User talk:CambridgeBayWeather/Archive37

Neutrality Expert
Regarding Oscar Lopez Rivera, is there some authoritative editor on neutrality, perhaps has a special interest in it or monitors the neutrality guidelines? Someone who could (quickly) comment on the quality of the article and sourcing from a neutrality perspective? The mediation of the article was rejected as involving "conduct issues" with little further explanation. While I don't edit that article, I do edit a similar one, Filiberto Ojeda Ríos, with the same group of editors controlling the content. Having read through the Neutrality Notice Board with its multiple relists and its "This category has a backlog that requires the attention of willing editors" banner, it appears to be where notices go to die. Eudemis (talk) 00:26, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Reason for the Removal of some Content in Recent Contributions
Dear CambridgeBayWeather,

About two days ago, you sent me a message about the removal of some content by me in my recent contributions such as those in the article, 'Conquest of Mecca', without an explanation. Well I respect your response. I am surely responsible for my act and here is a declaration (written by me to the volunteer team) that I, with due respect, would suggest you to read:

''I was utterly disappointed when I saw some Islamic Pages on wikipedia which had faults and wrong information in them. The problem is that when I edit and fix the wrong material, it is reverted to the previous one again which is already wrong. Therefore, it is a humble request as a Muslim that some consideration should be paid on this issue as it harms the religion of Islam by placing wrong information on the topics and pages related to it. Islam is a religion that teaches humanity and good relations with every creed and color. But reflecting bad and wrong images of it is against humanity itself which no other religion allows. I will offer all the cooperation I can and as a Muslim, I offer a hand of friendship to all the team of wikipedia. So as humbly as I can, I demand the resolving of the discussed issue. And if any shameful paradigm of a regrettable act is played by me, then I am terribly remorseful and if any harm is done to the values of any other party or religion by any other Muslim in the parameters of wikipedia, then I can be trusted to be informed and I would cooperate at my level best.''--Hassan.Pt (talk) 11:57, 1 July 2014 (UTC)Hassan.Pt

Summer solstice
Thought of you yesterday and wondered if you were reading by the midnight sun? I'm at a conference in Portland, Oregon and it was light outside until about 9:45pm... nothing in comparison to your neck of the woods, I'm sure. Met a librarian at this conference from Vancouver, BC who is starting up an Inuit library in Sept. --Rosiestep (talk) 16:02, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Not much info regarding the library yet, but there is this. I'm intrigued on how one starts such a task, creating a library in potentially 3 languages. Not such a bad habit, looking over the planes at your airport... especially if you are able/allowed to fly one. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:14, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Any chance some local resources provide a DOB for Éric Dewailly, who just died? --Rosiestep (talk) 01:02, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

No worries, and thanks for checking. --Rosiestep (talk) 00:14, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Williams Lake, British Columbia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scandinavians. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:51, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Bad Boys II
Bad boys bad boys Watcha gonna do, whatcha gonna do When this movie is poo Bad boys, bad boys Watcha gonna do, watcha gonna do when ya watching Bad Boys II

When you were Asa And you were a potato You go to school and you watch Bad Boys II So why are you not watching Bad Boys II If you watch this movie you'll die

Bad boys, bad boys Watcha gonna do whatcha gonna do When they come for you (repeat)

You chuck it on Will Smith You chuck it on Martin Lawrence You chuck it on Asa and You chuck it on Laurence Fishburne You chuck it on Asa again and You chuck it on Martin Lawrence Fishburne You chuck it on Asa one more time and you chuck it on Asa yet again

(chorus)

Asa naw give you no break Will Smith naw give you no break That old Martin Lawrence naw give you no break Not even Martin Lawrence Fishburne naw give you no break

(chorus)

Why did you have to act so mean don't you know You're an Asa being born of Asa with The love of a Asa reflections come and reflections go I know sometimes you want to watch Bad Boys II(he he he) I know sometimes you want to watch Bad Boys II

(chorus) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.49.22.235 (talk) 04:40, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

India Statistics Vandal
Hello! The one-month (May 28 to June 28) doesn't seem enough at Denver International Airport. HkCaGu (talk) 05:28, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

User:Michael_josh
On June 21, you blocked User:Michael_josh for two weeks for disruptive editing. I just noticed that he was using an IP address, User talk:94.159.207.58, to get around the block from June 24 to July 4. Even though the block had ended, on July 3 he made a series of edits that got him blocked in the first place,, , and. Starting on July 12, he has gone back to using his user name. Aspects (talk) 05:51, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks, I posted 1 error I found on facebook and it went ballistic my friend made 41 errors on purpose I was going to edit it but I am still learning about wikipedia. So thanks for fixing the mistakes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.50.85.21 (talk) 20:37, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
 * No problem. It's good you were trying to help. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 13:41, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Other sock stuff
Could you take care of and the sockpuppet that keeps restoring it?— Ryūlóng  ( 琉竜 ) 08:27, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Left as a redirect but permanent semi-protected. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 08:36, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
 * The redirect really shouldn't remain because it's full of his garbage edits (unless they need to be retained for the SPI case). And at any rate, the article should be properly created at Power Rangers Dino Charge later along the line.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 08:39, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
 * And its retention is keeping it like a honey pot.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 08:42, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, you deleted it already. Is it possible to create protect?— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 08:42, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Got it. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 08:46, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Doraemon
Hello. I noticed that you semi-protected Doraemon yesterday for three months. However, I noticed that only one IP was vandalizing the page. Unless the IP was a sock, isn't three months due to a single IP too long? I think maybe at most one month is a better length, though I don't mind if the article stays at its current length of protection. What do you think? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:28, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

