User talk:Amccann421/Archive/May 2016

Is this real life?
You warned me on my talk page about removing content in the sandbox and then suggested that I instead do it in the sandbox. Have you had a little too much to drink? Imsorryandreformed (talk) 05:05, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * It's a semi-automated program, Twinkle, that I use to add messages like that. I can't change what it says. I only choose the issue, which was blanking. You deleted a large amount of content just to leave a personal message – that's what talk pages are for. Might I also suggest that you not be obnoxious by making personal attacks? Just an idea. Cheers. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  05:09, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I deleted a large amount of content in the sandbox. Maybe you should drop the automated tool and pay attention. Imsorryandreformed (talk) 05:15, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Clearly you ignored my suggestion not to make personal attacks. Comment on content, not contributor. Anyhow, the sandbox is cleared automatically, and doesn't need manual clearing. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  05:20, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Am I getting through to you? I DELETED CONTENT IN THE SANDBOX. I DON'T CARE IF IT'S DELETED AUTOMATICALLY. I WAS TEST EDITING. YOUR WARNING WAS INAPPRORPIATE. Do you finally understand? Do I need to repeat it slower for you? Imsorryandreformed (talk) 05:23, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Whoa, no personal attacks here bud. Clubjustin (talk) 05:25, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I didn't attack anyone. Tell Amccann to remove his warning from my talk page. And you remove yours. Imsorryandreformed (talk) 05:28, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * No. He might have warned you incorrectly, but calling us idiots is a personal attack. Clubjustin (talk) 05:30, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Insulting people is not the way to get them to do things, pal. Maybe I made a mistake, but the way you addressed it sure as hell is not going to help you. You're yelling and moaning about something that really has no consequence. Calm down. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  05:33, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * OK then. When I run for adminship one day I hope I'll have your support. Imsorryandreformed (talk) 05:35, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Welp. He's not running for adminship soon as he just got blocked. Oh Dear. Clubjustin (talk) 08:08, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * What a shame. I'm sure Wikipedia has been improved by his personal attacks and lack of policy knowledge. He sure didn't have my vote for admin. Anyway, thanks. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  08:13, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * No probs. If he in his current state became, it would be like this: CSDing Earth for a hoax! Block Jimbo Wales! Clubjustin (talk) 08:19, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Hahaha, very true. Vandals will be vandals, I suppose. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  08:23, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I have realized that getting any sort of special right here somehow attracts personal attackers, for instance, I got rollbacker rights. Bam! Two days later,personal attack! Also, wear your personal attacks with pride (AKA Don't delete it), as you will one day look back on it and feel a sudden warmth surging through you. This is getting long (So Many Colons!) So, for formattings' Sake, reply on my talk page. Seeya! Clubjustin (talk) 08:30, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi
That information shown on the Wikipedia page for Glenn Lazarus is all true, the reason I have no source is to due with the fact that he is my Uncle I would know this information. It would be a great help if you could put that information back up there I find it disrespectful that there is no information to do with his family. — Preceding unsigned comment added by THE POTATO MUNCHER (talk • contribs) 05:08, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Unfortunately, having no source is the issue. This is a clear break of Wikipedia's policy of original research. You knowing Glenn Lazarus is original research. Everything must have a reliable source, especially information in biographies of living people. Knowing him personally is not a reliable source. So, I'm sorry, but I cannot re-add the information. I'm sorry that you find it disrespectful, but if it is not notable enough to have been written about by other places, it's not notable enough for Wikipedia. Cheers. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  05:17, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Rollback granted
Hi Amccann421. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3A enabled] rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Widr (talk) 10:31, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback should never be used to edit war.
 * If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
 * Use common sense.
 * Dude, congrats. (I have no idea how I got here) Clubjustin (talk) 07:35, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Haha, it happens to the best of us. Anyway, thanks. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  07:42, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * One second, you're RC patrolling. One other second, you find yourself on the guy you once helped's page. Clubjustin (talk) 07:45, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * The more you edit, the further down the rabbit hole you go. Sometimes I do it without realizing. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  07:58, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * In my case, I jackhammer down it. I just dealt with a WikiPOVpusher. I wonder why I sometimes find myself attracted to them... Clubjustin (talk) 08:01, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * They're a lot of fun, absolutely. I tend to stick to good old garden-variety vandals myself. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  08:04, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Sasha Toperich Page
Dear Amccann421,

Thank you for your email. Attached are proof source for Dr. Toperich's membership to Cosmos Club and Army Navy Club, since these informations are new.  Also attached are two business cards, if needed as proof of Dr. Toperich affiliations, including emails that are functional; sashatoperich@gmail.com and stoperi1@jhu.edu

For "The Challenges of Democracy in the European Union and its Neighbors" recent publication, here is cover: http://abf.ba/medbasin/en/publications-articles/item/282-challenges-of-democracy-in-the-european-union-and-its-neighbors I have a copy of Dr. Toperich US passport, to prove new sentence that he is an american citizen. (if you need it I can send it to you)

All other informations are only re-arranged and were posted earlier at Wikipedia. Dr. Toperich wants his page to reflect more current line of his career and life projectory.

