User talk:Everyone Dies In the End/Archive 1

Why
is my link not approved?

best regards, Soren Christensen —Preceding unsigned comment added by CoolEvent (talk • contribs) 10:57, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Your request for rollback
After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some information on how to use rollback, you can view this page. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Happy editing!  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 17:40, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback can be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback may be removed at any time.

Fair use rationale for File:IMac aluminium(new).png
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:IMac aluminium(new).png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.  F ASTILYsock  (T ALK ) 22:28, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Interdependent Media
Now in your userspace at User:Everyone Dies In the End/Interdependent Media. NawlinWiki (talk) 04:35, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Chad Ochocinco
I put it more detailed there, but basically you should have made your request at Redirects for discussion since you want to change a redirect.  TJ   Spyke   19:19, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

RE: User talk:Muboshgu
Regarding that template you left on Muboshgu's talk page, in his defense, i'd like to mention that he didn't use the "V" word until after both edit sumaries were used to explain the issue and both he and I tried to explain on the users talk page. I'm not sure if I'd have exactly called it vandalism, however it's a thin line once it's been explained to the user and the user persists in re-adding inappropriate content.--Cube lurker (talk) 21:24, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Reply on your talk.--Everyone Dies In the End (talk) 21:34, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but that's just plain not true. at 14:32 this was posted to his talk page  then at 14:50 I expanded with this  it wasn't till 14:55 that the first warning was used.--Cube lurker (talk) 21:40, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

I've responded on my page. --Muboshgu (talk) 22:27, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Yogesh Kirar
I declined your speedy deletion request on this article as it clearly makes claims of notability, albeit without proof. Lady of  Shalott  15:43, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Replied on your talk page.--Everyone Dies In the End (talk) 16:12, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Kongshengxin
Hey!,you removed my poem!I am Johnny in English name,nice to meet u! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bnncff (talk • contribs) 11:10, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Soty TheConstant.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Soty TheConstant.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.


 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.


 * If you received this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.


 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:37, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

I have found very interesting information
Okay we know as a fact that the WHL/CHL needs to have your birth certificate in hand before you get to play a single game. I don't think anyone will argue this. So going on the WHL website and looking at Marleau's page it says his birthplace is Aneroid. The CANNOT be wrong as they HAVE a copy of his birth certificate. link here. I don't think anyone can doubt it now. But we will see.--Everyone Dies In the End (talk) 04:23, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I see you've recognized your mistake. No big deal. In future you might want to consider the guideline WP:REDACT--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 07:27, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * No one replied so WP:REDACT doesn't really apply. No one quoted me on it or anything and making a big deal out of it is totally uncalled for. I have no clue why someone would bring it up.--Everyone Dies In the End (talk) 07:46, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, no one read it either. Except for you who probably learnt it from the search history since it was gone shortly after my edit to it and and hour and a half before you brought it up.--Everyone Dies In the End (talk) 07:46, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * As I wrote above: No big deal. It's a guideline that's worth keeping in mind--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 08:23, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * You shouldn't be reminding experience editors of policies that they haven't broken. It's uncalled for and inappropriate. I know the policies of wikipedia and I cross things out if someone has read my comment. I take offence when someone accuses me of doing something wrong when I clearly haven't. I have made mistake, but if I catch it before someone has read it I can erase it as most wikipedians would. If not, I do what I did here in a recent afd. --Everyone Dies In the End (talk) 08:42, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Image:PhilKessel
on Commons - what is it good for? --Xgeorg (talk) 11:37, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Unprotections
Just in case you missed it, both Vajra and Rigveda have now been unprotected :). -- Eraserhead1 &lt;talk&gt; 22:19, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Derren Brown
Fair call, and I suppose it stops people unwittingly adding back the original line. I've merged the two claims together and added a line of introduction, for context. Thanks. --McGeddon (talk) 11:22, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi
Thank you. Admin has blocked him already. Ciao. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.18.231.85 (talk) 07:25, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Just as I was starting to sink into depression ...
... what a cheerful signature! :) SlimVirgin  talk  contribs 20:37, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
for the vandalism revert on my userpage! --N419BH (talk) 01:57, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