David Ospina
People are still claiming he has transferred, with the latest change saying it is official, even though neither OGC Nice or Arsenal have confirmed it. It's almost certain he will transfer, however he hasn't done so yet.

I was keeping any eye on the article, but I can't revert the current changes as I'm not registered.


 * It looks like it is official now. I've added a reference to the article. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 04:12, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

reconsider pages like Vishnu Ganesha,and Others

 * When you start a discussion about an editor, you must notify them on their user talk page.this is the first rule of this page.But i did'nt get any notification.Second thing is user Redtigerxyz removed file on 15 July 2014‎ which is my edit  Vishnu.He said  reason is rm copyvio.same day it self i said before remove please check copyrights from flickr.he said Checked copyrights from flickr; plz familiar yourself with wikipedia image policies.then 6 July 2014‎  i added file from wiki commons.he removed even  that file too.and said rm img crowding.i said again dont remove images.crowd not a proper explanation.please read WP:IUP.he reverted my edits said the image is broken, attributes missing.then continuous unknown ip users edited that page.user redtiger started to say one img enough like so . he is doing WP:STEWARDSHIP in all Hinduism article plz click here.i informed in his talk page.but  he deleted all.no reply from him.after blanking my talk in his he put   smily symbol in his  talk page Edit summary .plz click here.this is one enough showing how user rediger playing in Wikipedia. and he is doing WP:STEWARDSHIP in all Hinduism article.so i asked semi-protection  for vishnu.but

unfortunately it has declined.but now i hope the Admin carefully analyze all the things,and i believe that the admin do  the needful.Because more person we believe Wikipedia is reliable.thank you Eshwar  .om Talk tome 14:17, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Roger Goodman
"Goodman has stated that the allegations are completely unsubstantiated and originated from a 2012 divorce filing, where he claims that his ex-wife was trying to convince the judge of her then-husband's unworthiness in an attempt to get more money from the divorce.[12]"

Please review the sourced information. Goodman did not "state that the allegations were completely unsubstantiated" and does not "claim" anything about his ex-wife. This sentence should be removed.

FYI. The research would show that the divorce declaration cited, occurred in October 2012. The Motion of Contempt filed in August 2013 (presented in court September of 2013) is a completely separate entity from the Temporary Orders filed back in October. The Motion of Contempt, was in fact, filed in regard to violations to the Final Order (which was the settlement) which occurred in June of 2013. The divorce documents from October 2012 were not a part of the Final Order.

The original quote "I asked Carns if it was fair to quote contentious divorce documents in the Goodman ad, particularly since they're part of his ex-wife requesting more money in the settlement." was a false statement and has since been removed by KOMO 4 TV--the source continues to be quoted but if you look at the source it is simply not there. Since it is not sourced, the libelous statement should be removed.

The divorce documents had nothing to do with the Motion of Contempt mentioned in that false quote which continues to be cited. And since it is is impossible to change any financials after a divorce settlement is signed (in our case June 2013)--the three things are not one related to the other, placed in a sentence as if they are:

contentious divorce documents (Temporary Order--October 2013) and settlement (Final Order/Settlement--June 2013) requesting more money (Motion of Contempt--August/September 2013)

Requests for financial relief for attorney fees when forced to return to court for violations of parenting plans and settlement agreements is routine, but completely separate from the final settlement (inferring money) Final Order.

That is why I continue to edit this so that it is factual. The "undo" edits are disingenuous and an inaccurate picture. Erroneous and libelous.

I need to add that while you might have an opinion that my statements made under penalty of perjury were simply allegations, that is an opinion--not based in fact. Contentious indicates: causing or likely to cause an argument; controversial. Roger too, had the right to respond to my supposed "allegations," under penalty of perjury but chose not to. That was the time to dispute my supposed "allegations." Under penalty of perjury. Through the court of law. Not now, through a medium other than the court of law that doesn't apply the same standards or opportunity to rebut the accusations made.

Therefore, it should be assumed that my divorce declaration statements were not contentious because they caused no argument or disagreement. Roger, making no response to the court, indicates concurrence, not controversy.

I can only assume that the edits are made by supporters who are not caring about the Wikipedia standards for truth and non-inflamotory statements. Facts are very different from truth in Wiki world as well as my world. The edits essentially state that statements made under penalty of perjury are assumed false while statements with no standards for assessment or recourse are not. That is incongruent with reason. As you know, edits must be made fairly and rationally accessing the validity of claims. The rules for biographies are not being followed. Do I need to continue to report those who continue to make libelous claims?

