User talk:Carwile2/Archives/2021 1

Overlinks
Hi Carwile2, with this addition to Nintendo 64 you inlcuded two links to "Nintendo" and bolded "Nintendo 64". I changed both of those instances to plain text, as many wikilinks makes an article cluttered, and unnecessary emphasis looks out of place. Please take a look at WP:OVERLINK and MOS:BOLD for why I reverted and when it is appropriate to use such formatting. Regards, HMman (talk) 17:11, 2 April 2013 (UTC).


 * --Thank you, I have noted this for future reference. Carwile2 (talk) 22:59, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jase Robertson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page A&E (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:24, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion CI Capital
Hello, I am still looking for other sources other than the firm's website like you said. If you could give me sometime to re-edit the document, I would be grateful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.45.211.168 (talk) 20:26, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of First Baptist Church (Panama City, FL) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article First Baptist Church (Panama City, FL) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/First Baptist Church (Panama City, FL) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:44, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Articles
First Baptist I nominated for deletion because it does not seem to meet the notability guidelines. The sources you've added include a Yellow Pages listing, which is not a reliable sources, and a book that only names the church without saying anything about it. Sources have to be in-depth. I would discourage writing biographies on the Duck Dynasty cast, as none of them seems to be notable outside the scope of the show, so creating biographies on them would just be repeating info from the Duck Dynasty article. (See also WP:BLP1E.)

Also, don't forget to add categories to your articles. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:44, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

