User talk:Edward321/Archive 4

Ror wiki
Dear Edward,
 * Thanks a lot for the intervention that finally led to an end of the edit warring. But I have a small request here. While you deleted all the names that don't have a separate wiki page dedicated to them, some of them were notable. There were those who had won gallantry awards and led the national team etc. So, if you have no problem with this, I'll add a few of the names back since I know the subject a little more closely. Thank you Rorkadian (talk) 08:48, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Trimmings in Hanna-Barbera "Tom and Jerry" shorts articles
Hi Edward321, is there any reason for trimming (i.e. deleting) whole trivia/notes sections in most of the Hanna-Barbera "Tom and Jerry" shorts articles? It's quite incomprehensible for me why was it necessary to take them out all. To my mind this information hasn't bloated the article so much and it has unique informative character, that enhances the content of an entry. Thank you for clarifying this a bit and sorry for my English :-). --Downlife (talk) 00:12, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Survey on quality control policies
As part of a project funded by the European Commission (QLectives), we are collecting and analysing data to study quality control mechanisms and inclusion/deletion policies in Wikipedia. According to our records, you participated in a large number of AfD. We are currently soliciting editors with a long record of participation in AfD discussions to send us their feedback via a very informal survey.

The survey takes less than 5 minutes and is available at this URL. Should you have any questions about this project, feel free to get in touch.

Thanks for your help! --DarTar (talk) 10:39, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Siegel Clyne
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Siegel Clyne. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Siegel Clyne (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:06, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: Massimo article
Dear Edward, the comment you left today on my talk page was very much appreciated - I am really trying… I feel a little bit like the other editor and I are playing by a different set of rules, which makes it harder. I noticed that you have made many edits on Italian history, including genealogical history (e.g. your edits on the Barbaro family of Venice, the Cavanna family, and on Palazzo Serra di Casssano, amongst others). Given the other editor and I have now had at least five long exchanges and there is a surfeit of detailed information on the talk page, I think your contribution would be very valuable. I am asking other editors with an interest in heraldry or Italian history to do the same, as admin Nick D asked me to do. If experienced editors such as yourself could post as little as a one line message on the 'Massimo' talk page it would be very additive at this stage and could help us in getting to a consensus. If you feel it is not the right time yet, then of course I respect your view. In any case I welcome any advice you can give on my talk page. Once again many thanks. Kind regards, Historybuff1930 (talk) 23:20, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Dear Edward - I hope all is well. Many thanks for your continued contributions to the 'Massimo' article. I saw your exchanges with Fabritius over the validity of the sources (i.e. the Gotha vs. the Italian sources he lists), which was excellent research, particularly the reference to the English language document in the Italian Senate website, which I cannot understand how he can dispute. Fabritius is planning to somehow find a way to link to his sources, but as I explained in this post today, the key issue remains which sources are the right ones, not just that he show the ones he refers to. The crux of the argument is about the ongoing validity of the sources he cites/may now show in the first place, compared to the ones I have used and already shown. I would be very grateful if you could continue to contribute to this debate, particularly after your extremely well-researched posts on the Gotha, the Italian sources cited, and the Italian constitution (see this post). Your ongoing contribution is extremely valuable. Many thanks again and kind regards, Historybuff1930 (talk) 07:14, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Dear Edward - I hope all is well. Logging in today, I noticed that you reverted the Massimo article back to the original edit after Fabritus reverted it to his version, despite the consensus to the contrary on the talk page. As you know, the article was originally protected for edit warring, and Fabritius and I were asked by admin Nick D to try and reach a consensus on the talk page with the help of other editors. Given a) the amount of properly-referenced research that you and I have put into the page, as well as the fact that  b) between us, there is now a consensus on the issue of which sources are the correct ones, I was very disappointed to see that Fabritius simply reverted the article to his version - indeed a mere 36 minutes after his last post.

