User talk:Geofferybard

I AM SEMI-RETIRED FROM WIKIPEDIA AND WILL NOT NECESSARILY ANSWER PROMPTLY.

'''Working on breaking news? Please follow these suggestions:'''

Develop an accurate picture of what's going on, and do not be swayed by conflicting advice and rumors from "experts" with their own agendas. Don't become a conduit for every rumor and accusation. And once you have an accurate picture, share it with the public so they can make a decision on what to do. http://www.npr.org/2011/03/16/134573800/nuclear-information-gap-spreads-doubt-fear



The true secret of giving advice is, after you have honestly given it, to be perfectly indifferent whether it is taken or not, and never persist in trying to set people right. - Hannah Whitall Smith

Archived: IMG Issues
User talk:Geofferybard/ArchiveIMGIssues

Archived: Editor's Guild
User talk:Geofferybard/Archive1NLS

Archived: Suggestbo
User talk:Geofferybard/ArchiveSBot

Recommended reading
http://meatballwiki.org/wiki/SoftSecurity

Useful links
http://www.worldcat.org

Fukushima I nuclear accidents
[SUMMARY - Heads up to move content was sent by ]

Ravendrop 08:31, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Old: WWWG
I can live with your edit of "The combine US-UK operation is slated to work in Miyagi Prefecture." due to mispelling and most readers won't need to know that level of detail, in this article.

at

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Humanitarian_response_to_the_2011_T%C5%8Dhoku_earthquake_and_tsunami&action=historysubmit&diff=419203425&oldid=41920274

But eventually we will need more detail. Please weigh in on the Talk page proposal at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Humanitarian_response_to_the_2011_T%C5%8Dhoku_earthquake_and_tsunami#Proposed_sectional_organization:_Major_Responders.2C_or_Large_entries_intermingled.3F

WWWG: Nice catch there.
Good one here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Humanitarian_response_to_the_2011_T%C5%8Dhoku_earthquake_and_tsunami&action=historysubmit&diff=419203425&oldid=419202744

Very good catch - this one

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Humanitarian_response_to_the_2011_T%C5%8Dhoku_earthquake_and_tsunami&diff=next&oldid=419203425

reeks POV POV as if...a tip of the hat to WWWG.

Geofferybard (talk) 01:03, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
<--- New one

TUSC token 4bfa422895da4fab6f6d46ae69a2c50e
Owner of a TUSC account!

EARTHQUAKE
Perhaps the "flow" is broken but the GLIDENumber: EQ-2011-000028-JPN is a rich motherlode of important information. Maybe you can relocate the link rather than follow the standard operating bite the newbie/oldie-bite procedure of simply deleting important, valid, cited information for the sake of personal aesthetics?

I will fix it this time but I notice your talk page is filling up rapidly with complaints and I have to concur that it is better to have the "flow" interupted a bit, than to deprive the world community of important information. Geofferybard (talk) 22:34, 17 March 2011 (UTC)


 * The problem is that method in which you inserted it made the page not look very good, and this page is receiving a ton of hits and edits at the moment so I feel like it's extra-important to keep the page looking good; normally, it's not an issue to insert, edit, cleanup, etc, but with the high edit rate it does become problematic. Also, I don't think this is important enough to put in such a raw format into the lede; the general reader will not know or care what a GLIDE number is. I would recommend inserting it elsewhere in the article. Of course, the information you added is useful, and your contributions are certainly appreciated and welcome. Just please try to insert new information so that it works and looks okay on the page. Thank you! –flodded ☃ (gripe)  22:58, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah I agree the server jammed on me I had it taken care of. Geofferybard (talk) 22:59, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

)

GOLDFINGER...er...GOLDHAT
Thanks for tweaking the Asian Disaster Recovery line if you follow the refs and links you will see that it is quite important. Hey just heard the radioactive plume is headed my way......Geofferybard (talk) 00:01, 18 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Gold Hat. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 00:04, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Flodded
(Flooded?)

I agree with your original concept of an "Earthquake" article and believe that eventually we should split off a "Tsunami" article as well, with a remaining combined overview article/articles which include the Fukushima incident as well.

Plain fact is an earthquake and a tsunami are two different events.Geofferybard (talk) 00:54, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Disagree - is the collapse of buildings due to an earthquake a separate event?--Pontificalibus (talk) 08:24, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * No but they are distinguishable for purposes of discussion. I mean, yeah, they are different events anyway. May not occur even in the same time frame even location. But it is a matter of organizing the writing thats all. Room for both a comprehensive and a breakout. Just wait this is all going to grow and grow and grow. IMOGeofferybard (talk) 08:56, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Operation Tomodachi
You added some items to the talk page. I'm not sure what exactly it means. As a side issue, the navy section has a small typo and some references are numbered but not included. Could you make that more clear? Thanks. MartinezMD (talk) 01:25, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Someone who dislikes my contributions to the Humanitarian response page deleted and I need to search out the refs...it was said to be "American propaganda" reporting facts on the ground. Go figure.I am parking that writing, it is my writing, pending completion of the restoration which is a real pain. The problem is that the refs in View history appear as bracket numbers not with the original links which I used.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Humanitarian_response_to_the_2011_T%C5%8Dhoku_earthquake_and_tsunami&action=historysubmit&diff=418955003&oldid=418926643

This is a problem. I am parking the text on Talk because it is laborious to recover even the text due to some weird behavior of the wiki software which breaks the text up and prevents large copy. I wrote the text myself from the citations but don't want to put it in main until I can recover at least usable general citations. I actually listened to the MP3 of a briefing and without the citation won't know exactly what hour minute & second the relevant remarks were made.

Feel free to WP:REFACTOR after you see all that added to mainspace, if I don't get to it first. Cheers.Geofferybard (talk) 01:27, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Pontificalus
Please vote at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fukushima_I_nuclear_accidents#Question_on_title You make a good point but it is not clear what you yourself believe .Geofferybard (talk) 02:00, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

L1A FAL
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fukushima_I_nuclear_accidents#Question_on_title Did you consider the full panoply? (Emergency and Disaster)