To further back up accuracy of the identity, here are official tweets related to page:

CTR at Johns Hopkins ‏@CTR_SAIS May 6 Read our "Mediterranean Basin" initiative's just published Annual Compendium 2015 @SAISHopkins @SashaToperich http://sashatoperich.com/images/stories/Annual%20Compendium%202015.pdf … 1 retweet0 likes

CTR at Johns Hopkins ‏@CTR_SAIS May 6 Challenges of #Democracy in #EU and its Neighbors, @SashaToperich and @AylinNoi https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bzq6_j78F-LTS3J3X1J3SERzaUk/view?usp=sharing … #CTRmustread

CTR at Johns Hopkins ‏@CTR_SAIS May 4 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sasha-toperich/macedonia-sliding-towards_b_9818526.html … #CTRmustread 0 retweets0 likes
 * 1) Macedonia: Sliding Towards #Autocracy? @SashaToperich, @HuffingtonPost

CTR at Johns Hopkins Retweeted Sasha Toperich ‏@SashaToperich May 4Washington, DC Congratulations @AylinNoi co-editor "The Challenges of Democracy in the European Union and its Neighbors" @CTR_SAIS

Dino.hajric (talk) 13:51, 9 May 2016 (UTC) Dino Hajric, 2016/05/09 15:48 GMT+2


 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Hi. Unfortunately, there is a lot wrong with both the information you've provided, as well as your relationship with Sasha Toperich. First of all, these are not emails – these are talk page messages. When you sign with four tildes (~), don't add a name, date, or time after.


 * Second, you say that "Dr. Toperich wants his page to reflect more current line of his career". Wikipedia is not a means of promotion. This is not a résumé – this is a biographical article. I mean no offense, but if Dr. Toperich has done anything notable lately, it would be covered by verifiable, reliable sources. None of this indicates notable things. The sources you gave are, in order: a membership card, his business card, a book he edited, a tweet, an article he wrote, a paper he edited, and another tweet. None of these are reliable, third-party coverage. The only thing that is not from Dr. Toperich himself are tweets, and Twitter is not generally a reliable source. All this information proves is that he exists (which we already knew), but that does not prove these things are notable. If any of these things were important or notable enough to be on Wikipedia, other people would've written about it before. Otherwise, it becomes original research, which is strictly banned on Wikipedia.


 * Third, there is a major conflict of interest here. It is quite apparent to me that, due to your access of Dr. Toperich's emails, passport, and his own opinion, that you are either Dr. Toperich, or, more likely, you know him personally. This is not a judgment of you – it's a judgment of this situation. Because you clearly know him, you have a bias. On Wikipedia, we must have a neutral point of view about everything. Bias ruins neutral point of view, whether you know it or not.


 * Finally, I will reiterate something I touched on above: if you are here to promote Dr. Toperich (by his request or your own decision), then I will unfortunately have to report you to the admins.


 * TL;DR – 1. You must provide reliable sources (you have not) that indicate notability, not just existence of the material. 2. There is a major conflict of interest, as it is apparent you know the subject. 3. If you continue to promote Dr. Toperich for promotion's sake ("wants his page to reflect more current line of his career"), you will be blocked. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  18:59, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

You removed my comment.
You recently removed my Hawaii Five-0 comment and was wondering if you could explain why? Surbey1996 (talk) 08:45, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi. First of all, changed "Five" to "Fiive" for some reason – I assumed it was a typo. Second, unless the character in question has actually addressed that they are Australian, then we are just assuming from her accent. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  08:50, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * You would be correct in saying it was a typo, an innocent mistake. But on the other hand the character did directly state that she and her father were from Australia. Surbey1996 (talk) 08:53, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, ok. Feel free to re-add it. Thanks for letting me know. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  09:11, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

SL-AMRAAM / optional vehicle
hi,

don't you think it's important to emphasize that this system has the capability to provide airdef while on-the-move ? (other medium-range semi-mobile and cumbersome-to-deploy missile systems of different types have to rely on a fully-mobile short-ranged systems)

waiting for your reply... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yoni livni1980 (talk • contribs) 16:55, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * First of all, you didn't sign your comments. Sign all comments on talk pages with four tildes, like this . That automatically produces your username and the time and date.


 * Second, demanding a reply is not going to get you far on Wikipedia. Many editors will not be as kind as me. Be patient. The world will not end tomorrow.


 * Third, Wikipedia is not for emphasizing certain things. We strive to have a neutral point of view here. We provide the facts. That means no opinions, personal analysis, or personal determination of what is important – all those things are prohibited. They break neutral point of view and often constitute original research, which is also strictly prohibited. If the information is important, then reliable sources will be able to support it. If the information does not have reliable sources that support its importance, then it does not belong on Wikipedia.


 * Fourth, the image caption is not a place to introduce new information. Even if your edit was a proper sentence, it would belong in the text of the article, not the image caption. The image caption exists to describe what is in the photo, and possibly to draw attention to something that could be missed by the untrained eye. You can read more about image captions here.