I personally find it deeply unfair and totally against the spirit (and rules) of Wiki that someone with a clear COI, with poorly-referenced arguments, and with a consensus against them, is able to publish what is essentially a set of long vanity paragraphs about themselves (see this edit), particularly when they (Fabritius or Fabrizio Massimo-Brancaccio) are included extremely respectfully in the alternative version. I cannot believe that persistence and 'bullying' tactics can win out over consensus and fact-based research on Wikipedia.

I have just posted a polite request to Fabritius not to revert the article again, pointing out that he should seek a similar consensus for his arguments before doing so (see my last post).

I am going to be away for a week or so, and may be able to get access to the net, but it may be intermittent at best as I am travelling. Given this, I would very much appreciate it if you could help to keep the page in its present state in the event Fabritius tries to change it unilaterally again (despite my request that he get a consensus first).

Many thanks in advance for your help and kind regards, Historybuff1930 (talk) 10:48, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Fictional history of Spider-Man
This article is nominated for deletion here. Please contribute on discussing the consensus there. Spidey 104 contribs 16:02, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Fabritius
is requesting an unblock (though his block is due to expire soon anyway). You'd be better able to sum up the ongoing issue than I would; feel free to comment on his talk page under the unblock notice if you have time. Thanks, OhNo itsJamie Talk 19:35, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Quinton Hoover
Hello,

I am letting you know that Quinton Hoover has been nominated for deletion again, as part of a series of AFDs based on the deletion nomination of List of Magic: The Gathering artists, as you participated in the previous AFD for Quinton Hoover. 24.148.0.83 (talk) 07:03, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Three Degrees of Separation
Just to let you know, I've nominated this article for deletion, just as you suggested, but in a separate AfD. --  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 01:22, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of User:Emshey
Hi. I removed the speedy deletion tag you placed on User:Emshey because the criterion identified, A7, is for the article namespace only. It looks like the page might be considered under G11, if you want to revisit it. Cheers. Bsherr (talk) 03:48, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

User:José Flávio Nogueira Guimarães
See the previous comment by Bsherr. Criterion for speedy deletion WP:CSD does not apply to user pages, so I removed the speedy deletion tag. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:42, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

WWII talk
By doing that you removed another user's post, which is highly inappropriate. Communicat has a right to express his POV on the talk page. I restored the text you removed, although I cannot say I fully share his POV. Please, also keep in mind that the draft we discuss is my post, not the text in the article's namespace. Although, as a rule, editing of other's posts is not allowed, I invited all users to modify this post, provided that, but only provided that it is being done friendly, and politely. Regards, --Paul Siebert (talk) 00:07, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I would like to second Paul's comment. Removing other people's comments, absent some serious personal attack or abuse (or an accident in editing), is grounds for severe warnings or blocks on accounts.  Please don't do it again.  It in no way helps the situation there to do that.
 * Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 01:53, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

WP:NOTIFY
Just a quick reminder that you really should notify the author when you nominate an article for speedy deletion, like The Possum Drop. Also, I think that that one is not over the line spammy, but feel free to request a second opinion or whatsoever you feel is best. Regards, - 2/0 (cont.) 16:45, 16 September 2010 (UTC)


 * There might be a bot that notifies eventually, I am not sure. You can also use Twinkle or some other script to semi-automate the process. - 2/0 (cont.) 00:23, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

William James Wanless

 * William James Wanless is now nominated for DYK. You can review the nomination here-- . Shlok  talk. 17:55, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

arbitration request
You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Arbitration/Requests and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
 * Arbitration/Requests;
 * Arbitration guide.

Thanks, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Communicat (talk • contribs) 12:01, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

ANI notification
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
 * Please see: Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents Nick-D (talk) 10:08, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Sylvia Noble
Just a quick note, I noticed that you just put 'merge into List of Doctor Who supporting characters' in the Sylvia Noble AfD. Because of WP:JUSTAVOTE your opinion may not be counted, so you might want to correct that. Harry Blue5 (talk) 11:03, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much
Thank you, for your positive comments about my work, in the deletion discussion for the article Werner Erhard vs. Columbia Broadcasting System at the AFD page Articles for deletion/Werner Erhard vs. Columbia Broadcasting System. Your comments are most appreciated. Thanks again, -- Cirt (talk) 21:31, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

arbitration
You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Arbitration/Requests and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
 * Arbitration/Requests;
 * Arbitration guide.