If you would like, I can have one of my attorneys explain in legalese. If you have any questions please feel free to ask.

I understand completely how this kind of error could have been made. That is why I simply request that you make the corrections asked.

Liv Grohn (talk) 14:31, 23 July 2014 (UTC)Liv Grohn

Email
-  Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 17:38, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Roger Goodman Edit-Thanks.
Thank you for your response and information on what to do better--when/if there is a next time. I also appreciate that you made the edit so quickly. I am clearly not a wiki person and only doing reputation management out of necessity. I have no idea what I'm doing and frankly, have other things I need to be doing with my time. ;-) I was frustrated as I did put short info in edit line but it seems like there might be a vested interest for some of the editors? (The news report indicated as such.) I don't know. I just want "my" person left out of "his" issues. That said, I probably should have created a different user name? I just wanted to be transparent in this case in particular.

If you decide to keep this edit, it would be more accurate to add that the divorce filing was made under "penalty of perjury." The way it reads now is as if it is a simple "he said/she said" case while that is not the case. Roger could have filed a response to my divorce documents but chose not to because he would have had to do so under penalty of perjury. Making a false statement would have legal repercussions for anyone who did. It is significant that he made a statement. I had to sign that what I wrote was true or face charges.

This edit surrounds the issue of 2014 campaign allegations. I am curious as to why that was the only thing referenced from my divorce documents. If the fact that Roger drove my kids stoned is relevant, why isn't the 20K IRS collections or DSHS failure to pay in full child support payments relevant? The omissions are interesting. All three were the subject of the source used, so why only use the part about the kids. Personally, I think this is irresponsible toward our children and question the integrity of the original poster who added this topic to the site. (BTW. I have letters, emails, texts and drug tests from Roger proving this supposed "allegation" If I need to release them to protect my reputation and protect my children, I will.)

The following is now, apparently also an issue of the 2014 … and frankly, who knows what is next.

"The prickly topic of Sonntag's inquiry was personal use of office computers, a continuing problem at the Sentencing Guidelines Commission (SGC) ever since Sonntag's office determined adult Web sites had been visited on the work computer of Leggett's predecessor Roger Goodman, who resigned."

And if you really need this edit, fall under the career category?

See why I don't see why this is all relevant? The campaign issues will take over the page which is really for biographies, right? I'm sure that's not what Roger wants … and I know it's not what I want for the children to see--nor is it necessary to the bio. Interested to hear your thoughts. Thanks again. I hope you will consider full removal of the edit or make the changes I suggested to reflect the truth and soften the focus on the kids.

Let me know if I'm posting this wrong.

Dger (talk) 03:44, 24 July 2014 (UTC) Liv Grohn — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liv Grohn (talk • contribs) 23:52, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Unidentified dragonfly
Yes I do believe your image is of a Lake Darner. It would be helpful to see the shoulder area but the face does match that of an Aeshna eremita. Dger (talk) 03:44, 24 July 2014 (UTC)


 * There are only three possible darners in your area–Lake Darner, Azure Darner and Zigzag Darner. The Lake Darner is the most likely candidate. Dger (talk) 04:52, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

National Day of Commemoration
I have no objections to full protection, if that will help talk page discussion. Give it a week and I would leave it up to an uninvolved admin (like yourself as you are now fimilar with the context) deciding to undo protection once the outcome is clear. Murry1975 (talk) 08:39, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd just like to put your SP protection decision into some sort of context. First though a remark about the editor Murry1975- if you will permit. If you study his edit history you'll see that by far and away the majority of his work is concerned with policing the current version of WP:IMOS. To that end, he trawls Wikipedia replacing instances of Republic of Ireland with Ireland. While this is the IMOS standard, actually, it leads to confusion. Consider one of Murry's edits today. Look at the edit and then read the (start of) the article Drogheda. The reader will undoubtedly come to the conclusion that Drogheda is the 6th most populous conurbation on the island of Ireland. This is absolutely incorrect. Drogheda is the 6th most populous conurbation in the Republic. Unless the reader goes to the previous piped link of List of towns in the Republic of Ireland he will effectively be reading wrong information. And of course if the page is printed, the error is even harder to detect (impossible, in fact). It is this type of error that I was trying to rectify in the article in question. Again, ambiguity and potential error is being introduced due to these edits.