 * If you have any more questions, feel free to reply to this message by starting with two colons  to indent, then adding your message, and finally signing with four tildes  . Thanks.  Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  19:53, 10 May 2016 (UTC)


 * i didn't know about those (odd) rules, such as putting Yoni livni1980 (talk) 20:13, 10 May 2016 (UTC), no one told me so, i am freshly new editor in wiki. if you erase something of a person, fine, but add a vested explanation of your act. Don't wait he/she will (someday or not) get back to you to extract a reasonable explanation. You don't want it, fine. that's a major blow of a loss of info to whom is interested in defense R&D. only those guys know how important the piece of info i put there back then. (finished)Yoni livni1980 (talk) 20:13, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

sorry
Sorry I thought i could put in more thing about what the slaves in egypt time did sorry thanks airmoney :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Airmoney (talk • contribs) 08:51, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * No need to apologize. It was just a little bit too wordy to flow well. It's all good. However, please make sure that you sign all future talk page comments with four tildes, like this . That will automatically produce your username as well as the date and time. Thanks.  Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  19:55, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

God of Wikipedia
You altered something I edited, what I changed was right, who made you god of wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheffylass96 (talk • contribs) 21:36, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * None of your edits have been constructive. See our policy on vandalism. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  21:56, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Deacon Jones edit
I did this to clear up confusion with the station that broadcast the Los Angeles Rams games at the time with the current KMPC, which was unrelated to the one that was KMPC in 1994 that is now KSPN, which the station that broadcast the L.A. Rams games on the radio then (in 1994). 2601:601:4002:E260:4877:5E58:7E0C:C341 (talk) 03:08, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done. Thanks. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  03:27, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Lakshmi
G'day Alex

I inserted the translation so that the sentence could be read without a reader having to click through to four (4) different webpages. Simplification may not suit you, as you're an educated journo, however, for the average reader of average intelligence, the less insider knowledge and less clicking, may be appreciated.

Jeremy

24hourwealthcoach (talk) 05:54, 11 May 2016 (UTC)


 * To me, it just seemed to clutter the lead section. Plus, it just makes it a difficult read, even more so for "the average reader of average intelligence". Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  06:13, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to STiki!
Note: Having a username change after you start using STiki will reset your classification count. Please let us know about such changes on the talk page page to avoid confusion in issuing milestone awards. You can also request for your previous STiki contributions to be reassigned to your new account name.

Hello
The change on Kemalism/turanism is neutral. Genetic researches and DNA tests show clearly that japanese people have no connection to altaic people. Our ancestors are Jomon and yayoi. Jomon are native japanese people and there origin is located somewhere in south-east-asia. The yayoi was long controversal but there origin is now located in a area near yangze-river(china). These Yayoi travedl over sea and over korean pensuila to Japan and mixed with the native jomon people. (also koreans are mixed between north/central-asians and these yayoi).

Turkish nationalists(grey wolf) create many lies. i saw that turanism part in kemalism and changed that. you can easely look genetic. also the japonic language is not altaic. officialy it is isolated, but many linguists also think it is a creol-language between old-korean and jomon-language. for example: japanese words don´t end with m. but altaic words can end with m. also the vocal-harmonie and phonology of japanese is very different to altaic.

there are no geneticaly connections. I only changed it to the truth.

greetings — Preceding unsigned comment added by Satoshi Kondo (talk • contribs) 17:10, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Knights Templar
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cursed_Crusade check the second sentence in the gameplay section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.41.160.170 (talk) 04:42, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Another Wikipedia article is not a reliable source (see here). Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  04:52, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Center For Immigration Studies
Hey Amccann, although the addition of "reactionary" might be too divisive in describing the Center for Immigration Studies, what should be added is at very least "Right-of-Center" or "conservative". It is essential that wikipedia readers searching for impartial information on the subject-- especially if this is their first introduction to it-- are made aware of the Center's conspicuous bias. As is detailed in the linked stories below from the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/us/17immig.html?pagewanted=all); the Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/mark-krikorian-the-provocateur-standing-in-the-way-of-immigration-reform/2013/06/17/dff0bd52-d75e-11e2-a9f2-42ee3912ae0e_story.html); and the Daily Beast (https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2010/fudging-facts-look-cis-studies); as well as the Wall Street Journal and Southern Poverty Law Center articles included in the original page's "Criticism Section"; the Center for Immigration Studies is a well known conservative organization. Furthermore, there is evidence included in both the Washington Post article and the Southern Poverty Law Center Report that the founder of the organization is a well known White Supremacist. In the service of impartiality and truth, it is CRUCIAL that virginal readers are made aware of the Center For Immigration Center's bias at the outset of the article-- especially since the Center claims to be "bipartisan". The addition of "Conservative" to the Center's main description block on the page is imperative for the preservation of impartiality and disclosure.