Thanks, Communicat (talk) 22:26, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

World War II opened
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, AGK   13:25, 30 November 2010 (UTC)


 * In looking at Communicat's most recent charge, he mentions changes he made around 5 August. So I checked the discussion thread on the Talk page. He stated that no one had replied to his posting, but he was incorrect, as two users did. One appears to be yet another instance of sock-puppetry by Communicat. This might be appropriate in your evidence. --Habap (talk) 15:11, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

inre Articles for deletion/Daran Norris
In learning that the fellow had a much more significant career than the nominator alluded to at the AFD, I've done some major re-structuring and minor sourcing of the Daran Norris article. What creates a difficulty is that he is searchable under six different spellings of his own name as well as under seven different Pseudonyms. Yikes. Care to help out? Thanks,  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 20:28, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II
This Arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedies have been passed:


 * is prohibited from editing or commenting on articles about World War II or the Aftermath of World War II. This prohibition is of indefinite duration, but may be appealed to the Committee by Communicat after six months;
 * Communicat is placed under a behavioral editing restriction for a period of one year.

For the Arbitration Committee, AGK  [&bull; ] 16:02, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Sharan Kapoor and IBC Motion Pictures
I have been finding edits by IPs that add these as producers to certain films. I came across this deletion log that you were involved in: Articles_for_deletion/Sharan_Kapoor. If there is no person named Sharan Kapoor, is there a company named IBC Motion Pictures? The log mentioned running "Salt" but did not say if it was done. Is this some way of cleaning WP of this mess? It still exists in some articles today, and as I said is still being added as of today, example here: Special:Contributions/83.41.137.232. What can be done? BollyJeff ||  talk  18:25, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I see that you are now reverting some SK entries in articles, but I would certainly appreciate an answer to my questions. BollyJeff  ||  talk  20:22, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I didn't see anything there about IBC Motion pictures, but if its a hoax too, then I will delete it whenever I see it. I was just wondering if there is way to easily find suspect edits other than the basic search tool. He has also made recent mods to UTV motion pictures and Balaji Telefilms. I supose those are legitimate companies, but can you trust anything this person does? BollyJeff  ||  talk  01:33, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

User:José Flávio Nogueira Guimarães
I declined speedy deletion of this page because it didn't appear that the user was promoting any business he may be engaged in. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:59, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Restoring the Lost Constitution
Another Randy Barnett-related article, Restoring the Lost Constitution, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Rillian (talk) 16:10, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Removal of ad note
Hi Edward, I've been helping out on Dads_for_Life_movement_Singapore and saw you worked on it previously. I've rewritten quite a bit to address the ad tag. Let me know if you think otherwise? Cheers! Keiomae (talk) 20:47, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Kiichiro Higuchi
Hello, Edward321 ! 20,000 Jewish refugees NEVER rushed to the frontier between Soviet Union and Manturia. Please read this book :早坂隆『指揮官の決断　満州とアッツの将軍　樋口季一郎』文春新書、2010年　ISBN 978-4-16-660758-7. The number of 20,000 is the false one fabricated by an editor when the memoir of General Kiichiro Higuchi was published in 1971. Exist no witness, no documents all over the world. All the Japanes scholars and journalists don’t believe it. The indication by Asahi Shinbun is NOT true AT ALL.Tizizano (talk) 22:15, 16 February 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tizizano (talk • contribs)

Second, Colonel Norihiro Yasue is NOT a subordinate.Tizizano (talk) 23:07, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