ITN for Ebola
-- HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   22:22, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Dirty Burn
Hey, I noticed that you deleted Dirty Burn. I'd like to contest it.. but the nomination is already closed. Why did you think it was worth your time and effort to close a useful stub? Fresheneesz (talk) 21:57, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Oversight
As it says on WP:OVERSIGHT, I don't do oversights myself. Please contact another oversighter or email the list. Cool Hand Luke 03:01, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

OK, what is it? Send me an email if you'd prefer. Daniel Case (talk) 04:15, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

It's done. Wikipedia policy would require the oversighting regardless of relevant local law as long as those names had not been made public. Daniel Case (talk) 04:28, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer permission
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   10:32, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Thesevenseas  Set Sail   For The   Seven Seas   329° 58' 45" NET   21:59, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Thesevenseas  Set Sail   For The   Seven Seas   235° 12' 44" NET   15:40, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

 Set Sail   For The   Seven Seas   257° 33' 0" NET   17:10, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

DRV
I've nominated it. See Deletion_review. SlimVirgin talk| contribs 04:41, 10 July 2010 (UTC)


 * The system works. :) SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 22:35, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Cable Cable
A tag has been placed on Cable Cable 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 an organization or company, 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Toddst1 (talk) 16:15, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Cable Cable logo.png
Thank you for uploading File:Cable Cable logo.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:26, 21 August 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Guoguo12 --Talk--   16:26, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Cable Cable
The above company may be important in the area in which it operates, but that is not the same as notable!

For a company to warrant an article on Wikipedia, it needs to meet the general notability criteria and the notability criteria for companies, with information being verifiable at independent reliable sources. --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 16:32, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Kisumu
I saw that you contributed to Kisumu, I was wondering whether we could work together to update the Kisumu page which currently reads like a travel brochure, which is very undeserving for a leading town in East Africa. If possible could you constructively help me make it better, I am hoping to get together a work group of contributers to help out so that it is something close to the Nairobi page. I will be working on this for the next week or two, if you have some spare time I will be glad if you could help me open up Kisumu to the world. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Krator1 (talk • contribs) 22:26, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:MDG logo.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:MDG logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  05:25, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jerry D'Amigo


The article Jerry D'Amigo has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Minor leaguer who has not been in the NHL.

While all 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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Iftelse (talk) 19:35, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Jerry D'Amigo for deletion
The article Jerry D'Amigo is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Jerry D'Amigo 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Iftelse (talk) 19:39, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Jerry D'Amigo
Since I didn't get to reply to you before they closed the review. Basically what I was saying was that the old guidelines in 2007 required that you play in the Olympics or World Championships if you were an amateur to be presumed notable without proof. However, that is the senior world championships not the junior's so wouldn't have applied to Jerry S'Amigo if those were still the same standards. That being said players who don't meet WP:ATHLETE can still get articles via meeting WP:GNG. The players you mentioned all had articles because they had extensive non-routine news reporting done about them which allowed them to meet WP:GNG even though they did not meet WP:ATHLETE. The Athlete guideline is just a guide as to when a player is likely to meet GNG and should probably not be deleted. However, the ultimate criteria for every article is the GNG which overrules ATHLETE in most cases. As in a player can be kept if he meets GNG but not Athlete and a player can be deleted if he meets ATHLETE and not GNG (which is a much more rare case). Hope that helps out. -DJSasso (talk) 12:46, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Deletion tag error
The deletion tag added was a cut and paste error. Previous users removed the spam and neutrality tags prior and it needed to be replaced to bring in verifiable information. No easily sourced information is on the Internet other than political ads. As it stands, it still reads like an advertisement with no substantive data, not even a birth date.