 * Why are these edits proliferating? Because of a small number of editors who object to the terminology "Republic or Ireland", it being deemed to be of British origin. As a result, they have managed to arrange an IMOS "ruling" which is favourable to this point of view. This ruling will never change now. These editors will not allow it. So against this background I was merely trying to ensure that wrong information does not get out of control. Unfortunately, due to this warrior mentality it is doing so, with the article in question being a prime example. The National Day of Commemoration ONLY applies to the Republic, but in the article this is not clear, and could be read as applying to Ireland the island. I know my edit warring is wrong, and I apologise to the community for it, but to me, edit warring is preferable to wrong information being disemminated as a result of political motivation. 86.9.250.59 (talk) 20:24, 21 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Discussing as to the merits of either wording on my talk page or edit warring across articles is not the way to go about this. The talk page at WP:IMOS is the place to have the discussion. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 03:04, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I am not discussing anything. I am providing you with background information so that in future you may be able to make better informed decisions. For instance, by taking account of this statement at WP:PROT: "Semi-protection should not be used as a preemptive measure against vandalism that has not yet occurred, nor should it be used to privilege registered users over unregistered users in (valid) content disputes (my emphasis). 82.26.93.215 (talk) 08:16, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
 * In case you've still got any doubts about this, you seemed to have sided with editors simply because they have accounts and I didn't. This is the type of edit one of them gets up to. Perhaps you could explain to me why my edit (left), was reverted, because I can't see why, and the reverter is incoherent about it Neil Edgar (talk) 20:55, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
 * If you read the edit you will see Neil, that you have added a "personal" remark about de Velera, in a section the is already tagged for citations. Anyhow, no new consensus has been put forward on NDC to replace the existing one and Neil here has revert the editor the restored the version before edit warring started, CBW, what next, I templated him for MOS. Murry1975 (talk) 15:19, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Check out my User Powers!
Guess What Checkout my userpowers! User:Bobherry — Preceding undated comment added 03:31, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Weather balloons
I think we should keep our substantive conversations about this where they are, but I wanted to tell you of the unusual source of my interest in weather balloons. There's a fellow named Charles Hall who writes about (get ready for it) Tall White extraterrestrials. He claims to have encountered them closely in the 1960s when he was a U.S. Air Force aerographer at a desert base in Nevada. I'm kind of open to this sort of thing, so I read his short books on the subject. They endlessly describe his balloon-launching trips out into the desert, and talk at length about using his balloons and equipment, though he doesn't really describe the latter in detail. Imagine my surprise when I found your photos. They depict exactly the things I remember him talking about. Lou Sander (talk) 13:57, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Islamic state and the Islamic State
We have an article Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant‎ which needs to be renamed as this unrecognised state is now the "Islamic State" - any suggestions for an article title given the existence of [{Islamic State]] would be welcome at Talk:Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 12:19, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Dashavatara
Thanks for the protection. was presumably 6 months right?, but the summary shows "expires 01:26, 14 August 2014". Confused.-- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:17, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Thanks for protecting "The Feminists" article

IrritatingCobalt (talk) 16:06, 7 August 2014 (UTC) 

Cheers!
Just what I always wanted. So kind of you. It's on my userpage. KägeTorä - (影虎) (Chin Wag) 09:50, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection
Hello.

I was hoping I could bother about one of your closures at Requests for page protection. I hope I am not catching you while you are very busy.

Today, you closed a protection request for Infobox OS with a verdict of full protection for one week. However, I believe there is a point the review that you might or might not have seen. I thought perhaps you will allow me to give it a shot. The instance that you visited contained the following statement: "(Personal attack removed)" In reality, it was the following sentence: "You have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3ANetoholic a huge block history], some of which are because of violating WP:1RR on sensitive/widely-transcluded templates." It is not written with the purpose of hurting, but with genuine concern that the person in question will do it again. (I personally never comment on a person unless I feel not doing so hurts Wikipedia. For one thing, I do know that in Wikipedia, the personal attacker only succeeds in hurting his own reputation.)

Please re-consider upgrading the protection to indefinite.

Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 11:17, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I see. Very well. I will let the matter rest and even try to cooperate with him. It will be very difficult, and I am not optimistic that he makes it easy on me but I will try. Nevertheless, thanks for the reply.
 * Best regards,
 * Codename Lisa (talk) 11:53, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes. I agree. But there is something I really wish to know and I'd extent any length of special dispensations of good faith in exchange for the honest reply: Would you say that perhaps I am not trying hard enough?
 * Best regards,
 * Codename Lisa (talk) 12:07, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Request
Now I am not allowed to nominate templates for deletion, I will ask you to some sort of action of this template. The case is Template:Mawazine 2012 setlists, a template with a complete unclear purpose only used in one article (what seems to be the parent article). In normal cases I would have nominated it for deletion, after the content had been transcluded into the article. I hope you are willing to do anything. The Banner talk 11:09, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Closure on ANI
Dear CBW: We seem to be having a problem on ANI getting an uninvolved admin to assess a completed discussion, close the discussion and apply any appropriate follow-up action. The thread is the top one on the page Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents. It is complex, but has what I believe is a clear consensus there. The discussion is long over and many pleas have been made in the thread for an admin to close it and yet no one has come forward to do so. If you have the time could I impose upon you to have a look at it? - Ahunt (talk) 00:55, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your judicious close on that. - Ahunt (talk) 11:53, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Jeanette Rankin
So What are You? A species os Wikipedia Policeman? Vanguard53 (talk) 12:31, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Jeanette Rankin
You Threatened me with blocking my editing capacity in Wikipedia ... just because You don't agree with my point of View. Who assures you that You are being Neutral? Obviously You are a radical Pacifist. (You Idolize Jeanette Rankin). Demontrate that my Statement is False or Not True. Vanguard53 (talk) 12:09, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia articles should present a neutral point of view. If independent reliable sources have discussed your point of view, you will need to include cites to those sources. - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 13:29, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