E.ON Kernkraft GmbH
I created E.ON Kernkraft GmbH. It was deleted. How can one stop such content deletions? NuclearEnergy (talk) 16:38, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Deletion review/Log/2011 March 18 NuclearEnergy (talk) 16:49, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Not enough data for me to comment. Generally you can template work in progress. If you contact the deleting admin you can request userification or restoration. Best bet, create the page in your user space and only put it in namespace when it can pass muster. Also, I notice that you do not use a stub template, which is recommended for this kind of short article. Geofferybard (talk) 23:27, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to comment on article for deletion debate
The article Young Conservatives of Texas has been nominated for deletion at AfD. Your input as to whether or not this article meets notability standards is invited. Thank you. Carrite (talk) 17:00, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * IMO notability has never been an issue with that site but the relevant tag would be and probably will continue to be
 * When you contacted me I was a member of Wikipedia Project Conservatism, and have since balanced that by joining WProj Liberalism, and I appreciate your presumption of NPOV good faith on my part. Sorry to be too late to weigh in on the Afd but I will keep a hopefully not-overly juandiced NPOV eye on things. In any case, WP is all the richer for an article which brings forth such interesting factoids as Ted Kennedy's reception of the George Bush Award for Excellence!Geofferybard (talk) 22:15, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Communalism
You seem to be making odd edits that would suggest that you might need some help with something you are unfamiliar with. If you need help doing something, feel free to ask. MrKIA11 (talk) 03:57, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Formatting. Issue is resolved. Thanks. Please feel free to weigh in on the merits.User:Geofferybard]]|Bard गीता 03:58, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * BTW, you might want to fix your signature. It should be . MrKIA11 (talk) 04:00, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks. They are closing the building so I will have to fix that next time. Um, how long is my page going to be displaying the awkward categorization which appears now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geofferybard (talk • contribs) 04:03, 30 April 2011
 * I'm not sure what exactly you're talking about but if you mean the 'unsure' category of the nomination page, I changed it to be under the society category. MrKIA11 (talk) 04:08, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I did a little trouble shooting the matter is cleared up thanks. User:Geofferybard]]|Bard गीता 01:40, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

May 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
.--Kumioko (talk) 02:13, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Administrative action: does it ever cross the line?
John, I always appreciate a good discussion and policy discussion can be particularly interesting. I appreciate you providing number 1-4 in our discussion on the vandalism talk page but as a more general operating principle and as the topic developes nuances, I would like to avoid commingling issues. It seems that with your latest edit you including as item (3) a discussion of a previous day's work and that is fine. But going forward, for the sake of clarity and minimizing clutter, I suggest that topic be developed at the below link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Vandalism#John.27s_Point_.283.29:_Is_administrative_action_ever_.22vandalism.22_2

http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity_open_letter_project/WMF_Board_March_2010

Thank you in advance for your consideration thereof. Please feel free to reply here or at the above link, at your convenience.Bard गीता 22:38, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Comments on Typology Essay go HERE!
This section is the preferred location for remarks on my draft essay which you are invited to review here at corrected link to follow.Bard गीता 22:52, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

User:Geofferybard/Vandalism_typology The current policy lists them alphabetically and I propose splitting the section into groups of types based upon how the type was created. Eg., by target, by method, etcetera.

Other essays in process:

User:Geofferybard/Toward_a_definition_of_wiki_Vandalism Eventually there will be civil and criminal litigation on the issue we might as well apply the cognitive tools of the legal profession.

User:Geofferybard/Vandalism_is_a_bad_word Advocates replacing the term "vandalism" with something which is not perjorative to the tribe and which reflects a scientific understanding of the phenomenon.

Note: Here is evidence it does occur, allegedly: http://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Babel#Emergency_block.2C_deadmin.2C_decrat Bard गीता 00:20, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive update
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 06:55, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Collaboration

 * Ever feel like you're editing in a vacuum, and long for some camaraderie?
 * Do you want to improve an article and put a Featured Article star on your userpage but don't know how to get started?
 * Want to be part of a cohesive, committed team working together to improve conservatism one article at a time?

If you're interested in having lots of fun and working with great editors, click here and make history. We're now taking nominations. Lionelt (talk) 01:25, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Monastic silence
I have moved the article draft from your talk page to User:Geofferybard/Monastic silence; a talk page primarily serves for communication with other users. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 15:47, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * ? I am just now back on line it seems that the page is back up and running in mainspace, unperturbed. And that there is an implicit agreeement that we would seek advice from the editorial board rather than wheel. I am on this project to create content for readers rather than spend all my time arguing for the existence of content pages with expert administrators with little interest or background in the topic. It should be self evfident that this topic is demonstrably separate and distingishable from Vows. I also note that there is a merger template inviting discussion so people can discuss.
 * Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia and cramming distinct topics into a single rubric is not IMO a sustainable policy. In any case, I think I have been more than patient given that I endured a spod over an In Use template. Please allow me the time to complete the thought of this article before jumping to conclusions. I appreciate that my replies were responded to with some thoughtfulness, but in return please understand that the use of administrative power without notice and discussion can be very put-offish, it can seem arbitrary whether or not you agree that it is, and that there is a widespread public perception that wikipedia is unfriendly to persons with topical expertise. The success of the project hinges on its dispute resolution and establishing collegiality if not friendliness. Administrative deletion is an extreme manuever which should be reserved for obvious hoaxes and vandalism or negative BLP. I let it go and got to work building this page in accordance with my vision of it and sincerely hope that this diversion of time and effort into justifying the page, before it has even taken shape, has concluded. Thank you for your kind consideration of this matter. Bard गीता 17:29, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh - take the point that userfied pages should be subpages of User pages not Talk pages. Thanks for the heads up.
 * Regarding the deprecation of video references, IMO that is utterly obsolete. I intend to write an essay if need be on that topic but don't want yet another side issue sucking up today's limited time. I honestly appreciate being informed of the old policy on video citations and appreciate that the knowledge, offered no doubt in good administrative faith, raises the level of my sophistication as a wikipedian. However, WADR, video testimony is admissible in court and in government decision making process. Many time the only way to cite important facts is by referencing a time point in minutes and seconds of taped testimony. If there is no written transcript, it is essential, and, even if there is a written transcript,the taped video can show up errors and ommissions in the transcription. Thus, IMO, it should not require too much debate to recognize that video references if used with text references, have value. I suspect the old policy was created to limit juvenile reliance on joke Youtubes and so forth. But video testimony of trials, public officials and citizen public comment at various agencies such as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission are, simply, not chopped liver.Bard गीता 17:35, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Dark Circle
Hi, I just wanted to let you know I've restored the comics article to Dark Circle and added a hatnote to point to the documentary. In cases like this, WP:TWODABS applies - if there are only two disambigs, and one is primary over the other, disambiguation should be settled with hatnotes instead of a dab page. -- Ja Ga talk 18:26, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The problem with that policy is that it lends itself to wheel warring when a disambig page would work just fine. How could a comic book take "primacy" over a nuclear power plant built on an earthquake fault, two months after the Fukushima Daichii nuclear accident? Surely this does not boil down to a matter of "he was there first"?
 * [Checked your user page.] Gee. I will ask that as a chemical engineer you please recuse yourself from using your Wikipedia administrative privileges in this matter. The reason is WP: COI. The film Dark Circle is a film about a long-standing American citizen's movement addressing alleged negligence on the part of a consortium of industrial firms engaged in engineering of a class of chemicals known as nucleotides. The is an attack on the industry in which your User page contends you are employed. Presumably you are in good faith and NPOV, but it would seem that the expression of good faith would be to allow arbitration. That said, do you have precedent that "primacy" is the mere fact of "there first"? Is that precedent actually policy? Bard गीता 18:53, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Check out WP:PRIMARYTOPIC to get an understanding of "primacy". Also, you can drop a line at Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation if you want more information about WP:TWODABS. -- Ja Ga talk 19:01, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link I'll get around to it. But whatever may have worked right for Wikipedia in the past, surely a comic book should not bump a film dealing with a nuclear power plant on an earthquake fault, or there is something seriously wrong with our culture. Whatever it says at WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. ( I am going to lunch and will read the link BEFORE sending a TalkBack - i am not "pushing" this reply - it is here if you choose to seek it. ) Bard गीता 19:06, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * A lot of things go into determining a primary topic, but the most important factor is likelihood of what the user is searching for. The comic is a far more likely search term than the documentary, so we give people that. And note the hatnote now in Dark Circle; the user is one click away from the documentary, just as they were when there was a disambig in place there. If the film had a higher cultural significance, that might be enough to justify the dab. (I'm not saying the topic is unimportant, I'm saying it hasn't garnered much attention.) But as it stands this is a clear case of WP:TWODABS. -- Ja Ga talk 19:22, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the discussion but after reading the policy I regard it as anything but clear cut. Let's at least be aware that there are issues of fact and issues of policy and not confuse the two.