Thank you for your attention to the matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cohen2011 (talk • contribs) 09:31, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Radicular cyst
Thank you for that. I don't completely familiar with the Wiki rules and formats. "Periapical cyst", "Radicular cyst" and "dental cyst" are all the same condition, with "periapical cyst" is the most common used in the medical literature and in everyday clinical talks. However, there were 2 different pages for "dental cyst" and "radicular cyst", with this of "dental cyst" with a lot of mistakes. So I gathered them to one page under "periapical", and redirected the other two. Sorry for the mess. --Fisty234 (talk) 15:51, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Crazy Drake
I added two references and an external link. Is that good enough? -- Puckingham  TALK  03:05, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Template:Los Angeles Kings roster
I will defer to your idea of not listing players who have reverted back to the Kings in the offseason (as technically Manchester and Ontario have no players on their roster following the AHL/ECHL season), but I am curious why you have deleted all the free agents from it? The hockey project always lists the free agents and regardless of the July 1 opening of free agency, all those players unless signed earlier (and I will remove the free agent status from the list) are still RFAs/UFAs. Shootmaster 44 (talk) 18:07, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Nhlgoaliecontact.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Nhlgoaliecontact.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 04:29, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Nhlgoaliecontact.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Nhlgoaliecontact.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 11:22, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Fair-use rationale for images
Hello! It's nice to see that you're uploading images. However, you didn't provide a fair use rationale for File:Nhlgoaliecontact.jpg, which led to, but now for you. In the future, please read through non-free content templates when uploading images; this is to avoid future speedy deletion requests. Regards, Hey  Mid  (contribs) 21:05, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

The Pride - 5FDP song
Hi, since I saw you were on the 5FDP talk page, I thought I'd ask you about this. I noticed the new song "The Pride" was worthy of its own page. From what I've found there are no indications of it being a single, but before I got delete happy I thought I'd ask first, since that seems to be the polite thing to do and the music part of the wiki isn't my thing. Thanks! Jahahn  ( gab )  04:50, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks! Jahahn  ( gab )  19:25, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Copyvio Tagging
Please make sure that the copyvios you tag are EXACT matches and that they are not under the cc-by-sa. I found two cases where this happened. cheers --Guerillero &#124; My Talk  17:42, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

First ITNR?
the one for SOuth Ossetia was your first? You left the articles of the old template you used...but no worried, i corrected it now ;)Lihaas (talk) 09:07, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Revival Process
Nice one! I looked for an article but could not find any links to it. thanks for the note :-) BigSteve (talk) 12:09, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Jill McCormick (2nd nomination)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add defamatory content, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jill McCormick (2nd nomination), you may be blocked from editing.

Specifically, I am referring to you twice raising the issue of whether McCormick meets the criteria at Notability (people) even though there is nothing on her page that suggests that she is involved in pornography. The notability criteria for regular (non-pornographic) models are at Notability (people). If that's what you meant to use, I recommend editing your previous comments in the AfD to refer to that criterion instead. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 13:57, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Note

 * I do understand your frustration, no one likes getting templated, particularly when their actions were simply a good faith mistake. I just wanted to point out that we all make mistakes.  The act of templating isn't an admin function, it could have been anyone that did it and the result would be the same.  We admins are no less fallible than you.  The only difference is that we passed the gauntlet at RfA and have a few extra tools, but we still have one voice each, and still err from time to time.  It always best to never elevate admins to a higher level than they deserve, as we aren't here to be the bosses, just the janitors.  Any admin that thinks otherwise is a problem, and any user that thinks otherwise is doing themselves a disservice.  I've boldly hatted the warning demonstrating it wasn't necessary, feel free to delete it.  Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 17:43, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * In regard to my previous comments, I admit that the template was too harsh considering the circumstances. I should have found another way to express my concern over the situation without implying that you had caused the problem intentionally. For some idea of where I was coming from, see the somewhat similar situation at Articles for deletion/Cathy Silvers, in which I was later concerned that my reaction had not been strong enough. Sorry about coming down too hard this time, though. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:10, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