“The Stenographic Records of Japanese Imperial Congress : The era Showa No.75”（Tokyo University Press ; ISBN 413096075X）indicates us that is“over 80, under 100” the total number of the Jewish refugees have passed the frontier between Soviet-Union and Manturia from 1938 till 1939. Everbody who can read Japanese would be able to see it to verify the historical reality. It is always available through Amazon, for example. The number of 20,000 is the fabricated one in the military fiction intitled : “Ryuhyo no umi （Sea of drift ices）”which is also avaibable : ISBN 476982033X.Tizizano (talk) 00:27, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

P.-S. Even Mr. Yoshito Takigawa, attaché of Public Information of Israeli Embassy in Tokyo, denied the number of 20,000 in the study intitled “Keywords to Understanding Jewish matters”（ISBN 4106005409）.

Please telephone Mr. Yoshito Takigawa to verify if the number of 20,000 is true．I show you the website of Embassy of Israel, Tokyo and its telephone number

Tel : (+81)3-3264-0911

English or Japanese is available.

Cf. http://tokyo.mfa.gov.il/mfm/web/main/missionhome.asp?LanguageID=0&Question2=&MissionID=43&MissionID=

Mr. Takashi Hayasaka says as following :「改めて記すが、「二万人」という数字に具体的な論拠はない. （…）芙蓉書房出版に問い合わせてみたが、案の定、当時の担当者はすでになくなっているということだった. 現在、この件に関してわかる者はいないという. 当時の直接の関係者が存在しない以上、大胆な予測は邪推でしかない. 一つの紛れもない事実としては、樋口の手書きの原稿には「二万人」という数字は存在しないということである. 樋口の脳裏には「二万人」という数字はなく、数字に固執している様子も感じられない」(p.140)Tizizano (talk) 01:10, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Jewish settlement in Imperial Japan
Third, Levine’ book is NOT reliable. See below, please. Cf.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:RSN#Is_Hillel_Levine.27s_biography_of_Chiune_SugiharaTizizano (talk) 23:36, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

ATTENTION
Hello, EDward321!

DON'T YOU REALLY READ ABOVE ? IT'S THREE TIMES THAT I MADE YOU ATTENTION !!!Tizizano (talk) 00:47, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Mentioned you
Hi Edward321,

I mentioned you in Articles for deletion/List of teen films (2nd nomination). No action required... I just felt like I should let you know.

Cheers, Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 11:56, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Hot companion
Hi, as you were user who participated in the previous discussion concerning Hot companion as an article for deletion, I thought it appropriate to inform you that it is being considered again. If you have any input for the current discussion, it will help in establishing a consensus (or lack thereof)Nstock (talk) 19:58, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Pierre Laval
You just reverted 19 intermediate revisions by 10 users to the Revision as of 09:53, 25 February 2011. Wouldn't it be better to discuss on the talk page ? Furthermore some intermediary edits may be valuable. --Anneyh (talk) 21:59, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Creativity (religion) related edits
Edward321, thank you for your contributions to several articles related to Creativity. Please see the talk pages of the articles Ben Klassen and Creativity (religion) for discussions pertaining to their continued development. Thank you! --Scochran4 (talk) 04:52, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

COI tag: Kathy Webb
Hi there. I saw that you added a COI tag to Kathy Webb following some edits made by a likely-conflicted editor this morning. I've discussed the offending edits on the article's talk page and concluded that they're not cause for concern. I've therefore proposed that the COI tag should be removed. Please feel free to join the discussion. --Lincolnite (talk) 15:50, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Am I right in concluding, based on your silence, that you have no objection? --Lincolnite (talk) 23:48, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Politicians arrested and charges with corruption
You are invited for discussion at Categories for discussion/Log/2011 June 1 and also at Category talk:Politicians arrested and charges with corruption-- . Shlok  talk. 18:55, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement request
FYI: Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement Nick-D (talk) 23:51, 3 June 2011 (UTC)


 * And again: Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement Nick-D (talk) 12:02, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