 * ISSUES OF FACT: Did you have some links from general public search engines indicating search frequencies?
 * ISSUES OF POLICY It is not so "clear". TWODABS presumes dispo of PRIMARY. That is not at all clear cut. Recall that it says "An exception may be appropriate when recentism and educational value ... are taken into account, especially if one of these topics is a vital article. In such a case, consensus may determine that the article should be treated as the primary topic regardless of whether it is the article most sought by users." Bard गीता 20:42, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I wrote that policy. Believe me, if I thought this case qualified, I would not have made the moves. You can always start a discussion at WP:RM to move Dark Circle to Dark Circle (comics) to make way for a dab and see what the community says. -- Ja Ga talk 20:55, 27 May 2011 (UTC)


 * It contains an education exemption. Wouldn't you like to think about maybe letting this be one of the exemption cases, without necessarily going through WP:RM? You have not expressed an opinion of the merits of this use of the exception. What were you thinking of when you put the exception in? Surely comix vs. Nuclear Plant on Earthquake Fault raises an educational content concern? Surely you would think about it for a while before abandoning your own (?) stated guideline or policy. At what point does non-educational entertainment take a back seat to preventing mass epidemic of cancer and irresponsible use of nuclear power? Do we need to resort to creating stuff like this to get the web surfer hits?  As one adult to another, is there something compelling about comix that I am not getting?  Help me out on this, maybe I am taking myself, Wikipedia, or collaborative media too seriously.( I mean, you don't want the Orks taking over !!!!)Bard गीता 01:19, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * This isn't a question of comics vs. nuclear plant. This is comics vs. an unaired documentary about a nuclear plant. If the documentary had enough significance to merit being primary, I would fight for it, just as I fought to get the "educational value" language added to WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. But it isn't. Remember, here we are Wikipedians first. We can't let our passions get in the way of building an encyclopedia. And by the rules, having the documentary at Dark Circle (film) is the correct course of action. -- Ja Ga talk 06:04, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Esteemed colleague. This has nothing to do with "passions". Frankly, I could care less about the treatment of the principles of Dark Circles. Just because I have background in a topic area does not mean I am :::: POV. Please don't assume so. In fact, I am Joe-NPOV on this issue because (1) am former member of Oil Chemical Workers Union and (2) my Dad was a Ph.D. chemist, for industry. (3) Unlike my Dad, who was an early :::: scientist signatory to the anti-GHG-anthropogenic climate change petition, I am convinced of the Advent of the Era of Anthropogenic Climate Change and as such, am if anything leaning toward the position :::: :::: espoused by Stuart Brand and that scientist from NASA who in fact favor nuclear. That said, DCPP is a special case. So, please, the standardized admonition about not having POV passions drive my work at WP are :::: really not necessary.I am no raging anti-nuclear Luddhite thank you very ::::  much.
 * Remember accusing me of COI when all this started? No hard feelings, though. -- Ja Ga talk 23:59, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

.

 * I have to respectfully take issue with your interpretations, at least the following:
 * JaGa said: "This is comics vs. an unaired documentary"
 * Geof says: The counterpoint is that the documentary was in fact scheduled for national broadcast. It was then pulled because it was regarded as too controversial IMHO that sequence of events increases notability. It seems that perhaps you may be overlooking that, because it would be difficult to imagine that, having that point brought to your attention, you would not concur. Please advise.
 * PS. Note also the controversy over the retraction of the scheduled national broadcast was itself a national debate, and that the article in question quotes an important cultural critic with citations.
 * Regarding PRIMARYTOPIC, the most important thing, by far, is likelihood of searching. The other factors, educational value, systemic bias, etc., etc. are used to tip the scales in favor of "we are an encyclopedia, not just a Google's Greatest Hits service". But it has to be at least somewhat close. Take, for instance, the Watergate figure Deep Throat. Sadly, the porno gets at least twice as many pageviews. Still, though, we put the porno at Deep Throat (film) and keep the political figure as primary. Why? Encyclopedic dignity, principle of least surprise, educational value, call it what you will. There's no hard and fast rule here; article naming is an editorial decision. In the Deep Throat case, it was decided that a typical editor would reasonably expect a proper encyclopedia to have the political figure at Deep Throat, and that's what was done, pageviews and Google hits be damned. For Dark Circle, I personally doubt the documentary has entered the mainstream consciousness deeply enough to merit such an exception, but since it is an editorial decision, there's nothing wrong with starting an RM discussion and getting the community's thoughts. -- Ja Ga talk  23:59, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Second point: Aside from the primacy enrichment due to the censorship debate, there is primacy enrichment due to the underlying issue which is the content of the film. There is huge interest right now in (a) nuclear power plants, in general, worldwide, and (b) the NPP which is the subject of that film,becasue (i) it is built on an earthquake fault (ii) it is in a tsunami zone and (iii) it is in a ground liquifaction zone, all of this of heightened public interest due to the Fukushima nuclear accidents. If that does not make a case for educational primacy-enhancement, what does?
 * Questions: In what cases has the "education exemption" been utilized?
 * Avatar was the most significant test case for "educational value" I was involved in. You should check out the discussion here; to be honest, I'm rather proud of that one. I wouldn't be surprised if it's turned over sooner or later though. -- Ja Ga talk 23:59, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Amazing how much debate and discussion over that! Wow. But not clear how anything in that enormous block of text can be read as not supporting the primacy over the profound educated person's concern over the fads of popular culture. You supported primacy of the ancient Hindu term over that of pop culture. Now in this case, I know you are way too smart to be suggesting that somehow the precedent is that movies trump other stuff. It is laughable to think I would make such an insulting presumption. I know you are not saying that.
 * It seems that the example supports elevating the eternal over the transient fads of the day. Not to suggest Avatar was not a great movie. I was there in town for the Film Festival when James Cameron received his award for that movie! It seems that the parrallel is that the movie Avatar corresponds to the comix character and the Hindu conception of diety corresponds to the Dark Circle of humanity's fate in the Nuclear Age. Comic:Flick::HinduDiety:Cosmicdoom.
 * As a science minded progressive, no doubt you will recall that upon the successful [???] test Trinity at Almagordo, was it Oppenheimer who quoted the Bhagavid Gita??????? 00:12, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