RE Chris Volz
I don't feel he has independent notability though. Flaw being notable and Five.bolt.main being marginally notable doesn't make him notable. Yes, he did have a solo album, but it sold a meager 700 copies and failed to chart on any official charts. It seemed pretty clear-cut, so I figured my edit summary sufficed, but I'll go and start that discussion then... Sergecross73  msg me   15:33, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
 * It's frowned upon to alter other's edits. Please don't do that, that's not what I wanted to do. I've undone what you changed my edit to. That doesn't belong at Requested Moves. Flaw already has it's own page, so we don't want to move it to that article. See WP:RM, it specifically says not to go there for mergers. If you're contesting it being a redirect, then we just need to have a discussion on the talk page and find a consensus on what to do. If we can't come to a conclusion, then I guess I'd probably bring it to AFD, but it really seems to be a rather straightforward case here... Sergecross73   msg me   20:57, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Spain
I ask that you remove these comments about me on talk:Spain, please. I think that they are absolutely inappropriate, and contain serious personal attacks. I hope that attends my request. Thank you. --LTblb (talk) 05:37, 17 April 2013 (UTC)


 * You consider Alburzador's comment is not offensive, but I find it completely inappropriate and embarrassing.--LTblb (talk) 06:21, 17 April 2013 (UTC)


 * This user 83.213.59.116 continues bullying the same way that Alburzador did. Probably a puppet case.--LTblb (talk) 13:28, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Peter Flight
This guy has been writing abuse on my wall for months. Where were you then? You only showed up when I said once he was being cowardly! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidmwilliams (talk • contribs) 06:29, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

oops
I must have done that by mistake. Thanks for fixing it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.201.113.4 (talk) 06:35, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Re: All other NHL draft articles
Based on how rude and uncivil your message was, you’re lucky that I am even responding to you.

Secondly, I am not the person that came up with this style. Go take a look at the 2012 draft and select any entry from April or May of 2012 and you will clearly see that this style pre-dates any editing history that I have with these articles. The style has been carried forward from the original 2012 article. At some point another editor changed the basic layout of the 2012 draft and no one has cared enough since then to change it.

Finally if you are going to accuse me of doing something wrong at least make sure that the basis on your accusation is correct. Deadman137 (talk) 01:19, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Responded on talk page about my original message and the false accusation of being uncivil. -- Everyone Dies In the End  (talk) 09:47, 21 July 2014 (UTC)


 * My apologies if I ruffled some feathers, however in the future you may want to be more aware of the tone that you use in your writing as it can come across as being a little hostile and aggressive. Now to get to your question; I had nothing to do with the formatting change in the 2012 article. If you want to find out why that happened you would have to track down the editors that made the change for that article. I only took over as the main editor of the NHL Draft articles in January of 2013 when the previous main editor decided to take a break from editing. Now to address the formatting from 2013 onwards; the reason that we have edited the article using the current standard was that the template was already there and the formatting system has worked so far for our needs. Admittedly there probably need to be some tweaks to how these articles are set up, but I’m still working on some different proposals. I do agree with you that neither of our preferences is of any concern with this minor issue. If it turns out that the formatting is completely wrong then it obviously should be changed, but given the fact that until now no one has cared to look into it, you can see why it is not a huge priority for the main editors of these articles. Deadman137 (talk) 06:15, 22 July 2014 (UTC)


 * No worries, turns we were both wrong anyways. Deadman137 (talk) 21:19, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Deborah De Williams / Sarah Mycroft @ List of People who have run across Australia article.
Hi Everyonediesintheend.

Thanks for your input on the Deborah De Williams section on The List of People Who Have Run Across Australia.

Firstly, I should declare a personal connection to Deborah, however that does not influence the information. I have provided and only makes me wish to retain the veracity of the information on Wikipedia.

Deborah De Williams main page includes many many verifiable references to her achievements and they have never been in question. With this in mind I would respectfully ask that the information in the article in question that pertains to Deborah being The First Woman To Run Around Australia and is also the world record holder (as is recognized by Guinness) for The Longest Continuous Run by a Female be restored. These are facts that have never been in doubt in any forum.

To explain the situation regarding Sarah Mycroft, Sarah is currently the subject of a police investigation for making criminally defamatory statements in open communication, has had a 4 year campaign against Deborah for reasons unknown and attempted a run around Australia herself but failed. There has been an investigation into her claims to have completed her run and her claim of first woman to run Around Australia and she has never proven she completed the run under the rules by which these things are measured by the peak bodies and Guinness. Phil Essam, with 25 years experience as the historian for the Australia. Ultra Runners Association has repeatedly asked her for proof and to his knowledge she has never offered any verifiable proof to anyone, and certainly has never sought the Ultra Runners Association to recognise her supposed effort. Phil also spoke with Guinness about her claims and Ms Mycroft had never approached them about any records. Phil also rang the locations which she claimed to have stopped in her journey and did not find any evidence that she had in fact been in most of these places.