Best, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.4.7 (talk) 05:11, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * There is a detailed criticism section here that outlines the perceived bias. Criticism does not belong in the lead. Also, even if the bias is true, it is not neutral to call an organization "reactionary" or any other biased language. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  05:15, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigations/COMEATMEBRO1234567890
Please do not file cases with accounts that have no edits.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:41, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * My mistake. Thanks. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  17:09, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Just a tip on notifications (your attempt to ping me): for notifications to work, you have to sign your post and ping the user in the same edit. Otherwise, the user won't - as I wasn't - be notified.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:49, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, sorry about that. Just a mental error. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  22:50, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Repeated reverts by a user
The user doing repeated reverts at Andhra Pradesh Residential School, Tadikonda. I think User:Rathi67 is the sockpuppet of User:Ksubhash. I'm filing a sock investigation.-- Vin09 &thinsp; (talk)   03:53, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * The evidence adds up, all right. Glad you caught it. Clearly, whoever he is, he doesn't seem to understand references and original research. Anyway, thanks for letting me know – I'll keep an eye on both accounts. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  06:53, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

RE: Bridgeport Hospital
Logo has changed for Bridgeport Hospital. How would you suggest updating to reflect? Mededitor1982 (talk) 13:48, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done The image has been restored. Sorry for the confusion. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  14:05, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Alianza Nacional Constituyente
Amccann421, The Article written in this profile, is a collaboration between several people who work in Venezuela to achieve a Constituent Assembly, we are not allowed to customize the content, not the individual authorship of the information we publish in any of the networks, as as citizens with political vision, the information generated by the event, mission and vision belong to the historical temporary situation that is handling the activation of the constitutional process in Venezuela, the main reason not to like pseudonyms is that we are threatened by extinction many of us in our physical and family integrity by the current government in Venezuela. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alianza Nacional Constituyente (talk • contribs) 01:15, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia does not permit for multiple people to share the same account. I have requested that an admin block you. Sorry. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  01:25, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Thor Dark World Budget
Hi, I just want to clarify my changes. I made a remark after changing Thor 2 budget from 201 million to 170 million. I specifically said "from BO Mojo" and I've check the Box Office Mojo reference attached to it, the reference goes to Box Office Mojo website and it clearly said 170 million. I did not cite any source because the source is already there but the info is still wrong. Thanks. 36.80.159.169 (talk) 03:04, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Natural Ice Cream
Amccann421, I'm afraid that when you promoted this hook to Prep 5, you missed a very important step, which is closing the nomination as approved. If this approval step is not taken, the same nomination can be promoted again, since it still appears to need promotion. Please, before you attempt another addition to prep, be sure to review the steps at T:TDYK. You'll also want to check the guidance at WP:DYKSG for how prep sets should be built.

I have taken care of this step for you, so that no one else promotes it before it can be closed. Oddly, you weren't the only person not to close the nomination they were promoting; there were two such unclosed nominations, one by a very experienced DYKer, so you weren't alone here. I hope this doesn't discourage you, and that I see you around in the future. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:41, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. I was quite confused. I'll be sure to look everything over and be more careful next time. Again, thanks. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  06:09, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Sexual assault of Savannah Dietrich - Justification for Rejection
Can you please explain the reason behind your rejection of my edit to the Savannah Dietrich article? You wrote "The rest of the article does not name them." Will Frey and Austin Zehnder are mentioned FOUR TIMES in the cited article:

1. "lenient plea bargain offer for two lacrosse players and Trinity High students Austin Zehnder and William Frey"

2. "Talking to investigators, Zehnder and Frey admit to sexually abusing Dietrich in August of last year with their hands and taking photos of the sexual acts."

3. " The school says Frey and Zehnder are no longer enrolled at Trinity."

4. "Frey and Zehnder's parents expressed their anger with the boys' names being made public."

What is your logic? Here is another mainstream article which outlines what happened in this story and mentions Will Frey and Austin Zehnder:

http://www.cosmopolitan.com/lifestyle/advice/a4420/cyberbullying/

Would it be sufficient to add this additional citation from Cosmopolitan or change the citation to the Cosmopolitan article?

There are many other sources for this information:

http://www.wdrb.com/story/19545645/savannah-dietrich

http://awildduck.com/?p=1524

Will Frey and Austin Zehnder are admitted felons who plead guilty and were convicted of felony sexual assault whose identities are integral to this article. Indeed, but for their actions this incident would never have achieved international attention. The cyber bullying that was orchestrated on behalf of Will Frey and Austin Zehnder after this story hit the papers was despicable. See completely fabricated comment by David Sims:

http://loiter.co/v/scumbags-will-frey-and-austin-zehnder-from-kentuck/

There is no justification for Wikipedia to hide the identity of these convicted felons or censor changes to this article.

123.150.168.186 (talk) 03:23, 19 May 2016 (UTC)


 * What I meant was that our current article here on Wikipedia does not name them. I did not mean that your sources don't name them. My reasoning is that it does not adhere to the policy of neutral point of view. The revelation of the boys' names was controversial, as it broke a gag order (according to your sources). Wikipedia using their names implies that we support the controversial release of their names.


