User talk:Christofurio

Regarding pages which duplicate content: simply use a redirect. - Fennec 02:01, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * I've redirected it now. No need for VfD. Evercat 00:09, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hi, I've responded to your question about L. Frank Baum. I transferred the question from my User page to my User:talk page, in future please try to make sure you are writing on the correct page: User pages are for users to introduce themselves, User:talk pages are for discussions. Also, it's polite to sign such questions, by adding --~. at the end. All the best, --Woggly 21:53, 1 May 2004 (UTC)


 * /Archive 1 May 2004-March 2006
 * /Archive 2 March 2006-May 2007

RfC on my conduct in Weiss dispute
Hi Christofurio! I've just opened an RfC on myself for my conduct in a dispute that you were involved with concerning the Gary Weiss article. The RfC is located here and I welcome your comments or questions. CLA 21:21, 1 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Noted. I probably shouldn't say more than that now. --Christofurio 00:08, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Susan Antilla
Please provide sources for this article, and do the same when you create any article. See Verifiability and Biographies of living persons for more information. —Centrx→talk &bull; 04:18, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Tuomo Vuolteenaho
A tag has been placed on Tuomo Vuolteenaho, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add  on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. -- Awadewit | talk  03:55, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Short and distort
I'd appreciate your guidance concerning this article, since you have knowledge of finance. In your opinion is this a neologism? I have only rarely encountered this term of usage and I am dubious about devoting an entire encyclopedia entry to it.--Samiharris 17:10, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I still have my doubts but I think the article is better now.--Samiharris 14:41, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Takashi Hikino
Takashi Hikino, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Takashi Hikino satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Takashi Hikino and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Takashi Hikino during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. fuzzy510 00:19, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

A Demon Of Our Own Design
A template has been added to the article A Demon Of Our Own Design, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with db-author. Please take the time to expand the article to establish that the book is notable enough. Pascal.Tesson 19:11, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * This book has received a great deal of attention in the media, so it would be a mistake to delete it. However, Pascal.Tesson is right that the book must have sourcing that it currently lacks. I've removed the proposed delete template.--Mantanmoreland 19:14, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Insider trading
Hi, If you are going to add back in the new langugage on insider trading, would you also mind cleaning it up so it makes sense? As it stands, "If the information being conveyed is proprietary information and the corporate insider has contracted to not expose it, he has no more right to communicate it than he would to tell others about the company's confidential new product designs, formulas, or bank account passwords, but not all of what would be considered "inside information" is proprietary in any sense that doesn't just beg the question here" is a run-on sentence and pretty much incomprehensible. Also, how is "nevertheless" indicative of a point of view? The original change wasn't explained. That said, depending on what it's supposed to mean, I probably have no problem with it. Epstein&#39;s Mother 23:38, 4 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Epstein's Mother (talk • contribs) 11:58, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

no its not true. i never hear the times accused of conservative bias —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.116.246.77 (talk) 20:52, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

The fact that you haven't "heard" something doesn't mean it hasn't happened. Have you tried to find such critics? If you stop up your ears to something, you'll always be able to say you haven't "heard" it. But saying that nobody does it is a different matter. --Christofurio (talk) 23:44, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Headings
Please ensure you don't add any more section headings with unnecessary capitals. Also please fix any you spot (they're not that hard to find). Richard001 (talk) 23:53, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

This is me, leaving a record for the world of my IP address because I didn't sign it.

Talk:Gary Weiss
You wrote: How about putting this material in the article on tort reform instead?

You may be interested in spending some time with the tort reform article, which is a holy mess and could stand a rewrite. I'd fix it, but people interpret the COI rules in such a way that it's not worth the effort for me to be involved. THF (talk) 13:17, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Your account block
Hi there. Your account was inadvertently blocked as a sock of another editor today. I have removed the block now, having reviewed the situation in detail. I understand that there has been some canvasing in the areas in which you've been editing and I recommend in future that you steer clear of the topic area lest you be accused of editing on behalf of someone else - A l is o n  ❤ 05:09, 6 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Codswallop.  I am nobody's sock,   nobody is my sock, and although I suppose your caution is kind-hearted enough,  I will continue to make my contributions where I think they are needed. --Christofurio (talk) 14:01, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Christofurio! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 8 of the articles that you created  are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the list:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 07:42, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Avner Greif -
 * 2) Franco Amatori -
 * 3) John R. Emshwiller -
 * 4) Rebecca Smith (journalist) -
 * 5) Tracy R. Lewis -
 * 6) James A. Brander -
 * 7) Muhammad Akram Khan -
 * 8) Mohammad Hashim Kamali -

Oldrich Vasicek
Hi Christofurio, regarding your remark on Oldrich Vasicek page: according to recent interview for Czech Týden magazine, Oldrich Vasicek "loves playing the flute and windsurfing", however he had go give up winsurfing due to problems with tendons in his wrists. I did not correct the article so far, by simply changing "is avid" to "was avid" the sentece gets a bit clumsy. Unfortunately no elegant sentence comes to my mind. Regards from Prague JanSuchy (talk) 22:07, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

An editor is reverting edits supported by sources in Portal:Current events/2011 April 6 can you or someone protect this news item?
An editor is reverting edits supported by sources in Portal:Current events/2011 April 6 can you or someone protect this news item? Here is a revert: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal:Current_events/2011_April_6&diff=423058294&oldid=422958776


 * The Senate defeated a measure that would have banned the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gas emissions. The regulations began being applied early this year effects air polluters such as power plants and oil refineries, as a climate change mitigation attempt. (Reuters) (New York Times) is the current news item. 99.56.121.215 (talk) 02:12, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Anon editor
Thanks for your note. I've raised the issue at BLP/N, to get more eyes on it. ScottyBerg (talk) 14:00, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

IP user blocked 72 hrs., which should help. ScottyBerg (talk) 15:03, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

You've got mail! ScottyBerg (talk) 13:18, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

No Reference Article
==Proposed deletion of Peter Klein article

The article Peter Klein has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one reliable source that directly supports material in the article. &#32; The nominator also raised the following concern:
 * no references and appears to lack notability

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one.