On the other hand Deborah did offer her required records, pre registered her attempt with Guinness and passed all the scrutiny required to claim the records.

Deborah is also a highly accomplished ultra runner with many records and had already completed 1.5 laps of Australia in other ultra goals. Ms Mycroft had no ultra experience and with SO many people having come forward to offer their evidence to the ultra community and Phil Essam to say that she never did it, and that combined with her reluctance to offer any proof she did the run, after 4 years it is incredibly unlikely there is any substance whatsoever to her claims.

I hope that this sheds a little light on what has been happening, it was only my desire to see Wikipedia contain valid information about the topic and not have just anyone come along including themselves on a page where they have no place.

If you need a third perspective on what I have claimed, I would encourage you to contact Phil Essam at www.ultralegends.com.au and I'm sure he will be more than accommodating with any requests for information you might have.

Thankyou for you time and consideration.

Regards,

Mark Dabner


 * Replied on talk page.-- Everyone Dies In the End  (talk) 11:52, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Re : Sarah Mycroft
Hi, thanks for your reply, however I'm confused about what you mean. I took your message to mean that she can add herself to the page, but provide no evidence she did it? And I can only edit her information or remove her if I have published proof she didnt? Isn't that a bit like me adding myself to the People Who Have Walked on the Moon article without any proper evidence I did so and unless someone has proof I didn't then I have to stay there? Sorry, I'm just a bit confused about what you mean. The whole point of my edits, and edit comments, was that she had not provided proper verifiable evidence to be included on the page, which is what I thought was one of the requirements of Wikipedia and what keeps it valid as an information resource. That was the point of my last message to you, which was to say that in 4 years she has never provided the evidence that she properly completed her run - which it is incredibly unlikely she did. It's an incredible feat to run around Australia, that's why hardly anyone has ever done it, that's why the information on Wikipedia must be accurate and if she still continues after 4 years to offer no proof she did it, has not provided her GPS logs etc to any governing body, but still claims to have a world record or two as a result then its not just inaccurate information on Wikipedia, it's outright fraud. Can I ask again for my edits on Deborah's information to be reinstated as per my last message? Thanks again for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markdabner (talk • contribs)
 * Replied on talk.-- Everyone Dies In the End  (talk) 11:44, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Re Mycroft
Hi, thanks for your message.

I do apologise, I wasn't trying to do the wrong thing and did in fact ask you if it was ok to restore the information that is fully and comprehensively referenced on Deborah's wiki page which I have linked the article in question to.

Regardless, I truly believe your agressive response was utterly unwarranted given all I have done is try and maintain the integrity of the information on Wikipedia.

I will edit the matching references to the Deborah de Williams section so no guidelines are in question. My last edit was only to correct the wording on the name of Deborah's World Record, which is a real and recognized by Guinness record and to add that being officially recognized as that world record holder DOES entitle her to the unofficial title of the first woman to run around Australia. I ticked the Minor Edit box as I felt it actually was just a minor edit with the addition I only several words, not a rewrite, which is what I rate a major edit.

With regard to the talk page, I was ask to begin a discussion on the page talk page, I did this immediately when it was requested of me so to say I never participated is completely unfair. Mark Heins has had nothing to say whatsoever yet I'm the one copping your angry spray? I also haven't ignored your messages and have replied almost immediately every time.

Anyway, I've clearly pissed you off in a rather extreme way, please know it was utterly unintentional, and I felt I was doing the right thing. Whatever you have read into my intentions in the negative, please know there has been no intention to upset anyone, only to bring this to an end. So, for whatever got you to the state you were in when you wrote that message, I inreservadly and sincerely apologise.

I will update the references on the information for you as directed. How many references will sort this out? I can provide dozens of solidly verifiable links to reputable resources.

