Wall who served in the Wisconsin Legislature on a dab page. I look and could not find any information. The 2 Wisconsin Legislature members lists made no mention of a Joseph Wall serving in the Wisconsin Legislature. Please let me know about this. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 00:15, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

That was a brainfart; I meant Thomas Wall (politician), not Joseph. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:38, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

One quick note-as Melvin Chevalier, Apesanawkat was involved in the Alexian Brothers Novitiate in Shawano County, Wisconsin in the 1970s-thanks-RFD (talk) 23:45, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

William Henry Evans

Hi-the 'Wisconsin Blue Book 1874,' pg. 457 has a biographical sketch about William Henry Evans. He was elected to the Wisconsin Assembly on the Reform Party ticket. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 23:40, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

I know; he's sixth in the queue, behind Hale, Samuel (working on him now); Grant, Job N.; Gale, George; Fulton, David C.; and Fellows, Timothy H. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:57, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Traduksciigo: Wikidata:Translators' noticeboard/Header/text

Saluton Orangemike,

vi ricevas tiun ĉi mesaĝon, ĉar vi registriĝis kiel tradukisto de la lingvo Orangemike ĉe Wikidata. La paĝo Wikidata:Translators' noticeboard/Header/text estas tradukpreta. Vi povas traduki ĝin ĉe:

• traduki al Esperanto

La prioritato de tiu ĉi paĝo estas malalta.

Ni tre aprezos vian helpon. Tradukistoj kiel vi helpas al Wikidata funkcii kiel vere multlingva komunumo.

Dankon!

traduk-kunordigantoj de Wikidata‎, 17:21, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Macedonia (ancient kingdom)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Macedonia (ancient kingdom). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Markit

Hi Orange Mike,

Thanks for your response to my suggestions, I have left a reply on Markit's talk page that I would be grateful if you read.

Thanks

SarahLouiseRoberts (talk) 08:09, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Mike,

I have left one last reply on Markit's talk page, would appreciate it if you could have a quick look.

Thanks

212.161.34.130 (talk) 10:21, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Orange Mike. My article on Philip Howell has mostly 90% abstraction from letters, and quotes from contemporary sources. I am about to wade through the reference

....wade through the citations. The only thing that is added is some historical facts to place these in context. This man lived 100 hundred years ago. I never knew him. If you would like to point out what statements of fact you are unhappy about please do point these out. JCFHowell (talk) 23:23, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

The article is completely adulatory, repeatedly cast in a defensive manner as if to justify his every move in the eyes of history. It is acrawl with Victorian-style gratuitous honorifics. It quotes extensively from contemporary friends and admirers, and his doting widow. Until I removed that bumfodder, it contained a scurrilous and suggestive rant against one of the most admired women of her era, a pioneer suffragist known to this day while Howell is mostly forgotten. It leans on primary sources and totally fails to draw on modern scholarship, leading one to suspect that he is not considered a significant figure by historians of the Great War.

I would be delighted to see the article improved with edits that address these weaknesses.

I note that you have also not mentioned your exact relationship to this fellow: great-grandson? Great-great-nephew? --Orange Mike | Talk 23:34, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

@JCFHowell: I would also guide you to our policy against "abstracting from letters" etc., or what Wikipedia calls "original research". Wikipedia editors do not work from and mill primary sources, we merely compile what experts have already analyzed and published in reliable sources. ((talk page stalker)) -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 00:13, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. Please take this in the good humour intended, but they sound like some caricature of a "Victorian" editor in some respects!

I had been endeavouring to cut back the article, as I was aware that there would be some argument against the reliability of a "doting widow" (although I think you do serious underestimate said lady, in that respect!) and also that Wikipedia is a reference site and not a forum. However, I have had some issues editing as the text keeps reverting to original - is this because of a) Wikipedia editing process, b) automation issues, or c) the fact that I am using IPad to edit which I think may have some platform issues with editing process.