. Bard गीता 19:40, 28 May 2011 (UTC) Article titling is an editorial choice. There is a good chance your position is the correct one; it all depends on the significance of the documentary. If you can prove that the documentary has significant coverage from many independent sources, perhaps you can overturn the claim to WP:TWODABS. (But I would work on building the article first - more sources, point out that it was eventually aired on other networks.) -- Ja Ga talk 19:27, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

To whom it may concern: Prejudicial and derogatory speech: side issues on RM debate on Chinese(ethnic slur)
I took the suggestion of JaGa to check out RM and, from simple.wiki noticed i had an old draft essay on how bad i thought it was that WP actually titles articles with derogatory slang. 1+1=2, so, voila! I went ahead and filed an RM on a slur word/article title against Chinese people. Now I am interested in advice on how to proceed in moving the discussion into an "Open" RM. Should I just wait and let them fight it out and when the dust settles let something emerge? Or should I intervene??? Also, what is the technical way to change to open - start over, modify the template-linked text? Perhaps, after Lao Tzu, wu wei is the best strategy. Bard गीता 01:02, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think that RM is going to succeed. Offensive material requires us to include offensive content, as long as it is not gratuitous and is treated in an encyclopedic manner. While ethnic slurs are disgusting, they are a part of our culture and their story (how they came about, usage, etc.) should not be censored. -- Ja Ga talk 19:19, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I addressed that in the thread. I am not calling for deletion. I am calling for article titles which do not endorse language which is for good reason not proper usage in literate company. Otherwise, WP becomes an agent of POV social change to the effect that "ethnic slur words are AOK and perfectly legitimate usage". WP culture would be enobling and dignifying the kind of language which lays the basis for genocide. As such, it would be not only not NPOV, it would be socially pernicious. Bard गीता 19:23, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Changing the title to include (ethnic slur) would violate WP:PRECISION, and is unnecessary; the article certainly doesn't endorse the term as AOK. In the spirit of tolerance, we should treat the article like any other and trust the reader's ability to draw their own conclusions. -- Ja Ga talk 19:51, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * JaGa you are a decent guy with a reasonable style of communication but some of the conclusions you reach strike me as inconsistent with what i have always regarded as common sense. maybe i am not adapting to a changing world. look at rap music, for instance. so then we are going back to all those words...what hits my GeorgeOrwellButton is "the spirit of tolerance". Surely the irony is not lost on you. And again, the language, "treat this article like any other". Indeed. Are you familiar with Herbert Marcuse's Critique of Pure Tolerance [?]. Tolerate the intolerant. Once they are in power, they establish dictatorship, but, oh well, the won 51% of the vote. Now: IMHO using the title endorses and legitimizes the word as a fit and proper encyclopedia article title. That is tautological. "Trust the reader" is derelict in the duty to educate the reader. I will check on WP:PRECIS however i don't think it will withstand my scrutiny. Bard गीता  20:03, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Correct Citation and proper style for Nuclear Policy of the United States article
I appreciate your contribution to the page, but as you might or might have not seen from the talk page there are some improvements needed (i've marked them). You are missing a lot of citations for quotes, using ibid, missing end paragraph cites and the ones you put up are not formatted correctly for a GA class rating. You can cut and paste the citations with our style that we used in this article (there is a tutorial in the ref section, or I can help you as well). It should only take 30 mins-ish, and I'd be happy to do some formatting things, but I just need to make sure the citations are all up there first. We will be submitting it for GA rating quite soon and it'll be shot down with the current state on that section. Regardless, I hope you make the minor clean ups because I've checked your sources that you given, and aside from my aversion of using YouTube for various reasons, it is all solid info and I would hate to have some of it deleted because of improper citations. Cheers mate and keep up the good work. Kayz911 (talk) 19:29, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your willingness to help with these matters. Unfortunately, when a buffed up article goes GA-candidate, there is a tendency to want to lock it in and preserve it, possibly to the detriment of updating or addition of content, which kills comprehensiveness. Just, that's the way that mechanism works. Arguably, there could be a work-around but the reality is that if an article is at the level of GA-candidate, there is a built in tendency to push away content providers who don't have the skill level to conform all of their edits to GA style. Thus, it is good that you are willing to help conform the content rather than simply edit it out. Because the goal needs to be enlightening readers rather than winning awards, and probably there are plenty of editors around who so covet GA status that they would thwart the growth of comprehensiveness. It is a structural problem which is probably intractable, and if every editor was as conscientious as you apparently are the problem would not be as bad as i suspect it may well be. Bard गीता  20:07, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Well this is not a normal article actually, it is part of Graduate Public Administration course that is working with a Wikipedia team, WikiProject United States Public Policy, and Wikipedia Ambassador Program. So I'm being held to a far higher standard here, because this article is going to be featured (along with a few others) for the Project's conference in Boston as a model of a informational page, quality citations, and outstanding research (or so I've been told via email) to the field of public policy on Wikipedia. No pressure right? So I'm keeping it pretty tip top shape as best I can and trying to meet those achievements. As for what you are saying, if the information (especially public opinions/current news) is accurate, regardless of the side it takes and is not blatantly a biased source, then it should be included regardless of rank. But if you can just throw in the citations to the areas I noted in the article for your contributions, I'll take care of the rest (i.e. the editing of the sources), but I need to know when some of the information is from. The information presented should reflect the rank, not the other way around...Kayz911 (talk) 03:08, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Cool man i hope you succeed! i had an idea earlier today. in order to (a) keep the site competitive, ie., exqusitely groomed, but also (b) Wikipedia information on eveolving changes to Nuclear Energy Policy of the United States, maybe you would support the concept of a separate article which would focus on emerging developments. It would update so frequently that there would be no way to keep it as well groomed as need be for competition purposes. What are your thoughts? Title ideas? Bard गीता 03:15, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Are you talking about actual implemented Nuclear Policy? Because there will probably not be "emerging developments" in Nuclear Policy in my opinion as a policy analysis. There has only been 1 passed policy relating to nuclear in almost 20 years. And with the recent events, the most likely action is none at all (like after every other nuclear accident). The Gov cannot really ReNig on their $54.5 Billion in loan guarantees or will have to pay up. Also nuclear energy makes up a 20%-ish market share of our energy production. South Carolina and Gov Sanford have always had issues with nuclear waste...why you ask? Because soon-to-be-decommissioned nuclear warheads have been traveling through the state to the Savannah River Project for years now, I've actually driven past one of these containers a few years back. Now you mention Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, I happen to know 4 people on a first name basis that work with them, and they don't even think nuclear policy will change, hence why they focus on stopping coal. Regardless, these are only people's opinions. Which is the problem of what you suggest doing, in light of nothing actually happening (which if something does happen it gets put in), there is nothing to talk about in my opinion because opinions are everywhere. Speculation is a dangerous topic for Wikipedia, and I honestly want no part of it because it seems like something that will be biased, vandalized, and argued to death over, and honestly not what I think wikipedia is here for...that's what blogs are for!