Mark Dabner — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.173.85.55 (talk) 08:38, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Responded on user page not IP.-- Everyone Dies In the End  (talk) 00:58, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Ok, well I posted my comments in the discussion section, well before you started a new conversation. Your issue seems to revolve around the fact that i am unprepared to communicate over the issue yet I have sent many messages and started a discussion that you dont acknowledge.

What would you have me do at this point? For me this is the equivalent of you having say been the first to swim the Atlantic, its been ratified, everyone agrees, everyone in your extreme swimming community agrees and you have the rightful honour that you earned. The someone comes along, and says they did it, even though they can't prove it, have been slammed by the extreme swimming community and have never offered any evidence that they did it, to anyone, even though it has been requested by many authorities. Even though this is the case, Wikipedia starts punishing information about your amazing swim. It makes no sense to me at all.

I really dont know what else I'm supposed to offer you. What if i sent you emails from Guinness that confirm they have never heard of her, and that she never applied for any records - even though I have a radio interview evidence in which she says she did apply and was following their directions on record keeping. There are a lot of emails, there is an analysis of her reported itinerary, I have scans of her crew notes that say she never did it, I have emails from hew crew saying she never did it, none of these are a secret in the Ultra running community and whilst everything that has happened has satisfied the Ultra Runners Association and Guiness World Records, its apparently not good enough for you and you can overule them both?

Can you see my frustration? Im not trying to be a pain in the ass, truly, I just want the Wikipedia information to be accurate, correct and verifiable. I dont see why im now being punished for even adding information that is fully compliant. It is proven fact that Deborah is the First Woman to Run Around Australia and is the World Record Holder for the Longest Continuous Run By A Female. That information is not in doubt by anyone other than someone who who tried and failed. The editor Mark Heins IS Sarah Mycroft, at least I have the decency to make my edits under my own name and not be all full of bravery hiding behind a pseudonym. I know this because Sarah emailed me, but for all intent and purpose 'Mark Heins' has refused all communication on Wikipedia.

I'll satisfy any criteria you need in order to be rightfully allowed to make edits to data, like any other citizen, but I will not stand for having informations that are validated and proven being removed by a mid admin because you have decided that you are now the one and only global authority on Ultra Marathon Running, which is what is exactly happening here.

Unless you can offer me a valid reason as to why I am being refused the right to place valid, referenced, provable data into Wikipedia, then I should be fine to reinstate my edits correct?

As far as I can see out of Mark Heins and me I am the only one even remotely trying to communicate with Wikipedia and do the right thing here. Have you wondered why that is? Ask Mark Heins to provide 'his' references, THAT is the issue here, NOT what Deborah has done so please stop punishing Deborah for it. Mark Heins has NEVER offered proof that Sarah did what she claims to have done, yet he is the one that gets to put whatever he wants on Wikipedia and I am the one getting aggressively threatened by you?

I really dont know how I'm supposed to prove it to you when the evidence that Deborah has provided to all world authorities has been verified, ratified and records and titles awarded accordingly.

Tell me what they have overlooked here that you are seeing so that I can give it to you. Nearly everything has been fully published online and it shouldn't be a problem. Perhaps try googling 'Sarah Mycroft cheat'. There is a page there put together by information pooled by the Ultra Community in support of Deborah - its EXTENSIVE. If you can get through that page and still think sh did it and allow her to claim records and titles she has no right to then by all means ban away, and I'll assume that everything on Wikipedia is subjective crap and not at all what I thought it was. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markdabner (talk • contribs) 01:34, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Replied for the last time.-- Everyone Dies In the End  (talk) 04:34, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

No, I'm not ignoring you at all but if you had bothered to go check that page you would discover that there is the publically broadcast apology by a major news network here in Australia over the Sarah Mycroft thing - she went on news program, conducted an interview, which subsequently was proven to be horse crap, then had to issue a public apology over it. Wheeras by your logic, the TV interview would be considered a trustworthy 3rd party source to prove she did it, yet the subsequent public apology means nothing? Is that correct?