My RfC
I never have closed this RfC I posted on myself in June 2007, in part because several of the issues involved have continued over several years. Before I consider possibly closing it (I feel I'm the one who should close it since it was a self-RfC), I was wondering if you would like to reconsider your endorsement of SlimVirgin's summary. If so, please strike through your endorsement. If you still stand by it, please consider adding an additional statement at the bottom the front page of the RfC. Thank you. Cla68 (talk) 01:52, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Mark Mitchell (reporter)


A tag has been placed on Mark Mitchell (reporter) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. FunkyCanute (talk) 17:32, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

World Factoring Yearbook
I'm leaving this message as you're listed as a current participant of WikiProject Business. I was informed yesterday that the current World Factoring Yearbook (circa £150) is now free for download as an ebook. It's a matter of filling out this form. I'm not sure if you'll find this useful as a reliable source, but I thought I should let you know that it's freely available online. I apologise in advance if this doesn't interest you! All the best, The Cavalry (Message me) 14:46, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

I apologize
I called you an a**hole because I was having a bad day and I hoped it would get better y having my question answered. I hope you can forgive me. I would like to ask you another question regarding the Rockefeller Republicans: Why were they supported by Wall Street? The Rockefeller Republicans were in favor of New Deal regulation. Also, the Wikipedia article stated that they were "against the redistribution of wealth", yet supported welfare. Isn't welfare inevitably a form of redistribution of wealth? Did they believe there was such a thing as a "fair" distribution of wealth? Did they not believe that the government and those who make money have an obligation to help society, particularly the poor?--Johnny 42 (talk) 16:59, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

It has been a long time, but I have just noticed these questions. For the heck of it, I'll try to respond. The Rockefeller Republicans received a lot of support from Wall Street because the leading figures of it, going back long before Rockefeller, going back to Wendell Wilkie circa 1940, are Wall Street creatures themselves. Nelson Rockefeller of course came from the family that created and gained its money from Standard Oil. The Rockefeller Republicans are generally capitalists who believe that one has to keep revolution away by co-opting the most popular ideas of revolutionaries and taming them so capitalism is left unharmed. There were people who saw things much the same way within FDR's brains trust helping CREATE the New Deal. This point is at the heart of your question re the redistribution of wealth, too. One point has long been that there ought to be a safety net to keep people from desperate circumstances, because people who have nothing to lose become revolutionaries. From this point of view (and it is worth noting that even Maggie Thatcher did nothing to try to dismantle certain social democracy features of Britain) one can see I think how the Colin Powell's of the US are okay with some sort of safety net, although phrases like "the redistribution of wealth" suggests something systematic and a priori -- they aren't willing to go there. That is my view of it. I don't put them up on pedestals, but they were as a group neither irrational nor anti-capitalist. --Christofurio (talk) 02:19, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Olympic schedule
Its posted here Trackinfo (talk) 19:40, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Herbalife, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Einhorn (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) 14:37, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Lawrin Armstrong


The article Lawrin Armstrong has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Orphan since 2009, appears to fail WP:NPROF

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Mdann 52   talk to me!  18:50, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Lawrin Armstrong


A tag has been placed on Lawrin Armstrong, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate,. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. -- Mdann 52   talk to me!  18:53, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Looking for collaborators
Hi Christofurio, I’m currently working on the page for David M. Cote and noticed that you're a member of WikiProject Business. I'm fairly new to Wikipeida (at least on the editing side) and I’m reaching out to experienced editors to collaborate with on future projects, so that I might more quickly learn the ins and outs of what makes a good article (in practice, rather than theory), as well as more about the Wikipedia community in general. I’d appreciate any feedback or suggestions you might have for me on my Wikipedian adventure. Thanks! --FacultiesIntact (talk) 00:04, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

LME warehouse list
Hi Christofurio - I saw that you edited the [London Metal Exchange] page last year and wanted to make you aware that court case referred to was later overturned in the English Court of Appeal. - Abraham.orchard (talk) 16:20, 27 February 2015 (UTC) - Disclosure. I work for the LME.

Hi Christofurio - Thanks for your message should have included link to the appeal decision at http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2014/1271.html before. Regards Abraham.orchard (talk) 14:49, 2 March 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) 22:15, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Joe Nocera for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joe Nocera 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/Joe Nocera until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.  DGG ( talk ) 03:01, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

July 2023
Hello, I'm Veverve. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Talk:Cthulhu that didn't seem very civil, so it may have been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. I should not have to give you a warning; you should know better than to attack someone like this and for no reason. Veverve (talk) 18:08, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

"Potential competition" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Potential_competition&redirect=no Potential competition] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 20:53, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

I responded on the Current Events Portal talk page.
Those are not highly visible pages, I know from years of experience working with them as to their futility. Sumstream (talk) 14:41, 9 April 2024 (UTC)