 * Also, regarding your earlier comment (since deleted): whether or not I am a graduate of that school (I'm not) has no consequence. However, if you are, that's a conflict of interest and a whole different issue. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  04:40, 19 May 2016 (UTC)


 * What you are saying is incorrect. See:


 * http://www.cosmopolitan.com/lifestyle/advice/a4420/cyberbullying


 * "The primary judge on the case, Angela McCormick Bisig, had been away the day the controversial order of silence was issued by another judge. Today, Bisig explains that juvenile courts in Kentucky keep legal proceedings confidential because "we want young [offenders] to be able to reform themselves without a lot of public scrutiny." However, Dietrich should have been allowed to discuss the crime itself, says Bisig, now a circuit-court judge. "We cannot tell a young crime victim that they cannot tell their personal story.""
 * The original judge in the case stated on the record that the gag order was WRONG and should NEVER have been issued in the first place. The entire story is an example of abuse of power by well-connected people in the Louisville area. The felons and the prosecutor who offered them a sweetheart plea bargain were graduates of the same exclusive private Catholic high school! Moreover, all charges against Savannah Dietrich were dropped and the original judge in the case opened the juvenile records to the public, so they are now part of the public record:


 * "The contempt motion was dropped, and at Dietrich's request—and despite objections from the boys—the court records were opened to the public."<


 * While withholding the names in 2012 before the publication of the Cosmopolitan article may have been appropriate, censoring the names in 2016 when the original judge publicly stated that the VICTIM Savannah Dietrich had the right to discuss the crime without any gag order goes against your reasoning advocating neutrality. It makes ZERO sense that the name of the VICTIM of a sexual assault can appear on Wikipedia but the names of the convicted felons who sexually assaulted her need to be hidden from Wikipedia on the basis of neutrality.


 * Your censorship of my edit prolongs disinformation promoted by the guilty criminal felons that Savannah Dietrich's actions were somehow inappropriate. She had a first amendment right to out her abusers, even if they were juveniles, and the presiding judge in the case said so.


 * Perhaps a reasonable resolution would be to add the citation from the Cosmopolitan article and explain that the original judge in the case publicly stated that there should never have been a gag order in the first place?


 * After noticing that you grew up in Pittsburgh I deleted the question of whether you attended Trinity but I openly wonder how somebody with no relation to this story can notice it and make a decision to hide the identity of the felons within 9 minutes of posting without doing a little bit more research. I have never been to Kentucky and have never had any contact with any of the parties involved.


 * 216.157.87.140 (talk) 05:12, 19 May 2016 (UTC)


 * So, I made some edits to the rest of the Wikipedia entry which are all factually accurate. With this information + citation of the Cosmo article it should be okay to list their names. What do you think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.157.87.140 (talk) 07:44, 19 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Still waiting for your response, but in reading over your earlier objection I am still trying to understand exactly what your point is. You wrote "The revelation of the boys' names was controversial, as it broke a gag order (according to your sources). Wikipedia using their names implies that we support the controversial release of their names."


 * 1. It was not the revelation of the boys' names which was controversial. The judges order that the victim could not discuss the facts of the crime to which she was a victim was controversial because it violated the victim's first amendment rights.


 * 2. The boys' attorney's filing of a complaint against the victim for contempt of court for revealing their identities was also controversial because they were trying to suppress her First Amendment rights and indeed it was this act that created widespread international condemnation.


 * 3. Both judges later stated there was no gag order (even though in reality there probably was an unlawful gag order made by Judge McDonald). The judges were covering their butts to hide their bias. But certainly a historical unlawful gag order later ruled inapplicable is not a reason to withhold the convicted felons' identity.


 * 4. Wikipedia NOT using names implies that Wikipedia supports the controversial suppression of the facts in this case by guilty convicted felons who sexually abused the victim, hiding their identity from the general public.


 * 5. The names of the convicted felons have already appeared in multiple major mainstream publications (WDRB.com, Cosmopolitan, Yahoo, Salon, Newsweek) making the issue moot; Wikipedia should state the historical facts as reported by the public record, and the names of the convicted felons are certainly valuable information which is part of the story.


 * Since the facts I brought to your attention are now part of the entry please agree that it should be okay to add the names of the perpetrators to the entry.


 * If you have issue with mentioning their names at the beginning of the article without repeating their names below I can easily replace "boys" with "Will Frey and Austin Zehnder" throughout the article.


 * 123.150.168.186 (talk) 14:02, 19 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Okay, first of all, I'm confused over whether I'm speaking to two editors or one using two IPs. I'll make this as general as possible.


 * Second, you have no right to demand a response. I was busy in real life, and, busy or not, I have no obligation whatsoever to respond to talk page comments.


 * Third, I admit that I may have made a weak argument, but I still think it's wrong to use the boys' names. You named some publications that used the names, but here are some that did not use the names of the boys (even when discussing the reveal of their names): USA Today, ABC News , CBS News , Daily Mail , WLKY , WPFL , Inquisitr , Vice , and Yahoo! (how about that?).


 * Either way, I no longer care. Make the edits if you want, but I still disagree. Even thought they are felons and what they did was wrong, those boys were minors at the time. Most major news outlets chose not to publish their names. Either way, based on the low pageviews, I'm willing to bet that nobody cares. I'm willing to just drop it at this point. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  00:04, 20 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Alex thank you for your response. I have gone ahead and made the changes and am about to publish them.


 * 1. I do not live in the USA so my IP addresses can vary depending on how I connect to the Internet.