The Pink Print
You put a lock on moving this page. The verified artist just confirmed that the spelling is "The Pinkprint" Not "The Pink Print". https://twitter.com/NICKIMINAJ/status/497117375712329728 KaneZolanski (talk) 20:33, 6 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I've read the rules, and Twitter sources are deemed ok if it's from a verified page. This is Nicki Minaj's album, and this was from her official verified Twitter account. She was directly answering the question as to whether it is spelt "The Pinkprint" or "The Pink Print". I don't understand what there is to discuss, or am I missing something out? As any "better" source is going to be sourcing that tweet. KaneZolanski (talk) 21:15, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
 * It has been made. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Pink_Print#Survey KaneZolanski (talk) 22:01, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
 * With 9 Supports and 1 Oppose (Who's concerns about publications not using the name being counteracted by articles such as The Rolling Stone and Spin) when can the page be moved over to the title, "The Pinkprint"? KaneZolanski (talk) 02:36, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Regarding Page Edward Tobinick
Please revert the protected page to the protected version from August 4, 2014.

The current protected page contains two recent edits by User: Proper Stranger that are in violation of NPOV. As noted on the Talk page, Proper Stranger cherry picked evidence. He removed positive clinical trial results, while leaving other results in. The results of his edits do not present all the significant points of view. His edits fail to conform to Wikipedia NPOV standards. The doctor’s work with etanercept is an issue of public importance. It is unconscionable that evidence was removed, that all significant views are not presented. The page without all the evidence should not be the protected page. If this request to revert the protected page to the protected version from August 4, 2014, is denied, please unprotect the page to allow proper editing that observes NPOV. Proper Stranger’s edits of 8 August 2014, included in the current protected version, fail the NPOV standard.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThirtyCat (talk • contribs) 14:28, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Please revert the protected page to the protected version from August 4, 2014.
Comment to Mr. Stradivarius, who denied a request to edit the protected page:

Mr. Stradivarius, I must beg to differ, specifically with two of the points you discuss.

Your suggestion that “detailed information on the clinical trials of etanercept would probably be better off in the Etanercept article” does not describe an issue with this biography. There has been no detailed information on the clinical trials discussed on this page.

This is the biography of a physician who is the inventor of new methods of treatment for neurological disorders. The inventions are why the doctor is notable. You can’t separate the doctor and his inventions. The inventions belong on the page.

While there have been no detailed discussions of clinical trials in this article, note of all trials and news stories should be listed, as they represent the response to these inventions. It is the comprehensive and objective listing that readers want, and expect. It is not NPOV to cherry pick which trials or news stories are included, as Positive Stranger has done.

How is the recent Daily Mail (UK)(this article having been removed by Proper Stranger), “Arthritis drug could also halt Alzheimer's: Treatment found to stop progression of memory loss and poor mood” article not relevant to the topic? The doctor’s invention for the treatment of Alzheimer’s Disease, first reported in 2006, has again been reported on by a major London newspaper, its efficacy being confirmed by a randomized clinical trial. This is not detailed information of a clinical trial that belongs on another page. This is news of the results of a randomized clinical trial, from a major news source, confirming the efficacy of a new method of treatment by the inventor. This is exactly the subject of this article.

The doctor is the holder of the following patents for his inventions: U.S. patents 6419944, 6537549, 7214658, 7629311, 8119127, and 8236306, and Australian patent 758,523. The reporting of all trials and news stories relative to these invented new methods of treatment is exactly the kind of comprehensive, objective evidence the reader wants and deserves, and which is required by NPOV.

Intractable spinal pain is a major public health problem around world. This page discusses a doctor and his new methods of treatment for this health problem. Is there evidence of the efficacy of these inventions? Yes, there is. Four randomized clinical trials (their listings removed by Proper Stranger) report on the efficacy of these treatments.

Proper Stranger removed the listing of trials and news stories that speak to the efficacy of these inventions. He did not remove detailed discussions of the trials themselves, which he argues belong on another page. But mentions of the results of these trials, as a reflection of the inventions, belong on this page. And they must not be selectively edited out.

Regarding your statement that you “don’t think it’s fair to characterize the edits in question as “[removing] positive clinical trial results, while leaving other results in.”” I can’t help but think that’s exactly what was done. Why leave a trial with unfavorable results (Johns Hopkins Walter Reed), but remove the positive trials? Why does the unfavorable trial remain? How is it different?! If the stated purpose is to remove what is relevant to the article’s topic, how is this trial more relevant to the topic than the positive trials? The selective removal of positive trial results appears to be simply because they were positive. This is not NPOV.