History of South Africa
Regarding this query - thanks for the notification. I haven't read the sources myself, but there's nothing controversial about what's been said, and the edit was visible on the page for a long time without any other editors querying it. I'll leave his edit as is for now, but add a note on the talk page asking for someone who has access to check out the references, or supply others. Greenman (talk) 19:06, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Sererism
Your name was mentioned there by User:Tamsier in connection with his/her suspicions about your motivations. I think that he/she is assuming bad faith without evidence, but I just thought I should let you know. Quasi human  &#124;  Talk  11:30, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

clarification
Good day,

Arequest for clarification has been filed with Arbcom relative to a case in which you were involved or might be affected by. Communikat (talk) 17:19, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks and a tipoff
Hi Edward, saw your revert of edits by 100percentrecord at Animal treatment in rodeo. Thank you. You may want to continue to watch this editor's contribs list and in particular to watchlist Calgary Stampede, where they are on the verge of edit-warring with a good, solid editor (Resolute) who has put a lot of time and effort into that article. I would value if you'd care to keep an eye on some of the other rodeo articles, such as calf roping, as well -- this individual seems to be attempting some POV pushing all over. The animal rights issues surrounding rodeo events are always topics of hot controversy, as you can well imagine, and there is a need for multiple level heads to be around. Extra eyeballs are appreciated, thanks. Montanabw (talk) 17:35, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

TT-talkback
╟─ Treasury Tag ► Regional Counting Officer ─╢ 07:03, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Who's That Girl
Hello Edward, can you please explain this reversion? Teh edits were made by a biased editor, and there will be a discussion in the talk page. Please revert it back to the original version, with the neutrality tag. — Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 05:26, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Vat 69
Please do not make mass reverts of popular culture material, as you did with Vat 69. Popular culture items do not require sourcing of the kind required for controversial material. Please read WP:IPC. I was in the process of editing this popular culture section to organize it properly. Wahrmund (talk) 20:00, 16 July 2011 (UTC)


 * A claim that the items are only "passing references" is feckless, since any reference whatsoever could be so construed. Consistent application of this standard would mean that every item in the list ought to have been deleted, which you did not do. Furthermore, the phrase "indiscriminate list" is an absurdity since discrimination is a function of judgement, which is only had by human beings and never by lists. Wahrmund (talk) 00:53, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

SA - BEE
Good day,

Re your earlier problem with browser not opening Wits university PDF concerning BEE: have you been able to resolve your browser problem so as to familiarise yourself with what BEE is about, and possibly avoid further reversions etc. You might recall having reverted an edit by me concerning BEE, on grounds that cited source file was "corrupted". Several others have now checked and verified; nothing seems to be wrong with file and no-one else has had any problem opening it. I'm curious. Kindly respond on my talk page when you have a moment. Thanks for your interest. Communikat (talk) 12:41, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Covington
Hi, the subject is strongly claiming the allegation of mental illness is defamatory and there are ongoing complaints about it at wp:otrs - I support keeping it out - it seems the subject is estranged from his brother and that is the only source of the information. I would like to see some reliable independent reports of the claims before I would feel ok to add it. Leaving out what is a complained about single claim of mental illness without additional sourcing is at this time the better option in the BLP at this time. Regards. Off2riorob (talk) 15:56, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you - we can look back at it if there are any changes/new reports are presented, regards. Off2riorob (talk) 16:25, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Fatimiya Sufi Order from list of Sufi Orders
Edward321- though the article may have been deleted, please refer to the comments made by other editors in the article for deletion discussion thread: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Fatimiya_Sufi_Order "Nobody is questioning that it is a recognized order, or that it exists. Wikipedia has rules for notability that every article must meet, and this one currently does not. That's not to say that the order isn't valid, but for now at least, it doesn't meet the established guidelines for an article on Wikipedia. That's not to say it never will, there are many articles that were initially deleted as not meeting Wikipedia's guidelines for notability, but later did end up being articles that met these guidelines. For now, however, the article does not. - SudoGhost 02:06, 28 July 2011 (UTC)" "On another note, I think adding the organization to the List of Sufi Orders was great!"Cind.amuse (Cindy) 10:56, 31 July 2011 (UTC) (selection from comment on page). Based on this, this needs to stay on the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Sufi_orders. Please do not delete this again.Samuel.Brc (talk) 00:25, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Consequent deletion of my contributions
Hi! You deleted all of my contributions here: Alsószentmihály inscription; Crimean Karaites; Jews in the Middle Ages; Kabar; Karaite Judaism; Khazars; List of Karaite Jews; Szarvas inscription. You reverted all of my contributions without any acceptable reason. You reverted many smaller corrections of mine, which cannot be disputed, since these are obvious. Please, if you are interested in the orthography of the Karaites, the Avars, Onogurs, Khazars of Hungarians, let me know, I give you background information. All the references I cited are publications of officially acknowledged scholars. Please, do not qualify my contributions as "fringe theory" without knowing the topic. Thank you. --Rovasscript (talk) 04:39, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited List of companies of Pakistan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Total (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) 10:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Bahrani people (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to North Lebanon, Eastern Province, Eastern province, Henry Rawlinson and Aramean