 * 2. I got involved in this posting because I hate to see injustice and censorship. What happened to Savannah Dietrich so many years ago was definitely an injustice. And Wikipedia's response has definitely been censorship. I am glad you replied here so both of these things could be worked out.


 * 3. The boys have no right to privacy because they were minors. There is a assumptive right of privacy for proceedings involving minors in juvenile court, but the fact that Will Frey and Austin Zehnder were minors when they committed the crime does not override the victim's first amendment right to tell her story. As a journalism student I would think you would be up-in-arms about protecting the first amendment rights of the victim because those same first amendment rights allow journalists to make a living. The despicable thing about this story is if the minors and the parents really valued their privacy so much why didn't they offer a paid settlement to Savannah Dietrich? Will Frey and Austin Zehnder sexually assaulted a 16 year-old minor in her house when she was drunk; nothing short of despicable. They lied about what happened to their friends and encouraged (or at least never objected to) their friends to cyber bully Savannah Dietrich by posting all kinds of libelous stories about Savannah Dietrich being a cheap slut, etc. Instead of offering to compensate Miss Dietrich for the emotional distress that they most certainly caused and she most certainly suffered as a result of their actions Will Frey, Austin Zehnder, their parents and their attorneys decided to use the law to shut Savannah Dietrich up. They found a prosecutor who was from their alma mater and was friendly to the case and they almost got away with 50 hours of community service each. Almost. They should have paid off Savannah Dietrich and then lived the remainder of their lives in anonymity. Instead they are now convicted felons, and even if they are able to get the criminal records expunged in the future, Wikipedia will still be around to tell the true story. Their behavior after the original crime is almost more atrocious than the sexually assault.


 * The other publications you mentioned published articles BEFORE Judge Bisig went on record stating that the victim should have had the freedom to tell her story. Maybe the authors were lazy or cowards, maybe their editors were lazy. Certainly as a journalism student I think you would admire Abigail Pesta because she followed up on the story with a different publication a year after the story was already old news. She did her homework, interviewed Judge Bisig and named names. And now these boys are screwed because their mistake will follow them for life. But if you read the articles, these two scumbags didn't even apologize to Savannah Dietrich in person in court: their attorneys apologized for them. More importantly, other parents (and other lawyers) will look at this case and they will advise their children / clients to ALWAYS settle, ALWAYS apologize and NEVER violate others. I don't feel sorry for Will Frey and Austin Zehnder in the least. I feel sorry for the hundreds of young girls who have to go through what Savannah Dietrich went through. I feel glad that this story is out there so that others can learn from Will Frey and Austin Zehnder and not repeat their mistakes.


 * I will post in a couple of minutes and I'd appreciate it if you can approve the posting. Thanks. 216.157.84.134 (talk) 01:03, 20 May 2016 (UTC)


 * I made the updates. Thanks.


 * On reflection it occurred to me that other publications might have refrained from publishing the names of the convicted felons because of Judge McDonald's order. Articles written AFTER July 30, 2012 could have included the names of the perpetrators. As a journalism student you should read: http://volokh.com/2012/07/22/the-dark-side-of-privacy/ 216.157.84.134 (talk) 02:00, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

My edit on vaporwave and or meme music
I would like to inform you that vaporwave is infact nicknamed meme music. Here is my source- http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/subcultures/vaporwave I would also like to say if you think that source is discreditable, please send me a better one. (not trying to be rude here)

-Thanks, Mr. Evans

(ps- I apologize for any grammar errors I would not enjoy to go through the effort of correcting them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timothy Evans (talk • contribs) 22:03, 20 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: That's not a reliable source, nor was I able to find any. This information doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  22:07, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