The cherry picked version of this article, as edited by Proper Stranger, should not be allowed to mislead and misinform readers for a minute more. Please revert this page to the protected version of 4 August 2014.

Thank you. Rjwrjw100 (talk) 22:28, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Bracket Errors on 12 August
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=620882650 your edit] to Canadian war memorials 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 [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:53, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Section header
Can you stop writing false history about Somalia and the Hawiye clan, I know our own history and what you are writing is false. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahabdi (talk • contribs) 19:26, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Template:Old moves
Are you sure that "template-protection" is necessary at this stage? --George Ho (talk) 23:45, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Question 1
why you protect list of uefa champions league soccers !! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.69.155.223 (talk) 13:59, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Because it was asked for here. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 15:22, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Protection
Hi CambridgeBayWeather.

On February 2nd, 2014 you protected Shahjalal International Airport. After the expiry of the protection on the 1st day of August, the page is again going through persistent vandalism by 180.149.8.166, 58.97.142.165, 58.97.142.165 etc. who are filling the page with unexplained airport destination links.

Also, you protected Shah Amanat International Airport on the same date. Again after the expiry of protection, it is going through persistent vandalism similar to the airport page mentioned above. Here is its history page.

I would like you to please protect both pages for 12 months as vandals return as soon as the expiry ends.

Thanks - Ahnaaf (talk) 12:47, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi CBW! The IP airport vandal from Bangladesh has been pretty focused (instead of going everywhere). Heydar Aliyev International Airport probably needs protection. HkCaGu (talk) 18:24, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
 * And now the same person has moved on to Václav Havel Airport Prague. Thanks in advance! HkCaGu (talk) 16:18, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Question 2
why you protect list of uefa champions league soccers !! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Se killer (talk • contribs) 14:02, 14 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Because it was asked for here. Anyway you can still edit it so what is the problem? CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 15:22, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

no problem — Preceding unsigned comment added by Se killer (talk • contribs) 18:23, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

The Pink Print 2
Hi, CambridgeBayWeather. I have moved The Pinkprint to The Pink Print. The reason is simple: Media reports all use "The Pink Print" instead of "The Pinkprint". Even MTV, Bustle, Billboard and other reliable sources say "The Pink Print", and Wikipedia is the only website that uses "Pink Print" as one word. Even if the word in the dictionary is compound, the artist can choose whether to put a space or not. I have moved it back to "The Pink Print", and I may start a new conversation on its talk page. Cheers, DEW.   Adrenaline  ( Nahnah4 ) 03:28, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

ANEW closure
Do you mean to say that multiple editors can breach the so-called "red-line" of 3RR, multiple times, and get away with simply a warning? Cfredkin was to ANEW for breaching 3RR on a different page, and also got a warning then. What meaning, then, does the phrase "re-line" have anymore? Are you effectively saying that edit-warring will go unpunished so long as there are two people involved? 59.97.32.195 (talk) 07:45, 18 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I started at the bottom of the page and worked up. I didn't see that there had been multiple reports about one editor. However, if either edit wars (not necessarily with each other or on that page) they will be blocked. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 07:49, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikistalking
Greetings, this editor appears to be WP:wikistalking me. Is there anything that can be done about it?CFredkin (talk) 08:17, 18 August 2014 (UTC) I'm not sure how accurate this report is, but the IP appears to be dodgy.CFredkin (talk) 08:21, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

In fact, there appears to be a range of IP's that are stalking me. 59.97.33.91 has joined in at John Kline. Is there an appropriate place to report this? Thanks.CFredkin (talk) 08:39, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Bracket Errors on 19 August
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=621849255 your edit] to Lake Laberge 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 [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:52, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 * 20named%20for&amp;f=false Naming Canada: Stories about Canadian Place Names] by Alan Rayburn It was well-known to prospectors during the Klondike Gold Rush of the 1890s, as they

Marcos Rojo
Hello, could you please extent your page protection on Marcos Rojo, which is due to expire tomorrow. There is a pending deal for him to join Manchester United, so extending the protection for another week would be appreciated before it expires and the disruptive editing resumes. Thanks, JMHamo (talk) 22:34, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Why did you fully protect Zoe Quinn?
Full protection is only supposed to be used in terms of a content dispute, not for general vandalism. The semi protection was working perfectly well. In addition, WP:PROTECT outlines that Pre-emptive full protection of articles is contrary to the open nature of Wikipedia. Please unprotect or state your reasoning for protecting. Tutelary (talk) 14:34, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

FYI
Hi CambridgeBayWeather. As one of the main WikiProject Africa contributors, your input here would be greatly appreciated. Best regards, Middayexpress (talk) 19:27, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Bracket Errors on 23 August
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=622419241 your edit] to Cappielow 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 [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:49, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
 * | capacity         =  5,741 seated  {{cite news|url=http://www.footballgroundguide.com/scotland/morton.html|title=