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:35, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Notice of discussion at the No original research/Noticeboard
Greetings. This message is delivered to you in order to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:No_original_research/Noticeboard Interpretation_and_Reliability_of_text... regarding an issue where you are involved. Thank you. --Oakshade (talk) 01:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

ANI report
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:15, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Notability of Bettina Baumer
Yogesh Khandke (talk) 23:18, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Reply
I did not question the legitimacy of your edit (I did not even revert it) I merely gave a warning to keep you from overstepping 3RR. If you had not appeared to be about to do so, I would not have left such a message. As for the "don't template the regulars" essay, I'm aware of it but I don't necessarily check to see if an editor is a "regular" every time, Wikipedia is vast and my energy is limited. I leave templates as a matter of procedure, as AIV will often make note of whether or not the user has been given the appropriate warnings. Peter Deer (talk) 17:39, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Ottoman Throne and Seyh Süleman
There is no Princes with the descendant of Yusuf Izzeddin

and about Seyh Suleyman...

Look this ...ok?

http://web.archive.org/web/20020616202944/http://www.4dw.net/royalark/Turkey/turkey2.htm

Dilek2 (talk) 01:40, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Oghuz Turks
Please don't accuse me of a personal attack because I said your deletion was "unjust". Generally, any deletion of material that includes citations--and this one does for three out of four claims--is unjust. It's not personal--it was the shortest description of the observation that I was trying to make. If we all took offense at such edits and accompanying comments, this project would have been dead in a week. My point was that the post (made by someone else) contained three references to outside sources, although two of them were not very specific, as they only identified the document, but not the specific location. But this is cause for request for a precise citation, not for deletion. Futhermore, your deletion was rather extensive--it wasn't just one or two lines, but an entire section. That's excessive, especially for material that most readers would find quite useful. It was not original research, although the full comparative listing might have been original, so this could not have been a reason for deletion either. On the other hand, restoration of a full deletion generally requires a reason. I did not see this as vandalism, which is the first thought that crosses my mind when an entire section is deleted. I compared all other edits in the last couple of weeks and decided that the edit was made in good faith. Still, having reviewed the entire text, I concluded that the deletion was a mistake--one based on an incorrect interpretation of the text. As such, the deletion was not justified, especially with a cryptic explanation of a previous edit simply being "better". It wasn't--the deleted edit added useful information and included citations, however feeble they might have been. Therefore, the deletion was unjustified or, using a shorter word, unjust. This is in no way a personal attack and, frankly, I do not understand how you could have interpreted it as such. Such reactions are unwise. Alex.deWitte (talk) 04:59, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Fehime Sultan and Nemzade Hatice Hanimsultan
Fehime Sultan had no child. Go and read her Life, she was not the Mother of my Grandmother Nemzade Hatice. Also my Grandmother was not a descendant of Seyh Bedreddin. She was a sunni muslim and not a Bektashi or Alevi. Why you and other made false statemant's ?