correcting entry for Willie Robertson
Why did you change my correction for Willie Robertson's college degree? As a former professor of his, I knew the Harding reference was incorrect and confirmed it with his mother last weekend. What basis do YOU have for undoing this correction? Sgwilliamson — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sgwilliamson (talk • contribs) 18:20, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your correction! The basis I had on undoing the edit at first was that when you entered in the reference, it resulted in an error message for some reason or another. After your message to my talk page, I was going to ask you for the reference so that I may enter it in correctly myself, but it seems that the second time you put it through, you fixed it! Please, feel free to do further edits to the page Carwile2 (talk) 00:36, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Banjo Music, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bluegrass (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 15:39, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Phil Robertson
If you want this edit to remain intact, you will need to provide a reliable source for the claims. Otherwise, it will be removed. The last sentence in the paragraph starting with "The contract was agreed upon..." is problematic too. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 14:08, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * You need to keep that paragraph - the reason I put it back in the first place is to put the one you added to my article in a better context. If viewers read only that "The rumor that Robertson and his family were under pressure to eliminate their family prayer from Duck Dynasty turned out to be unfounded", without knowing what the rumor actually was about and consisted of, they will be left confused. Carwile2 (talk) 17:49, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * You don't need to say "there was a rumor that ..." followed by "the rumor that ...". It's redundant.  The second paragraph covers the topic sufficiently.  Since the first paragraph is not adequately sourced, it should be removed.  I'm going to remove it and the burden is on you to adequately source the content that you want to be included.  As an alternative, I suggest that you attempt to reword one sourced paragraph to cover the topic in a way that you agree with.  Separately, you need understand that you don't own the article.  The article's content will be based on consensus and your opinion has no more weight in the matter than mine.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 18:03, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I have no problem at all if you want to revise your paragraph with info from mine, or merge them. All I want is to let the readers know more about the rumor. If you cut the first paragraph completely, the latter will not make much sense. On a separate note, I know that I have no ownership of the article, we all forfeit privelidge that just by joining Wikipedia. I said that because it was I who expanded and manage the article. Its kind of like babysitting the neighbors' dog - You still call it yours. Carwile2 (talk) 00:20, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Phil Robertson
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:03, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Marina World
I've removed the PROD tag from Marina World, as I did not feel your deletion rationale reflected actual policy on what constitutes notability for buildings and structures. Please feel free to take to Afd, if you wish. thank you, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:58, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Laila Gallery Complex
You may not like it, but you had no right to revert the article creator's removal of the PROD tag or issue a warning. The PROD tag clearly states: "You may remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to deletion for any reason." Again, just take it to Afd. thank you, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:51, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Article for Deletion
Hello Carwile2. I am a frequent editor on Wikipedia and I came across an article that seems to be about a company that is not so notable. There is no reason mentioned in the article of why the company should be on Wikipedia. AReputation is the article I am talking about. I would have nominated it for deletion myself, but I don't know the process. 182.189.100.213 (talk) 07:25, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Norland Products, Inc.
Hello Carwile2. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Norland Products, Inc., a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 01:49, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Cartoonito (UK and Ireland)
Hello Carwile2, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Cartoonito (UK and Ireland), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not a test page. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 03:59, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Removed CSD G2 from Ashinaga Ojisan
I removed your CSD G2 tag from Ashinaga Ojisan. While that editor's contributions look a little weird (creating a bunch of small articles,) I don't see any indication this was a test page. OSborn arfcontribs. 00:28, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm Benboy00. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Blaq Ice, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Benboy00 (talk) 16:39, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Liberty Oil Co. v. Condon National Bank
There was no copyright violation since any information was copies from a US Supreme court opinion published in 1922 that is in the public domain as I stated on it's talk page. Its was written by William Howard Taft who died in1930. --ASHaber (talk) 22:49, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Opting in to VisualEditor
As you may know, VisualEditor ("Edit beta") is currently available on the English Wikipedia only for registered editors who choose to enable it. Since you have made 50 or more edits with VisualEditor this year, I want to make sure that you know that you can enable VisualEditor (if you haven't already done so) by going to your preferences and choosing the item, " ". This will give you the option of using VisualEditor on articles and userpages when you want to, and give you the opportunity to spot changes in the interface and suggest improvements. We value your feedback, whether positive or negative, about using VisualEditor, at VisualEditor/Feedback. Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:14, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Stuff
You're right. I just think that an article with several third-party sources getting a notability tag really strikes me as off-base, and mistagging is a berserk button for me. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:54, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
 * You tagged Gulf Coast Town Center with notability and I thought it was a very out of place tagging that I shouldn't have have been so rude about in the edit summary. If there's anything you'd like to do about editing together, let me know. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:59, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Tatsuya Fukumuro
This is my first article; could you help me improve it rather than just killing it? I just created the page because Wikipedia doesn't have any information about this guy, so I entered what I knew and could source. Nathan Korth (talk) 03:09, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Z Vanessa Helder
Hi Carwile2, My article for Z Vanessa Helder was just recently speedily deleted. Under A7 of Speedy Deletion, which is a notability clause. I have no particular investment in seeing an article about Z Vanessa Helder in Wikipedia, but would like to improve my understanding about Wikipedia editorial functioning. Since Helder has been dead for some time her bio should fall into the general category of Wikipedia articles in which the benifit of the doubt is given with respect to sourcing and notability. There have been several recent exibits of her work, the Googling of which should establish prima facia notability. and there have been sever recent schalarly articles and pubilications either directly about her and her work or referencing it, again all Googlable, some of which were present in the deleted article. These things should be sufficient for any article written about a deceased 20th century artist, but, as a woman working in the early era a Modern American Art Helder is particularly notable irespective of critical oppinion of her work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vrrm (talk • contribs) 06:58, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Salahuddin campaign speedy deletion
Hello. I am currently working to expand this article and provide a strong number of citations. Please do not delete this article. Thanks.