retarded americans
My corrections were actually right, u retarded americas dont know how to spell anything in different languages. Not constuctive, my sphincterAyy lemao bruh (talk) 22:37, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
 * No personal attacks. Clubjustin   Wanna Chat?  05:05, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Brooklyn Brawler Page
The Brawler confirmed on an episode of The Taz Show that he was born and raised in Brooklyn and moved to Detroit to get married, so the change I made was accurate WHOSHE71 (talk) 05:03, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, so prove it. There are already reliable sources that say Detroit. Either find reliable sources supporting your claims, or don't change it. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  05:05, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
 * (Edit Conflict) Source?  Clubjustin   Wanna Chat?  05:08, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello friend
Hello friend, Plesas of the not change. I list you or else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnson111 (talk • contribs)
 * Friend, good edit. by why change? Is of the bann list? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnson111 (talk • contribs)
 * I warned you multiple times not to refactor talk page comments. You had your chance. Sorry, "friend". Goodbye. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  05:23, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Alright ALRIGHT!!!
If Timothy Dalton has sayed that he is not "Welsh" then you must prove it by giving me the links to the videos of the 2 interviews where he sayed that he isnt "Welsh" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.152.44.247 (talk) 17:22, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
 * No, I most certainly don't have to. The source is reliable and cited properly. The interview was for a magazine, not television. Also, it was in 1994, before people recorded everything and uploaded it to the Internet. The information provided is sufficient. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  17:32, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Then can you show me the photos from these mags? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.152.44.247 (talk) 17:36, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
 * This was the best I could find. Parade is a magazine that is distributed in American newspapers, so that's why it appears to be a paper and not a typical magazine. Again, this is from over 20 years ago, so there's not much on the Internet. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  17:43, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
 * @, Please sign your talk comments with four tildes   Invisible ( Talk ) 18:42, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.152.44.247 (talk) 08:12, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * The irony, THE IRONY! Clubjustin  Talkosphere  08:15, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Saúl Álvarez
I highly disagree with your reverting the IP's edits regarding the Khan result. BoxRec clearly has the result wrong, in that the referee waved it off for a TKO rather than allow a count of ten for a KO. I also provided a source which clearly confirms the TKO result, so please tell me what the problem is in allowing the IP's edit to stick. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 17:33, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
 * You are correct. I was just going off what had already been provided and didn't know the source was wrong. Go ahead and add the correct info, I won't challenge it. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  17:37, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you, and no worries. Btw, is that article title move still going ahead? It's been several weeks. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 17:38, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I couldn't tell you. Since "Canelo Álvarez" already redirects to the current article, and the redirect page has more than just one edit, I can't move it. An admin is needed. It's been up at Requested moves for weeks without any change. Two votes for the move is hardly a consensus, but no one has objected, and it clearly adheres to WP:COMMONNAME. I don't know what will come of it. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  17:50, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Auto-archiving
Hello there, I just wanna know Where and How can I enable auto archiving of my talk page. ;) Invisible ( Talk ) 05:53, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Have a look at Help:Archiving a talk page. That should answer any questions. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  07:27, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Why do people now come here for advice? Clubjustin  Talkosphere  08:16, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
 * He looks little more experienced, that's why. :D Invisible ( Talk ) 08:38, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I have no clue. I don't know much haha. Hey, anything to help the newbies (or the confused veterans). Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  22:00, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Like for like.
User talk:Who R U? I am laughing my head off. Check his socks. Clubjustin Talkosphere  08:20, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Hilarious. A perfect example of how screaming and shouting about others being wrong, but not proving why you think they are, never works. What an idiot. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  22:08, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
 * He's still creating more socks, only to be blocked over and over again. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  22:39, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
 * This is why we can't have nice users. Clubjustin  Talkosphere  03:16, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Adhisaya Ulagam 3D
Hi, I am Star and I have made changes on the Adhisaya Ulagam 3D page. The edited information given by me is quite accurate and there are no online link references because this contest was conducted in the year 2007 and the online links that were present previously became expired. However, I still can provide the reference of printed media taken during the time of the contest. Starstone490 (talk) 06:05, 24 May 2016 (UTC)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adhisaya_UlagamStarstone490 (talk) 06:05, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
 * References to print media are acceptable – see WP:Citing sources if you're not sure how. Also, there is no apparent justification your change of "mostly negative reviews" to "mixed reviews". From the information already in the article, "mostly negative" is accurate. Either add reliable sources that gave the film more positive reviews, or don't change it. Thank you! Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  06:11, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. How do I upload print media references on Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starstone490 (talk • contribs)
 * Just include the information in between  and   tags. See the information at Citing sources for details. I'll be watching and will fix any errors you might make.  Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  22:38, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

flagicon in nationall football team
It is a method to identify the region of birth of each player quickly. In the case of Spain it is important because the RFEF is composed of 17 other territorial federations (with championships), just as the RFEF is integrated into the UEFA. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.172.65.201 (talk) 15:52, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
 * It's unnecessary and potentially confusing to those unfamiliar with Spain. Many countries have districts, states, or regions – Spain is not the only one. Just use the nation's flag, since it is the Spanish national team, and not, for example, the Catalonian team. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  22:41, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Contribution did not appear constructive
You recently removed an addition I made of a popular culture reference of the use of the term "four-letter word." You said it "did not appear constructive." I think you made a mistake. Not only are there are several other examples of its usage in songs that you did not remove, it also provides new insight into its usage in a gangster rap song - much different from the other examples.

Perhaps you were unfamiliar with the song, maybe you thought it wasn't worded well, or maybe you wanted a citation, but I do not understand your arbitrary definition of "constructiveness" and your deletion of my edit.

Pete225 (talk) 00:45, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Should've been clearer, sorry about that. Yes, a citation is the issue (plus some minor grammar/formatting). Just a link to the lyrics would suffice. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  02:14, 25 May 2016 (UTC)