 * Now back to the article at hand and what I need from you on top of the citations. The "Renewed international importance of US nuclear policy" section you added, either needs to be greatly expanded or removed my friend. Because at this point it's just not relevant or tied into it enough. Aside from only having 1 source which I've now read (and another source missing), it barely cuts it because commentary on a forum, even from a law school just is not a great reliable source (and the author is quite biased, but that is to be expected). Journals, news papers, etc are way better because they are far more open to peer-reviewing. Also, there is nothing about what should be important about US nuclear policy and what other countries are modeling after the US in that section? The first thing I think of is if countries liked the US Nuclear Policy so much, then they why are we still one of the few, if not only, country to privatized their nuclear power? It's just not at the standard of this article and needs to be expanded or something. I'll give you a little time on that as well if you want, and not delete it off the bat like many would.Kayz911 (talk) 07:16, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The point is just that if the article is involved with someone's academic success and is GA competitor, that it would be helpful to all concerned if a separate article could be developed which would allow for WP to remain up to date without the level of stringency required to keep that article competitive for GA and academic awards. Otherwise, the article will be content- starved, interminable arguments would develope, and ego would become intertwined to a counter-productive extent. There is also an incentive for people with a vested interest in the article to view the underlying topic as glacially static fixed in stone and thus not in need of updating, and to nit-pick any new contributions to death. Don't you think that there is an evolving policy with regard to (1) Yucca Mountain (2) onsite waste storage (3) spent fuel (4) dry cask (5) the role of seismic studies (6) relicensing? At any rate, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will be in town tommorow and I will be speaking and I will mention this to some of the staff. Frankly, the length and the intensity of your remarks suggest to me all the more need for a completely separate article which does not step on your turf. Can you help think up a topic and perhaps help get that article set up, or at least support the concept. Some ideas might be "Post-Fukushima effect on xxxx". At any rate, it seems a no-brainer that we should be pulling from the same side of the rope on this as it is everyone's interest to allow content development to proceed without complicating your ambitions.  Bard गीता  21:57, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Hazel Dickens (Question for Adrignola)
Adrignola,

It seems that you have expertise in this area. In making recent edits to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazel_Dickens, it became apparent that there is no photo. She was a musician and there are many promotional photos of her all over the web but it seems that they are all on pages bearing a copyright notice or maybe also pages with no copyright information. Is it permissible to utilize a photo which is in wide use on the web or which is on a professional musician's webpage or other classes of use without a consent email or is it necessary to wait until a consent email form has been sent before utilizing any of those images? If so, hopefully the consent form turns up on searching "Help: photo consent" Also, are all images linked from wikicommons or are there image repositories on this or other WMF project pages which are permissible to use? Bard गीता 21:31, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I have found no images at Commons for use in this article. For an image to be hosted at Commons long-terms, OTRS permission would be needed.  You can upload ahead of time, but if permission is not received it will be deleted anyway.  Checking out the article's page, it seems that this person is no longer alive.  Wikipedia permits fair use of copyrighted images without permission for non-living persons, since there will no longer be any way to photograph a free replacement yourself.  You'll have to upload such a file locally and not to Commons since Commons doesn't permit fair use.  It will also have to not be too high of a resolution so as to not infringe on the copyright holder's ability to profit commercially from the image. – Adrignola talk 23:58, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmm. Sounds like good advice. Didn't know upload was enabled for users at WP. Bard गीता  00:20, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Non-essentialism
Hello. I notice that you added the nfd template to this article, which looks like you were trying to nominate it for deletion. Is that correct? If so, you were doing it wrong - the correct template to use it afd, as that's an article. The procedure to follow to nominate an article for deletion can be found at WP:AFDHOWTO. I can help you with it if you're having difficulties - please let me know on my talk page. On the other hand, if you weren't trying to nominate this article for deletion, then you shouldn't have used that template. I hope that's clear. Robofish (talk) 01:02, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
 * I am not terribly fond of afd but yes i was in that case reluctantly thinking along those lines. Bard गीता 23:24, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

TESTING testing ONE TWO THREE This template is placed here for observation purposes only
I put it here myself! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary&#32;for your edits. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you.

Template question
This template placed by this user.