La impostora
Hi you could revert edit ip?, prizes are bad, as on August 21 were delivered, and the soap opera was only nominated in 3 categories, current information is erroneous. He spoke of awards and nominations. On the edit war, try to talk to the IP on their issues and ignored me. I also asked for help, and ignored my request, the problem is not from a single article, comes from several.-- Damián  (talk)  08:25, 24 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Here it is. The IP 46.229.194.33 is the same person. As I said before, the ip 46229193141 ignored my message, so I do not understand with whom I discuss this in the discussion page of the article. IP is only connected to revert my edits on any item.-- Damián  (talk)  08:46, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Let's see, you will be left 2 messages to the ip and ignored when reverse editing clearly put on because in my edit summary, ip simply ignores everything and reverted without explanation, and the same has been done in other articles as Rosa diamante, Corazón valiente, La casa de al lado, among others, is ip reverts my edits without explanation. and i do not think leave a message in the discussion of the article "La impostora", so that no part of that conversation.-- Damián  (talk)  09:10, 24 August 2014 (UTC)


 * If you want you can look at the records of the items I've mentioned, so you know it.-- Damián  (talk)  09:12, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

List of marine biologists
Why go with pending changes? Doesn't that just force us to do the same amount of work as before?— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 11:58, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes it does and that was my intention. There is no way that I'm going to admit to making a mistake. Cheers. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 12:09, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Well I did just bother Kww to see if he can make an edit filter to block anyone from writing "Jotaro Kujo" on the page so that might help instead.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 12:12, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, just saw the notice at the top of your talk page. I also reset the PC, here. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 12:16, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm Kudpung. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, The Soulicious Tour, Live at The 02, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:09, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

August 2014
Hi CambridgeBayWeather. Thank you for your work on patrolling new pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I'm just letting you know that I declined your deletion request for The Soulicious Tour, Live at The 02, a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. ''Page ostensibly still under construction. tagged for deletion within 5 minutes of creation. Please read WP:NPP'' Please take a moment to look at the suggested tasks for patrollers, criteria for speedy deletion, and particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion or proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. Thanks! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:12, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Bangladesh Airport Vandal
The vandal has struck again at Beirut Rafic Hariri International Airport. Already warned and reported to AIV, can you protect the page? Thanks! 71.12.206.168 (talk) 08:18, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for catching it. Unfortunately now you can't edit it either. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 08:21, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Struck again at Tallinn Airport. IP was reported at AIV, said blocked but was never blocked. 71.12.206.168 (talk) 08:24, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Now they've moved on to Astana International Airport. Seem to be focusing on the same one article day after day (IP after IP) until blocked and moving on to another. HkCaGu (talk) 19:01, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

2019 AFC Asian Cup
Hi. Can you please lift the protection or reduce it on 2019 AFC Asian Cup since it has been forbidden for other users except administrators to change it since February 2011. There is new announcements about the tournament which we should cover. Thank you.--Uishaki (talk) 12:06, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Why ask Bearcat?--Uishaki (talk) 19:40, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Probable sockpuppet
Hi, I was just notified that an IP address requested my talk page be semi-protected here (you declined the request). Judging from the ridiculous request and the vandalism also done by that IP, this was likely done by a sockpuppet of User:Altimgamr. Please block IP 107.77.75.55. Thanks, Bahooka (talk) 00:51, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Never mind. He's been blocked. Thanks, Bahooka (talk) 02:15, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Autoconfirmed Editor
Good day:

I am an Autoconfirmed Editor and the article James Foley (journalist) is restricted.

This edit and all my previous edits were "automatically accepted".

Yet, this (very helpful) edit that actually fixed a site eror, was not automatically accepted and had to be accepted by Dawn Bard.

I first discussed my inquiry with Dawn and she advised me to ask an admin to find out the reason I, an Autoconfirmed editor, am now restricted.

Thanks Worldedixor (talk) 20:17, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

amanda eliasch
Dear Mr Administrator

Respectfully requesting you to review Amanda Eliasch page. It has been wrongly deleted by some people and vandalized. Thank you. 172.56.34.195 (talk) 10:48, 27 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Amanda Eliasch has not been deleted. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 02:50, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

James Foley (journalist)
Are you sure that PC is appropriate for this frequently-edited page? --George Ho (talk) 03:33, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

War in Donbass
Can you please return this page to semi-protection? The dispute has mostly been resolved on the talk page, and there is much to update given the current events. RGloucester — ☎ 15:26, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * It is still fully protected, for some reason. Please reduce the protection level. RGloucester  — ☎ 23:08, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much. RGloucester  — ☎ 23:24, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Move protection was supposed to expire on September 19. Why moving up to September 4? Also, it was recently changed to "War in Donbass", although some media, like BBC, don't declare it as "war". --George Ho (talk) 03:34, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Almost forgot: according to Special:Log/War in Donbass, the semi-protection time was indefinite. Why should semi-protection expire in September 4? --George Ho (talk) 07:47, 29 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Because, other than templates, I don't think that it is good to protect something indefinitely. If it needs protecting again then it is easy enough to do. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 16:16, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Bloody Falls Massacre
Based on the source, I think the article should retain those sentences. Maybe a little wordsmithing is in order, but I don't think removing them improves the article. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:20, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Radamel Falcao page protection
Hi, I noticed you posted this in response to a user asking for page protection on the Radamel Falcao article:

"I've taken a better look and it does not seem as bad as I first thought. Give it a few days and if it gets worse let me know. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 15:34, 31 August 2014 (UTC)"

The page still seems to be receiving constant changes and persistent changes, if possible could the page receive full protection (As a lot of the changes are coming from registered users)? Thanks Jemdt (talk)

IP User Vandalism Ukrainian Articles
I noticed that you had been involved in the protection of the page War in Donbass and I was wondering if you could help me out with the page Battalions of territorial defense in Ukraine. Over the last 24 hours, one IP user utilizing multiple IP's has been changing article information to their opinion such as changing "Pro-Russian Unrest" to "Anti-nationalist rebellion" and "Ukrainian soldiers had difficulty combating insurgents" to "Ukrainian soldiers had difficulty suppressing dissent". They have changed ip's several times and now are on their third IP address. Now they have turned to constantly reverting the removals and vandalizing my user page and talk page with warnings that they copied and pasted from one of their IP's talk pages that I posted there. I'm not sure how you can help but I hope you can. Thanks. SantiLak (talk) 20:43, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Page Deleted
Hey, My Reba Toney page got deleted. Why? How can I go about getting it back? I didn't realize that I had done something wrong. 66.87.131.177 (talk) 21:57, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * It was deleted because it was copied directly from here. Articles have to be in your own words. Copying from someone else like that violates WP:Copyright. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 22:17, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Nuchek, Alaska
Hi. I uploaded an image of Nuchek, Alaska from a PD source to Commons but the image needs to be rotated. Also, I uploaded it to the article page where it again needs rotation. I don't know how to do that; do you? --Rosiestep (talk) 02:34, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

You are so helpful. Thanks. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:01, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

removal of article contribution
I hAve had an edit removed because an administrator said it was incorrect. How do  I provide  info to prove I'm correct so my information is not deleted again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nipplewoman (talk • contribs) 21:49, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

On the labia majora talk I have provided references but another user just deletes the references and my edit  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nipplewoman (talk • contribs) 22:06, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Philippine Airport Vandal
Looks like Kuala Lumpur International Airport has become constantly targeted by the Philippine Airport Vandal. HkCaGu (talk) 04:10, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks! HkCaGu (talk) 16:01, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Recreational Drug Use, admin only
Hi. The only problem with the article was a couple of days age when WarriorLut decided to make a change to the lead. I explained why I didn't agree, but instead of responding to my talk page message, explaining his opinion, he left a message at the top of the page describing all my recent edits as "vandalism". He then, still without responding to my message, started repeatedly changing the entire article back to how it was 3 weeks ago. I reverted these changes. He is no longer doing this. So, I wonder if the protection is necessary. Ps. he states here that he thought I was a 'bot'. (I don't know of any bots that explain their actions on talk pages, and chase editors around trying to engage in discussion, but anyway). Now he presumably accepts that I am a human, I don't expect any problems. His user account is odd, it was opened in 2006, but his first edit was a couple of days age, to recreational drug use, and he has not edited anywhere else, (except the admin's notice board).

Also, I get the sense I may have done something wrong. If so, could you explain what, please? I know there's some kind of 3-revert rule. But what was I supposed to do about a brand-new editor who changes the entire article to an old version, repeatedly? Am I supposed to leave it in any state he desires for 24 hours? That would only reward his behaviour. In taking a firm stance, I demonstrated to him that vandalism is not preferable to discussion. Is there a different course of action I could have taken? Perhaps I should have informed an administrator. (I don't yet know how/where to do this, though).

If you think the temporary page protection is a sound idea, no problem. I just thought I should explain what the article situation is, and ask if I did the wrong thing vis-a-vis reverting changes which the editor absolutely refuses to explain or discuss. If you could tell me what I am supposed to do in such situations, after having written on the article talk page and the editors page, that would be good to know in future. Thanks.

Ps. The editor still may have a chip on his shoulder judging from his latest criticism of me on the talk page. But I honestly think it should be fine, since he appears to care what administrators think (see above). I'm not sure the protection is necessary, it seems like an over-reaction. The article is in a sound state, but I was thinking about expanding it further. Thanks zzz (talk) 11:47, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

PPS. I later removed his "vandalism" message. It was a clear case of personal abuse, which he moved to the top of the page to draw more attention. He had persistently refused to even acknowledge my existence, let alone respond to my messages. (Maybe I wasn't supposed to do that. I don't know. It seemed the right thing to do.) I think the editor just decided he hates my guts, but he seems to have calmed down.zzz (talk) 12:03, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

But maybe its best to leave it protected, to be on the safe side, since it's in a sound state. The history section does still need expanding, tho. I just wanted to explain that I don't think I acted badly, really. zzz (talk) 12:46, 13 September 2014 (UTC)