WP:UAA report
Just wondering why you reported a at WP:UAA that has been blocked since 2008? -- GB fan 00:42, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, GB Fan, I reported the at WP:UAA because I think this account needs to be deleted altogether instead of simply suspended.  Carwile2 *Shoot me a message* 16:38, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

What are you doing?
I said quite clearly that I was adding references and I have. Can you give it more than 30 seconds before spamming an article with inapplicable templates? And then adding it back in after I had started adding references. And WTF was the COI template about? That's trolling, not new page patrolling.  St ★ lwart 1 1 1 02:58, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Tags can be removed after sources are added Carwile2 *Shoot me a message* 22:21, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Two Girls Dressing a Kitten by Candlelight
Important paintings have their own articles. We don't merge them because the artist's bio would then be too long. See Category:Paintings by Joseph Wright of Derby. Thanks, Philafrenzy (talk) 23:25, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Philafrenzy, why are there other pages than the subject of the article? This seems, to me, to detract from the article, making it almost a vague synopsis of the artist's similar works. Carwile2 *Shoot me a message* 23:31, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Please explain. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:32, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Philafrenzy, Although the painting is a chiaroscuro, a quick scan of the article reveals that has included other chiaroscuro paintings. This is detracting to the reader, especially since the article has a whole section devoted to "Chiaroscuro in paintings by Joseph Wright" and pictures the other paintings, as if they directly concerned the subject. Also, all the other pictures, whilst it is granted that they decorate the article quite nicely, are a distraction from the subject as well. These parts should be removed from the painting article, and/or merged to the artist's article, if you agree. Carwile2 *Shoot me a message* 23:40, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I assume you refer to the small gallery at the bottom titled "Chiaroscuro in paintings by Joseph Wright". That section helps to put the painting that is the subject of the article in the context of other works by Wright that also use the technique as discussed in the article. It is a benefit to the article for the reader to be able to compare the different works so I don't agree that they should be removed. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:46, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Philafrenzy, I see that as you are the chief "proprietor" of the article, and are apprehensive about fundamentally changing it. I respect that. So, perhaps you can compromise. As you take interest in editing/creating artwork articles of this type, perhaps you can create an article entitled "Chiaroscuro paintings by Joseph Wright". That way, you can remove distracting and detracting information from the article, but place an external reference to within the old article to the new. How does this sound? Carwile2 *Shoot me a message* 00:15, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
 * That would indeed be a valid topic for an article but it would require considerable art historical knowledge to do well. I wouldn't start it unless I was prepared to spend a long time working on it which I can't right now. Do you have a deep knowledge of Wright's use of Chiaroscuro that would enable you to write the article? Even if that article existed, however, the examples in the small gallery in the Kitten painting would still be justified in that article. I wonder that you feel so strongly about the matter, given it is a small gallery at the bottom of the page. Even if it was removed, at least two or three of the images would then need to go elsewwhere in the text. Philafrenzy (talk) 09:39, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Rollback
Hi Carwile2. After reviewing your request for rollback, 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! Beeblebrox (talk) 04:17, 13 March 2015 (UTC) . Beeblebrox (talk) 04:17, 13 March 2015 (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.

Editing student sandbox
Hi Carwile2, please do not edit this page for the next several days as it is not done. Anavimadumim15 (talk) 16:12, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Dear Carwile2: Please do not edit any sandboxes of the students in my course. This is material that they will be marked on in the future. I had thought that sandboxes were private and that it was not appropriate to perform unrequested editing, but if I was mistaken please hold off for a while until these are marked. You are welcome to edit if (and when) the pages are moved into live space. For a list of the users participating in the course, please see CHM437&CHM1263 Bioinorganic Chemistry 2015. Thanks.Dbzam (talk) 16:28, 13 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Carwile2, the edit in question looks to be this diff. I'm going to guess this was a mistake? Just as a reminder, though, please do not revert edits a user makes in their own userspace (except in extremely rare circumstances like gross WP:BLP violations, legal threats, etc. (this clearly wasn't one of those situations). if something like this happens in the future, know that you can always undo someone's edits if necessary and/or revert to a previous version of the page. I can help with this, but did not do so here since it looks like you made changes after Carwile2's edit and I don't want to undo your work. If you want help, let's continue the discussion at my talk page or by email. --Ryan (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:43, 13 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Sorry, Dbzam & Ryan, I was using IGLOO, an experimental software for wikipedia that is still in the alpha stages of testing. I did not realize that the pages I was reverting were sandboxes, and I will have to notify the developers about this bug. Again, my apologies to Anavimadumim15, I will try to take necessary steps to resolve this problem. Let me know if I can be of further service! Carwile2 *Shoot me a message* 21:17, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Talkback
Thanks for the feedback. --  Kangaroo  powah  20:42, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:40, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Order of Omega
I added two refs to Order of Omega, one to U of Georgia's newspaper and another to Kappa Alpha Order's Journal, let me know where else would make sense for refs.Naraht (talk) 18:30, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: ACWL
Hello Carwile2. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of ACWL, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: airplay on national radio is a sufficient claim of significance. Thank you. So Why  08:45, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