Dilek2 (talk) 15:52, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

children of Mihrimah Sultana
Her Children is not unsourced...My Godness...What is your PROBLEM?

In many Turkish and German Article's her Children, Grandchildren and Greatgets are listed...

Who are you? and what you want?

Dilek2 (talk) 17:02, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

(Something your grandmother told you does meet Wikipedia requirements
Does or does not? Dougweller (talk) 06:26, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Sources of Ottoman Title
http://web.archive.org/web/20020418161219/http://www.4dw.net/royalark/Turkey/turkey.htm

Dilek2 (talk) 23:30, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * The site has questionable reliability and lacks a current article on Turkey. Apparently, even the site editors found the earlier version unreliable. This certainly fails Wiki standards for sources. Alex.deWitte (talk) 13:19, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Anyhow....a Sultanzade was and is always a direct son of an Ottoman Princess... so what you said is Zero. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.46.105.3 (talk) 13:06, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

History of Afghanistan
Hello. Are you familiar with the history of Afghanistan? If so can you explain why my version appeared bad to you? In the "Islamic conquest" sub-section it states at the end of Nancy Dupree's quote "As Saffari's are known one of the most powerful warriors and they are the one who are blessed by the title of Pathans (the Pashtun tribes) by the arab muslims. As some of the arabs and afghan still believe that in India (specially from the part of U.P) the warlords from Saffari Dynasty are still alive", can you please show me a link where she wrote this because I believe she didn't write this.--Nasir Ghobar (talk) 11:11, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

WP:0RR at Debate over the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
As you were a recent participant in an edit war at the above-named article I am taking the opportunity to warn you formally that the article is now under a no-reverts rule. This means that from now on anyone making a revert will be blocked instantly without further warning, except in cases of really obvious vandalism. Instead of reverting, you should consider trying for compromise either by drafting a good-faith compromise in the article, or discussing towards one in talk. Edit-warring deters other editors and poisons the atmosphere that we need to edit constructively. Please do not do it.--John (talk) 15:27, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Sources of Nemzade
Where are the sources that my Grandmother was a descendant of Seyh Bedreddin? Where are any other sources in this Article about the Lif of my Grandmother?

so why your always deletet it the Truth Story of her? Edward? Tell me the Sources that she was a descendant of the Seljuks and Seyh Bedreddin...Please. I can't see any Sources that she was a descendant od Seyh Bedreddin and the Seljuks. Also her Birthyear... I think it will be better do delete this Article of her. Thank you.

Dilek2 (talk) 12:26, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Dilek 2, your grandmother telling you something still does not meet Wikipedia guidelines on reliable sources. Many editors have been telling you for two years that you should read Identifying reliable sources. I strongly suggest you do so. 13:07, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

I ask you...where are the Sources that she was a descendant of Seyh Bedreddin and also from the Seljuk? It's so funny...No any Sources but you claimed she was a Princess of the Seljuk Dynasty...ok than Thank you my Dear...Maybe I can wrote a Book about her Story...and maybe it is very good Publicity to tell her: Nemzade Hatice a Seljuk Princess of the Line from Seyh Bedreddin...LOL

Dilek2 (talk) 15:56, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

It's so funny...My old Grandmom who died in September 2000 in Babaeski (any can see her Grave), is claimed here in Wikipedia that she was a Descendant of Seyh Bedreddin and also of the Seljuks Tribe. LOL, I ask Edward the Editor about his Sources...I can't see in this Article any Sources of this Statemnt. He doesn't give me any answer...Isn't it strange?

Dilek2 (talk) 11:28, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Yakub Alemsah
Yakub Alemsah is not sourced as a prince...he isnt a prince... I look this so called sources there in turkish and Englisch and they is abosutly not of talking this person. Please look too...You will not see his Name of any so called Sources... He is not a Member of the Ottoman Dynasty.

Dilek2 (talk) 16:03, 3 July 2012 (UTC)