I'm not trying to be dificult here, it just seems as though there is no evidence that is good enough for you to accept Sarah Mycroft does not deserve a place on this page and since actual real evidence such as what I just mentioned still arent good enough I'm left scratching my head as to what you expect from me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markdabner (talk • contribs) 04:45, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

No I'm not ignoring you at all. I'm just confused and all I'm getting from you is anger, and the same non sensicle argument (to me) that you can say whatever you want on wikipedia and it's up to others to prove it wrong before it will be removed.

It's down to two very simple issues.

I made some very minor wording adjustments to Deborah De Williams, you reverted them, even though all the information in it is verifible and referenced extensively, especially on her main Wiki page. This leaves me nowhere to go on that, if solid references aren't good enough for you then I truly dont know how to correct the existing information, which were wording changes to correctly name her world record, and that as such, the world record also gives her claim to the title "First Woman to Run round Australia". These achievements hve been recognised globally, and only ever questioned by 1 person - Sarah Mycroft. Please tell me what I need to do so that my last edit can be reinstated in a manner that you wont kill it again.

Secondly, Sarah Mycroft. The entire Ultra Running community doesn't believe she did it, and in four years nobody has bothered to add her to that page, or even create a page for her on Wikipedia. There is extensive evidence that proves she could not have humanly run the distances she claims to have (400+kms a day!), most of which was published by Sarah herself on her own website without doing the maths to see if it checks out..

If I take what you are saying correctly, I can only prove she didn't do it, if someone wrote an article or similar from a reputable source that proves she has lied about it correct? That's why the sarahmycroft.com page exists, to point to all of the published and linked evidence of all of the inconsistencies in her story and the lies had has told and been caught on.

I am genuinely asking for your help, you have been ridiculously aggressive about it, I have been frustrated at having had no good advice from you when I keep asking for it. So both lets calm down and work together to resolve this properly. I feel that for you it still up to me to prove she didn't to it, not for her to prove he did.

Just telling me that I can edit the page however I please as long as its within the guidelines is useless to me, I did that and you still undid my edits so clearly I'm missing something.

Tell me exactly what you want so that I can fix the information on the page about Deborah.

Tell me exactly what you want me to do when 'Mark Heins' puts the information back up. ie Do it edit to say say "this information is doubtful or unproven", and provide links to the solid verifiable 3rd party evidence that makes it so.

Please reply in a friendly manner, I'm really trying to do the same here man, I'd be willing to bet anything you haven't heard a word from Mark Heins *cough*sarah*cough* so at least give me credit for communicating promptly with you and asking for your help.

I genuinely want this to work out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markdabner (talk • contribs) 05:57, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

YES i did read the article, several times in fact. The page i referred you to goes to lengths to make sure all of the information there is from proper sources and not just made up on the internet.

I've asked you for your help. I didnt realise we all had to be 15th Dan Wikipedia masters in order to be able to edit a couple of words. I've asked you to calm the hell down and stop being so freaking agressive, surely its no way for you to behave?

Just so its said, I'm going to correct the information about Deborah, and include references. If you revert the changes for no real reason like last time, then we can both get reporting to Wikipedia I guess.

If Sarah's information goes back up, I will not change it, but add a note saying the the information above is in doubt or unverified and reference several links to the evidence that suggests this. People can make up their own minds then.

I just need to know that you will at least allow me to do that?

I dont know what your problem is, but whatever is making you behave this way, please don't direct it at me. You know behind the counter at McDonalds, the little 15yo who's a Manager and treats everyone like crap, I feel like you are behaving in that manner, and its simply not cool when I've been trying to resolve this with you calmly and genuinely wanted your help. I wont be messaging you again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markdabner (talk • contribs) 06:09, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited SHOP.CA, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CTO. 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) 15:40, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Shop.ca-Logo.png
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Shop.ca-Logo.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:52, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Usrname
Nice name. How do you like my floating icon? Best regards,  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   20:01, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Nhlgoaliecontact.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Nhlgoaliecontact.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:59, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Ping
Eik Corell (talk) 14:02, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Nhlgoaliecontact.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Nhlgoaliecontact.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:59, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Album artwork of True Love Never Dies by the band Otherwise.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Album artwork of True Love Never Dies by the band Otherwise.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:46, 7 December 2017 (UTC)