You are now a pending changes reviewer!
Hi Carwile2! I've been running into you while patrolling logs and recent changes, and I happened to notice that you don't have the pending changes reviewer rights. I hope you don't mind, but I went through your contributions and I noticed that you're quite active in recent changes patrolling and that you consistently view and undo vandalism and bad faith disruption. I believe that the pending changes reviewer rights would be useful for you to have and that you'd make good use of the tools. Instead of having you formally request the rights at WP:PERM, I went ahead and just gave it to you. This user right allows you to review edits that are pending approval on pages currently under pending changes protection and either accept the edits to make them viewable by the general public, or decline and revert them.

Please keep these things in mind regarding the tool or when you're reviewing any pending changes:


 * A list of articles with pending edits awaiting review can be viewed at Special:PendingChanges.
 * A list of the articles currently under pending changes protection can be viewed at Special:StablePages.
 * Being granted and having these rights does not grant you any additional "status" on Wikipedia, nor does it change how Wikipedia policies apply to you (obviously).
 * You'll generally want to accept any pending changes that appear to be legitimate edits and are not blatant vandalism or disruption, and reject edits that are problematic or that you wouldn't accept yourself.
 * Never accept any pending changes that contain obvious and clear vandalism, blatant neutral point of view issues, copyright violations, or BLP violations.

Useful guidelines and pages for you to read:


 * Reviewing pending changes, the guideline and tutorial on using the rights and reviewing pending changes.
 * Pending changes, a summary of pending changes protection, the pending changes user right, and how it applies.
 * Protection policy, the policy section on pending changes protection and its appropriate application and use by administrators.

I'm sure you'll do fine with the reviewer rights - it's a pretty straight-forward tool and it doesn't drastically change the interface that you're used to already. Nonetheless, please don't hesitate to leave me a message on my user talk page if you run into any questions, get stuck anywhere, or if you're not sure if you should accept or revert pending changes to a page - I'll be more than be happy to help you. If you no longer want the pending changes reviewer rights, let me know and I'll be happy to remove it for you. Thank you for helping to patrol recent changes and keep Wikipedia free of disruption and vandalism - it's a very thankless job to perform and I want you to know that it doesn't go unnoticed and that I appreciate it very much. Happy editing! :-D  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   13:31, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Thread moved to WP:ANI
Hi Carwile2, your thread has been moved to WP:ANI, as that noticeboard is a better venue to deal with the behavioral concerns before requesting a formal ban, and it can even be used for proposing formal bans if necessary. Please remember to notify users about such discussions after creating them. I have now done so for you at User talk:DJRSD. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:55, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Use of the "Expert needed" template without category or reason parameters
Hey, I've been doing some maintenance category cleanout and noticed that you added the Expert needed template to Robert Roderer, but you didn't specify a WikiProject category. Not specifying a category makes the template unhelpful, and adds it to the useless Category:Articles needing unspecified expert attention. Additionally, it's crucial to add a  parameter, or it will probably be removed because nobody can tell what the problem is. I added a category for you, but please supply parameters when using that template in the future (i.e. . Cheers! jp×g 23:39, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

AfD
Hello. This is to inform you that there is an AfD discussion at Articles for deletion/Brake check which you may be interested in, as you !voted in an AfD on the same article back in May. - "Ghost of  Dan Gurney"  18:04, 30 November 2021 (UTC)