 * I added a reference. I know it would be nice to have everything referenced, but why not try reminding people to reference what they said instead of just taking it down. You're making the assumption that, without reference, material is invalid to be on Wikipedia. Wikipedia would be much smaller if this was the case, and I'm not sure it would necessarily be for the best, just check the other examples under "popular culture references" - none of them are cited, and yet I don't believe you should delete every one. Also I recommend the song, you should check it out. Pete225 (talk) 02:43, 25 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Hey now, don't assume I edited in bad faith. I meant to let you know it was unsourced, but I simply made a mistake. It happens. I agree, though – not everything without a source should be deleted. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  02:46, 25 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Sure, glad we agree! And also hey if you hadn't edited it I wouldn't have learned how to do half the things on Wikipedia that I did today. Cheers, Pete225 (talk) 02:50, 25 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Glad to hear it. And hey, welcome to Wikipedia. I hope you stick around. If you ever have any questions, feel free to ask, and I'll answer if I can. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  02:53, 25 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks! For the newcomer: what are a couple of your favorite things that have really made your Wikipedia experience; how can I get the best experience out of editing, etc? Pete225 (talk) 03:00, 25 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Boy, that's a tough one. First, you should learn as much as you can, especially about policy and guidelines. Your life on Wikipedia becomes so much easier when you know what you're doing. Second, work on whatever makes you happy. I personally like countering vandalism, welcoming new users, and creating/editing articles that interest me. You'll find something that you enjoy. Third, and most importantly, don't take it too seriously. Just have fun. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  04:18, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Sorry about that...
Hey, I'm sorry for what I did on the Hummingbird article, I didn't know that humor wasn't allowed, so I edited it. I hope you can forgive me. TheFanGaming95 (talk) 00:47, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Don't worry. Everyone can learn. Clubjustin  Talkosphere  01:18, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Jack Lemmon
Hello Amcann421, I'm writing to dispute the undoing of the latest revision to Jack Lemmon. Firstly, both the current pictogram and text inaccurately represent Lemmon's headstone which can be determined by examining the photograph beside the text. Secondly and equally importantly, Lemmon's headstone is one of the few in Hollywood or perhaps anywhere that conveys humor or light-heartedness which may say something important about the man. Lemmon's headstone might mean "Don't be sad. I'm not gone.  I'm just starring somewhere else," or perhaps it's a just a final salute to his industry. Regardless, it should be both accurately described and celebrated just as Mel Blanc's page accurately describes and pictures his headstone's inscription "THAT'S ALL FOLKS." Marianscholar (talk) 11:48, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done My mistake. When I looked at the photo, I couldn't see "in". It's been fixed. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  16:51, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Tipperary Times Deletion
Hi there,

Tipperary Times is an online newspaper. I'm confused regarding the deletion Marathon1man (talk) 17:34, 25 May 2016 (UTC)


 * The article does not credibly prove why it is notable. The newspaper's existence does not prove that it is notability. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  17:57, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Led Zeppelin
They're plagiarists. These allegations are widely reported in the news media. Why isn't this above the fold? Sure, my edit was more tongue-in-cheek, but it's nonetheless an effective means of protesting these hucksters, and drawing attention to their thieving ways. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.222.234.166 (talk) 20:37, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * There are several reasons your edit was inappropriate. If your edit was meant to be, as you said, "tongue-in-cheek", then it was inappropriate because jokes are not acceptable in Wikipedia articles. This is an encyclopedia (see What Wikipedia is not).


 * Jokes aside, your edit was unsourced, not neutral, and potentially libelous. If this information is, as you say, "widely reported", then prove it. A snarky comment is insufficient – a full "controversy" section (or likewise) would be needed so as to maintain a neutral point of view. Please only add facts and not your own opinion. Thanks. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  23:40, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

May 2016
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Black Dhalia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be undone. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.72.97.71 (talk) 16:28, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
 * I know the policies. You appear to be disrupting Wikipedia to make a point. Also, you might wanna look at WP:3RR. Also, while not a policy, it's good practice not to template the regulars. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  16:32, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I just wonder, Who gave this warning! At least sign your talk comment. :D - Invisible ( Talk ) 16:39, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
 * It's the IP who is edit warring with me. Adding an unsigned template. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  16:43, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah! got his contributions on Black Dahlia, LOL! - Invisible ( Talk ) 16:49, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Your online status bar
Welp, I'm the one asking for advice now, but how did you make it Alex? Clubjustin Talkosphere  03:28, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Simple. Create a page at User:Clubjustin/Status and enter your status (online, offline, busy, away, around, sleep). Nothing else. Then, add  to your user and talk pages. Done.  Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  03:36, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Done.thanks! BTW is there any way I could access my status page easily without having just a obvious link on my userpage? Clubjustin  Talkosphere  03:53, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, actually. Just discovered it myself. Change it to . Then your status becomes a link. I literally just found this out about 10 minutes ago.  Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  03:59, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Better bookmark this page ;) - Invisible ( Talk ) 04:02, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ Clubjustin  Talkosphere  04:07, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

About Your Revert of My Edit to the Page Ali Zafar
Hi, you reverted my edit to the page Ali Zafar. He is not an electronic musician, therefore my edit was legitimate. --113.203.221.222 (talk) 05:39, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Ok, so prove it. You cannot just say "he is not" and remove it. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  05:41, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Are there any citations explicitly proving he is an electronic musician? He makes pop music, not electronic music. They are different genres. --113.203.221.222 (talk) 05:43, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I know they're different genres. Are there any citations explicitly proving he is a pop musician? Because your claims are currently without substance. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  05:46, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh, and here is The Times of India categorizing him as an electronic musician. Amccann421 &#160; (talk)  05:49, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, fine. I'll leave it. --113.203.221.222 (talk) 05:50, 28 May 2016 (UTC)