Does the BASEPAGENAME populate automatically? Doesn't seem like it works right. Bard गीता 23:23, 30 May 2011 (UTC)=== 23:41, 30 May 2011 AnomieBOT (talk | contribs) m (41,466 bytes) (Substing templates: Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary&#32;for your edits. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. . See User:AnomieBOT/docs/TemplateSubster for info.) (undo)
 * BINGO! There's my answer.03:17, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Reframing proposals - Palestine/ international policy etc
I feel your pain. I too proposed a RENAME, which most people call a MOVE, and found myself subject to disparagement for accepting criticism and feedback. It really got out of hand. Someone who isn't probably usually so worked up about things seems to have taken a special interest in finding fault with anything now that i propose. They established a disagreement with me on an entirely unrelated thread, which it doesn't seem they had any prior interest in. Etcetera. it's like being stalked. sooo don't feel so bad that Jg took a swipe at you. all's fair in love and war right? this stuff does sharpen the intellect IMHP. in the long run dealings like that hone you for RealWorld and you look back on such interactions rather like interactions with college professors who were not at the time your favorite professor but whom in the long run maybe teach you more. Meanwhile, it helps me to not respond to WP:BAITING. :)
 * Substantively then: Is there any legitimate basis to a custom that proposals should be absolutely perfect and defined or else they are subject to summary dismissal or is that a made-up-from-thin-air hardball negotiating tactic with no credible basis in WP history? Bard गीता 02:16, 31 May 2011 (UTC)


 * this made me laugh! Yes, it seems that is customary on Wikipedia, but I don't really get too worked up over it. I do appreciate the suggestions and time you've provided to the discussion. I feel that it's sound reasoning to fork the content eventually, a rename would merely be an interim solution.  Night w   09:39, 31 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Maybe you can advise how to proceed at this where they are still back in the 50's...00:48, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Radiation, ionizing and non-ionizing
I just wanted to say thank you for honoring my in use template earlier. IMHO the world will not end if we don't achieve accurate naming of every WP article in one day, but judging by the ferocity of the commenting, one would think otherwise. For the sake of clarity i am asking that people post at the bottom of the thread whenever possible so we can see who posted when. The original proposal was flawed, but the two underlying issues appear to be outstanding. Thus, the modified move request lists two alternative targets either one of which would be a distinct improvement.Thank you for helping to maintain a civil tone while we sort out this somewhat confused move discussion. Bard गीता


 * So much text, and you moved everything around, and now I have to restate what I already said? Please, we are all unpaid volunteers here using our free time.


 * Please take a look at Talk:List_of_people_with_surname_Weeks, where I try to gently nudge the discussion towards a compromise I can live with. I don't create a new section, and I don't require that everyone restate their opinions there. (one hint: all arguments will be taken into account by the closing admin, even if they weren't made under the new section)


 * My head hurts right now. I need to rest a day or two, then I'll look at it. After all, I am supposedly in a "wikibreak". --Enric Naval (talk) 03:38, 31 May 2011 (UTC)


 * You and me both. Be at peace, brother. Bard गीता 03:39, 31 May 2011 (UTC)


 * (edit conflict, I was still writing more text :-) ) I mean: thanks for the message and all. But in those "requested move" discussions you are writing too much, and you are trying too much to control the flow of the discussion. This can backfire on you. Wait until you have more experience in discussions.


 * And, looking at the discussions, don't be surprised if they are closed against your opinion. Sometimes people prefer a simpler but slightly less accurate title. Editors usually prefer titles that normal people can understand over perfectly accurate titles that people won't recognize. And many will dislike accurate titles that are too long and complicated to type. The best thing is to shrug your shoulders and move to other matters. --Enric Naval (talk) 03:52, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, not if racism gets a pass. Also, IMHO, the Chinese are rising and will bite back if they are not treated fairly. But your points are well taken. It seems also that my work is placed under heightened and hostile scrutiny by someone from that threat, who seems intent on making me out as a rank idiot in the eyes of WP folk. So it goes. Bard गीता  04:01, 31 May 2011 (UTC)


 * A few comments: 1. Re "It seems also that my work is placed under heightened and hostile scrutiny by someone from that threat, who seems intent on making me out as a rank idiot in the eyes of WP folk." Bard, please do not make any assumptions about the motivations of other editors and write about them. Even if you feel that way, relax, take a deep breath, and get over it. Not easy to do for anyone, myself included I admit, but not voicing such thoughts helps to mark you as a mature and sensible editor who is above the petty fray (which I am sure describes you well), and contributes to a higher standard of discourse on WP. So we are clear, by making this suggestion, I am not taking a side on the issue about which you commented. 2. The comments you have made at Talk:Electromagnetic radiation and health are challenging to follow. You have added so much text, with varying formats or organization. Consistent formatting and short, brief comments, waiting for others' replies where possible, would help to keep things more understandable in my view. 3. The use of nomenclature like "Oppose" when responding to proposals is standard in WP. It does not mean a commenter thinks a voting process is taking place, merely indicates clearly the commenter's stance to the proposal. 4. I have taken the liberty of consolidating your latest two proposals at Talk:Electromagnetic radiation and health for clarity in this edit. I trust you will not think this too forward, and apologize if you feel I have changed your intended meaning in any way. End numbered list I hope you take these comments in the friendly spirit with which they are intended. --papageno (talk) 15:19, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

That poor student was probably taken aback by the revert

 * I noticed you talked to a guy about this content, which i thought was kind of cool.
 * "The Grameen Foundation was created to accelerate the impact of microfinance on the world’s poorest people, especially women. In 1976, Professor Muhammad Yunus founded the Grameen Bank with a mere $27 and now it serves more than 7 million poor families with loans, savings, insurance and other services. The bank is fully owned by its clients and has been a model for microfinance institutions around the world. In 2006, Professor Yunus and Grameen Bank jointly received the Nobel Peace Prize. President Barack Obama awarded Professor Yunus the 2009 Presidential Medal of Freedom."
 * That revert seems a bit harsh. Would that content survive if he had stated in the text what the source was? Bard गीता 03:26, 31 May 2011 (UTC) What recommendations would you make in that case? How could i avoid a similar fate myself, going forward, as i thought a mix of properly cited primary and secondary sources could be tolerable if not OR? And is OR your main concern? Or POV? If you are POV clean can we accept some OR? Isn't there OR or at least SYNTH in almost every WP page??04:07, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Rather than cool, I saw that Grameen Bank material as inappropriate advertising by someone who did not understand the project. That editor was sourcing from the organization's publications and the founder's book. Press release language and puffery don't belong here. Here is what I wrote on the editor's talk page:
 * I reverted the changes you made recently to the Grameen Foundation article. The only support offered for these changes are primary sources which are inappropriate for an encyclopedia and go against Wikpedia policy. Please see this article about appropriate sources for articles. Also, if there is any chance you have a conflict of interest due to a personal or business relationship with the Grameen Bank or Grameen Foundation, then please be aware that your participation in editing articles related to the Grameen programs must be undertaken with great self control and effort to eliminate bias. Thanks,  Joja  lozzo  00:20, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Regarding your email to me:"I still don't really understand why it is that you deleted all of the information I added...". I reverted your changes to the Grameen Foundation article because the only support offered for them were primary sources which are inappropriate for an encyclopedia and go against Wikpedia policy. Please see this article about appropriate sources for articles. Also critical to good editing is neutrality. The article should not read like an advertisement or press release. Once you understand the limited uses for primary sources such as the Grameen Bank web site and the founder's publications and the need for secondary sources and neutrality, please consider contributing again. If you think I was incorrect in reverting your contributions please bring it up on the article talk page. Thanks. Joja  lozzo  10:52, 3 May 2011 (UTC) :I understood that reverting the edits was going to come as a surprise to the editor and I tried to explain what I did by immediately posting to their talk page. I apparently did not communicate well enough but at least it was personalized a bit.
 * To avoid the mistakes of that editor, I suggest that if you have a conflict of interest, declare it on your talk page and on relevant article talk pages and be really careful about what you post. If you have a POV, work hard to tone it down. Try writing about the issue from the other perspective and let others write from yours. Use reliable secondary sources. Joja  lozzo  14:56, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Rename is not removal,deletion or censorship
Disagree with move proposals. "Chink" has a long and ugly enough history to be deserving of its own article. Per WP:CENSOR, ""being objectionable" is generally not sufficient grounds for removal of content." You cite WP:NOTFREESPEECH above, but I don't read that as a license to censor based on content, but rather to make it clear Wikipedia is here to create an encyclopedia, not a ground for soapboxing: "Wikipedia is free and open, but restricts both freedom and openness where they interfere with creating an encyclopedia". I don't see "Chink" as meeting that criterion. Khazar (talk) 07:07, 28 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Reply to the above [comment] Disagree with move proposals WHICH STATES "Chink" has a long and ugly enough history to be deserving of its own article. Per WP:CENSOR, ""being objectionable" is generally not sufficient grounds for removal of content."