Your comment raises some expected issues

I am in fact the grandson of the subject - but I don't think this should impede the process or detract from achieving an impartial final result. In fact I had thought to stop the article after the first few paragraphs, but then was drawn in to the process by reading other articles which extend quite a bit (eg Gough, etc) - which then mention Howell (Howell clashed with Gough - subordinates, etc) This has been part of the motive of submitting an article, as their has been increased interest in the era in UK because of "centinary", remembrance etc, and there seemed to be quite an omission wherever he is referred to, or has been "misquoted" by your so-called "experts". More particular there has been some recent academic reappraisal of British commanders, which hold these in a more positive light. Staff officers have also come under greater scrutiny. With regard to the work of "doting widow", this has been used by several qualified historical tomes, so in some respects achieved some recognition for accuracy. I have been personally wanting to avoid issue of "conflict of interest", etc so really wanted to submit material for your editing process - rather than create any additional cause for debate.

You raise some issues - although the invective may be a little laboured.

1.) Victorian "honorifics" - most of these are military rather than particularly Victorian and apply today as much as they did three hundred years ago. I am not sure if you were in the trenches you would see these as "gratuitous, etc" rant. But I am with you that simple terms are better. No point in being gran-diose!

2.) Adulation - re-reading I don't agree the piece is mostly adulation, but primarily list of appointments (slightly boring perhaps! - but the point of reference.) I have been using the "doting widow's" tome, primarily to correct dates, as your so-called experts have these wrong. There are references to comments made of ability, etc. - I think rather than adulatory, these were characterised by defence of the vilification issue, etc. - which you have now removed - or quite genuinely expressing opinion of a fairly impressive military career.. I don't think there has been any purpose in lionising the subject, today. Merely to put forward the case that not all British general's were not all characterised by a "buffoon" caricature superimposed by later generations. However, I have started to take out unnecessary adjectives and superlatives, especially if a bit "flowery."

3) Adulatory Editorial Wiki Comment about Pankhurst, etc! - I deliberately put this in to stimulate a reaction from editorial! In fact I had already begun to moderate the conjecture - but came up against same system editing issues mentioned above. I don't think for the sake of status one should omit factual accounts in any true pedic reference library - this matter was debated in British parliament, for example - and omitting facts on the basis of heresy does not make for good historical or biographical accuracy. Is it heresy to say that Pankhurst through her own actions was not entirely the angel some make of her? I think not! The factual point is that some controversy raised doubts which caused him to be recalled from a complicated sector of war, which Pankhurst's pamphlet was at the centre of, and which there was an argument about libel - which in the event if his death was never contested. The issue sparked off some unnecessary divisiveness (pro-this or pro-that) There has also been some reappraisal of Christabel (rather than the mother) in academic circles.

I agree that this needs a carefully worded statement of fact, so as not to provoke. Therefore I will put a smaller paragraph about this for you to look at for addition. Then your readers can make their own determination or further investigation.

4.) the subject is not necessarily a non-entity as mooted or as compared to Christabel Pankhurst (contemporaneously) and this is why historians have avoided reference, blah, blah, blah! ...... I think simply a fact of not having access to material, etc, is more to the point, although much of this has started to be dug into to in some recent academic research. I have been more concerned that there are profiles of most of the other British generals, but none of Philip Howell - although referred to once or twice both on Wikepedia. I would rather someone else had done this, to be honest! In UK we are "remembering" War 1 contribution. Howell contributed quite a lot in relative obscurity. Personally I think Pankhurst contributed little to the war effort, at a time when the majority of women were working in factories, field hospitals, and driving ambulances - other than handing out white feathers to people or unjustifiably slating others. There is a wider recent academic arguing that the women's war effort was largely the motivation of justifiable change for women's rights. But I agree that Wikepedia is not the forum for that argument. Perhaps you might like to help out with some uncontroversial statement of fact about this piece of history - once you have calmed down from defending Pankhurst. It is really a question of differing perspectives - not rant.

5) Historical significance, etc. Some people court this others don't.

Oops, ....I forgot to mention, the first Pankhust/"Britannia" article was headed "Who is General Howell?" ..:) — Preceding unsigned comment added by JCFHowell (talk • contribs) 15:42, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate these substantive responses. Could I impose upon you to continue this discussion in the appropriate venue, the talk page for the article itself? --Orange Mike | Talk 12:26, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of ethnic cleansings

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of ethnic cleansings. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:South Yemen

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:South Yemen. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Orangemike. You have new messages at Bped1985's talk page.
Message added 05:09, 6 September 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Bped1985 (talk) 05:09, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Are you currently at UW-M?

Always glad to see Wikipedians working here, especially in the basic but useful stuff. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:53, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Orangemike. I graduated in 1972. I am now in Texas. Robert1947 (talk) 20:14, 6 September 2014 (UTC) Robert1947 (talk) 20:19, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Remember [Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rima Laibow]]?

You might want to take a look at it with the socks struck, and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Electromechanic. Dougweller (talk) 14:04, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Possible sock case

Hi Orangemike! I noticed that you and I have both admonished user Garth Carlos Fellers for adding improperly sourced content and/or soapboxing. I first ran into him at List of nicknames of United States Presidents where he tried a few times to add "Obamanation" to the list. His sources looked fabricated to me, and I couldn't find any result when I Googled them. Today, 198.47.97.49 added the same content in this edit. The IP and the logged-in user have several articles in common, some edits occurring within a few minutes of each other. Might be worth keeping an eye on these. Thanks sir, have a good day. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:21, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:America: Imagine the World Without Her

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:America: Imagine the World Without Her. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

User:Center4socialmedia

• Center4socialmedia (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Patricia Aufderheide (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple/Unfulfilled/2014/September#center4socialmedia → CMSImpact

Please see Patricia Aufderheide, an article which just survived BLPPROD and was originally created by the above user. Sadly, the original article had no references. But thanks to a bunch of work by User:Mary Mark Ockerbloom we now have quite a decent article on a clearly notable professor. Since Center4socialmedia may be new to Wikipedia and might be encouraged to contribute further (though under a more appropriate user name) it would be helpful if you would consider unblocking them. See Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple/Unfulfilled/2014/September#center4socialmedia → CMSImpact. User:Xeno indicated he would reconsider a change of name if the user was unblocked. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 22:48, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Given that the account was spamming for the Center for Media & Social Impact, formerly the Center for Social Media, they don't seem to be even remotely understanding what they are doing wrong here. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:44, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

But you've blocked them indefinitely based on one single article edit, the material they added to Patricia Aufderheide. As it turns out, that was a notable topic. Surely there is hope that they can usefully contribute to other articles. EdJohnston (talk) 01:20, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Not if they don't understand that Professor Aufderheide's Center for Media & Social Impact can no more have an account than her Center for Social Media can. Unblocking an account with THAT name, whose sole purpose is to publicize the director of the organization in question, sends completely the wrong signal. --Orange Mike | Talk 04:09, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Info. in Support of NOT deleting the Michael and Marisa page.

Looking for your expertise and advice on how to handle this. Here is info. Sorry for the length of it.