 * WHICH REPLY IS AS FOLLOWS: This is not a proposal for "removal of content". The reply, while presumptively made in good faith (acknowledging the "ugly history"), errs in that it disputes a different proposal than this RM. Certainly there are those who might propose deletion of the content, and there may be a good case for deletion of the content. But that is not what is at issue here. What is at issue is whether the unqualified and facile promotion of a disreputable racial and ethnic slur, into the status of an encyclopedia title, is in fact the appropriate manner in which to handle that content. It would be interesting to see if the above commentator would revise their position in view of the common interests which clearly we do share, which is to promote and preserve the quality of this collaborative English-language encyclopedia. Bard गीता 00:54, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:18, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Ancient Apparition: Your formatting and interim remarks on C***k (Slang)
(Nice user page, particularly the fonts.} I appreciate that you blocked the discussion for archiving as one of the commentators was posting high on the page on another thread in an effort to influence "voting".

Presumably your remarks indicate that you don't anticipate an authorized rename of that article to be occuring anytime soon. We had that much figured out, but it was good to freeze the discussion insofar as some people reply higher up the talk page in such a manner that their remarks tend to get overlooked. One user who commented here more or less followed me around for a while and deliberately, it seems, posted higher up the talk page to advance a POV. With regard to your remarks, it seems that you are trying to assist the discussion along and that is appreciated.