This page has not been updated in years and needs to be. It will updated properly. New information regarding this duo demonstrates that they are a viable pop/adult contemporary duo with enough celebrity to warrant their page. New substantial information: Michael and Marisa have been written up in Billboard Magazine, on CNN.com, Huffington Post, AOL, in Parent's Magazine, J-14 magazine, and many others. Checking on google will confirm. Their anti-bullying music is part of the school curriculum of many schools across the U.S. and they are spokespeople for PACER which is described on the Wikipedia Unity Day page as a renowned anti bullying organization based in Minneapolis endorsed by Ellen Degeneres. Michael and Marisa are releasing their third album of original music written with some of the most renowned producers in music who have volunteered to co-write and produce with them. They have won major songwriting awards from a Nashville based organization (19,000+ international entries and Michael and Marisa honorable mention). Last month they were they opened all across the U.S.on the national tour of the band "Rixton" (see Wikepedia page), who is a platinum artist with a #14 song on pop radio and #1 in the U.K. Next month they are opening for Demi Lovato (X-Factor Judge, Top 40 artist, actress etc. see Wikipedia page). When doing appearances thousands of high school and college kids line up for meet and greets in cities across the U.S. Bottom line is that Michael and Marisa are celebrities that warrant a Wikipedia page, however the page needs to be updated properly with current information that shows that. Childish references like playing with Legos need to be replaced with references to being written up in Billboard Magazine, a respected magazine for the music industry. I will make sure that the page is properly updated. Michael and Marisa have had a wikipedia page since 2009 and have done 300 shows nationwide at viable venues such as the Bamboozle Tour, Six Flags Amusement Park Arenas, Whisky-a-Go-Go, Roxy, Lincoln Center, Webster Hall, NY and 100's of others. They have also done a lot of philanthropic work. In addition to PACER mentioned above, most recently they have been active with A Beautiful Life Foundation which was established to stream music into Children's Hospitals across the country. They have also held fundraising concerts for Toys for Tots and Doug Flutie's Autism charity and last month donated a concert as part of Ecofest held at Times Square in New York City. Sorry for the length of this. Trying to show that Michael and Marisa are substantial enough to warrant their page. Looking for support not to delete the page. Googling Michael and Marisa will confirm. Press is posted on their website Michaelandmarisa.com as well as info. on the producers involved. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinheadduffey (talk • contribs) 13:15, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

1. This is not the place for this discussion; discuss it on the Articles for Discussion page for that article.

2. Read WP:NOTCONTAGIOUS. Opening for a notable band does not make you notable.

3. Information from their own webpage is not likely to be of value; read this guidance on self-published "sources" and this on reliable sources.

4. We are not concerned with whether they do good works, or make good music; but rather whether they have become notable to the world in general. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:54, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ice Bucket Challenge

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ice Bucket Challenge. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ashok Chakra Award

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ashok Chakra Award. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

hi

Thank you.

Do you use IRC? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MeropeRiddle (talk • contribs) 03:48, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, no. --Orange Mike | Talk 03:50, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:South African Republic

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:South African Republic. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Reply for user page deletion

Please comment on the following page Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Abhishek_Pujari. I have removed all the controversial links and texts from Abhishek Pujari's User Page. Also, can I now remove the page deletion tag that was added to my user page? Thanks. Abhishek Pujari (talk) 09:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Revolutionary Communist Party, USA

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Revolutionary Communist Party, USA. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

COI declaration

I know that you are a firm believer in following COI directions to the letter, so I want to make sure everything I have been doing is in line with Wikipedia policy. I am currently working on the Wikia page, and would like advice from someone with a lot of experience to ensure my edits are in line with Wikipedia policy. I have a lot of knowledge about the site from my work elsewhere, but do want to make sure that they I am not missing anything as regards Wikipedia policy. I appreciate your help and advice. Yogi Beara (talk) 23:30, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) As Jimbo himself "those with COI should never edit the article, but should only suggest sourced changes on its talkpage". As such, any edit to the article itself would be out of line with that the panda ₯’ 23:33, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

True...but there is a difference between "strongly discouraged" and an absolute bright line rule. We are not to that point yet.--Mark Miller (talk) 23:54, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Both the Panda and Mark are right, but I too believe in a full-bore bright line. What areas are you most concerned with? --Orange Mike | Talk 00:05, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

I am mostly concerned with some of there being unsourced material on the page and some items that are out of date according to new sources; nothing in terms of a major rewrite, removal of sourced content, or even major content addition. The page is pretty good overall. It is important to note given the above that I am not working with James Wales directly, just with Wikia (I believe he is no longer in charge of the day-to-day stuff there). I have made some minor edits, and if there is something I see that goes beyond obvious minor improvements, I was planning on using the talk page for a requested edit instead of going ahead and changing it myself, just to make sure everything is above board. For the very basic stuff though, I fear asking for 50 or 60 minor edits (spelling changes or the removal of a few words after a citation that weren't sourced) may be a bit much for a requested edit, such that I am wasting people's time. That's the last thing I would want to do. Yogi Beara (talk) 13:35, 18 September 2014 (UTC)