I am not going to share my thoughts on your summary but please be open to considering that I may do so at a later time. But don't worry, nobody was expecting a rapid turnaround on the policy. For one thing, the discussion has helped focus the issue and any new concept for how to deal with the issues expressed will benefit enormously particularly from some of the comments of the most vociferous opponents of any change. Unfortunately, many commentators were mired in a robotic reiteration of NOTCENSORED without grasping the point that editorial guidelines, of which WP has many, are not "censorship" in any sense, and certainly not in the Orwellian sense with which it is often associated. Albeit, editorial guidelines can be abused to create a form of censorship' at any rate, collaborative discussion is a good thing not a bad thing and it is nice to know that there were so many people at least interested in considering the matter. Bard गीता 21:43, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Continued debate
Hi Geoffrey, I saw you were re-opening the discussion at Chink. It's fine with me, and I'll stay out of it this time, having already said my piece. And I'm sorry to hear you feel yourself censored; I know how frustrating it can be to have a consensus of editors on the other side of what you feel to be correct, as it's happened to me too. FWIW, the best advice I've gotten from another editor on WP is that when you start to feel heated in one area, it's often best to edit another for a while; there's always more work to be done almost anywhere you look. I hope you won't find this a particularly discouraging experience. Cheers, Khazar (talk) 21:47, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, it is discouraging but in the long long run i will prevail. For one thing, there are one billion Chinese and more of them studying English and computer science than in New Zealand and Australia put together. In the short run, people who hold administrative credentials, or hope to apply for them, have an understandable natural tendency to defend the status quo - IMO. That may be an insurmountable barrier. But outside of Wikipedia, people find the policy very annoying. And most persons of color who are not Wikipedia geeks find it very, very offensive. I don't even know how to begin to approach the administrator who took the thread on because in my experience if you don't go along with them they block you, that goes on your record, and you are screwed with regard to that project. Maybe he won't be that type, but it is not encouraging that he closed the thread by writing "a spade is a spade". I am old enough to remember when that remark was considered prima facie to be racist - not that I am taking a side one way or another. But it seems that perhaps some of the younger editors have a very set view of what is and what is not the correct way to classify and categorize and with the self-assuredness of youth more or less shut down the voice of historic experience. What may be achieved is a consensus down the line that the articles can remain as Free standing ≠ mere subsections, which is unfortunate, but perhaps at least of the form TERM (Word; derogatory). That way, WP does not put the imprimatur of respectability on hate speech. Bard गीता  22:11, 1 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Obviously I can't speak for others, but I can assure you that I'm neither an admin nor interested in becoming one, and it's certainly not motivating me in this case. I think you'll find Wikipedia both easier and more pleasant if you'd be willing to assume a bit of good faith on other editors. None of this is to dismiss the obvious offensiveness of the term "Chink"; I wholeheartedly agree it's a racist term in 99.3% of its uses. But all I can say is that some of us honestly believe the best way to deal with a slur is to discuss it straight on, hence the lack of an exception to the standard naming conventions. Hopefully we can agree to disagree on that, but in either case, happy future editing. Khazar (talk) 22:35, 1 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Oh, and btw, I just belatedly understand your meaning above in saying "that remark was considered prima facie to be racist". (I misread you initially as referring to Chink by "that remark"). I agree that it was an unlucky choice of words, but again, want to strongly encourage you to avoid the implications you're making here and assume good faith on James' part. As I'm sure you're aware, that metaphor predates the slur and in many areas continues to have a separate life, though I'm sorry to hear in your experience it's only been used racially. Khazar (talk) 05:16, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Hadal
Your recent rename was 100% on point and correct and it was long overdue. This post confirms that you and i have had no prior contact. Don't be surprised if you encounter opposition. IMHO it is important to defend that move it is not only logical it is essential. Also please be aware of this disambiguation page which I will back up here in case somebody messes with it. Interestingly, although you state on your Userpage that you are left of center, it is often left folks who confuse and conflate nuclear energy policy and nuclear weapons policy. So that helps your NPOV credentials because you are transcending your personal background. The real problem in general is that people really do confuse the two. The local Wikipdeia problem is that the article is involved with a Good Article nomination and with the academic work of one of its earlier editors and unfortunately there is a certain understandable touchiness with regard to the article which we need to work with. Also, IMHO there is no way there will be peace on that article without a separate article due to the inevitably turf battle. Bard गीता 22:04, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I didn't realize it was closed by moderator. I expected a wheel war and then being overwhelmed by status quo loyalists. Nevertheless, there will be constant criticisms of important information being added if it in anyway interferes with the role the article plays in the class project and the GA nomination. That would hamper the ability of the page to stay up to date. Already I am under a deletion threat of content because I think they want MORE citations, or DIFFERENT citations or ONLY PEER REVIEWED. But tons of articles cite journals. This extra special high standard is because of someone's use of the page as a class project so they should not be permitted to choke off updates, IMO. As a compromise, I suggest a different article which is NOT in the GA contest and the class project so we don't have to walk on eggshells. Bard गीता  23:52, 1 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi. I think it should be formally stated that I performed the move in my capacity as a disinterested, neutral party. The Requested moves page seems to be in a perpetual state of backlog and I was simply doing my part as an admin. I did read the discussion prior to moving the article. It seemed as though everyone agreed that a move was necessary, as the ambiguity of "nuclear policy" was not really in dispute. I do admit to a certain ignorance with respect to this 'turf war' you speak of, beyond the fact that the article seems to be a pet project (and I use term with no prejudice intended) for certain editor(s). I can understand the desire for a 'higher standard' of edits to the article, as I've been in that position before. However, I'm concerned by your statements above. When you say, "there is no way there will be peace on that article without a separate article," are you in fact proposing, in essence, a duplicated entry? If you feel good faith edits are being suppressed, creating a fork of the article is certainly not the solution. Might this be a case best handled via Dispute resolution? If the problem really is this dire, it is better to confront the issue head-on rather than try to circumvent it. --Hadal (talk) 08:27, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * When that was written it was not known that you were, in fact, an administrator, and if you werre not it would have been probable that the move would have been reverted, apparently, because of the possessiveness expressed to me here. For instance, my understanding of that letter is that if entries to that page are not absolutely perfect, they will be reverted even if they contain important content. I understand your concern that content forks not occur as a result of personal issues such as territorialism. Agreed. However, in the interest of avoiding yet another incessant argument over the obvious, the proposal, designed to accomodate others, not myself, was to exercise discretion and explore the possibilities of discretionary fork. Ultimately there is no absolutist warrant for fork or not-fork in all cases; in some instances, a fork is reasonable as is a non-fork. The opportunities to split ( the term fork is not necessarily the best word for dividing content) which are most reasonable are when the article's scope exceeds its topic, which does occur, but also, it would seem not unreasonable to consider a separate article on "Post Fukushima effect on NRC policy". There is nothing duplicative nor is it an intention to "circumvent" anything, it is an attempt to forge a workable solution. As it stands, I feel inhibited from contributing anything to the article because it might mess up somebody's academic work, or somebody's shot at GA, and it seems the article will fall into Outdated status unless something is created. A very specific corrollary issue is that Kay has taken on a viewpoint which seems to be a direct result of all of this stress and tension around GA and academics, which is the view that US nuclear (energy) policy is some kind of stable phenomenon which does not change and therefore the article will not need much updating. Rather than resist that observation, my suggestion was to accomodate it. One way would be to distinguish between the more stable fundamental policy and the actual regulation as practiced on a per-reactor basis. Nuclear anything is a vast vast topic which can accomodate a multiplicity of articles but unfortunately on Wikipedia if you create new articles they can be deleted onsight and you may not even have a copy of your work. There is a bias toward merging and in a complex topic such as this one merging is seldom a good idea. I try to work on other collaborative projects because after more than five years I still am patrolled by people with no interest in the topics who seem to enjoy deleting other people's work for technicalities and it becomes a waste of time trying to request they at least userfy. So perhaps you can support a rational new article series such as the two mentioned above: US regulatory response to Fukushima; Nuclear energy regulation in the US and another needed article, if anyone cares to write it, and if it is not spot deleted by an administrator with no interest in nor background in the field, Public opinion on nuclear energy, Public opinion on nuclear energy in the US. Kay is making demands for perfection in the last paragraph of the article with regard to these topics, but IMHO Public opinion is a separate matter altogether than Public policy and the best solution would be to recognize that and pre-approve a split. Whaddaya say? (As for ominous, it is the prospect I may burn out from the constant attack of sock puppets and heavy handed admins - why delete monastic silence of all things - and go the route of User:Neutralhomer and so many others?  Bard गीता  17:15, 2 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Oh boy. I don't know if I'd feel comfortable (or qualified for that matter) to "pre-approve" anything. I read your exchange with Kayz911 and, unfortunately, I think you've simply chosen to edit in the wrong place at the wrong time. I'm not sure who approved a co-mingling of someone's graduate school project with the decidedly non-personal prime directive of the Wikipedia project, and while I don't think it's the most stellar of ideas, I'm also reluctant to get involved in the mess. I was honestly just trying to move things along for the betterment of the project: the article I moved was one of dozens stuck in WP:RM limbo, probably because admins are trying to avoid sticky situations like this one. For what it's worth I do think there's plenty of content that could be written under your proposed headings, so you're right in that they wouldn't necessarily be forks. Having your work summarily deleted by trigger-happy page patrollers is and always will be a risk inherent in participating here: however, you always have recourse. Articles can be undeleted; and even if they don't survive a Request for undeletion, you can still get a copy of your work retrieved from the deletion archive. Also, as I'm sure you're aware, you can always work on an article in your own user space to 'incubate' it unmolested, until such time you believe it can 'stand on its own' against possible challenges. If you feel like you might be headed for a burnout, you probably are: and this is coming from someone who stopped editing regularly for nearly five years. --Hadal (talk) 04:23, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah I took a few days off and read a few books. Did me a lot of good and lo and behold - all of the threads had nothing but nice collegial remarks for me :))) And thanks for your "second set of eyes on my thoughts". "For what it's worth I do think there's plenty of content that could be written under your proposed headings, so you're right in that they wouldn't necessarily be forks..." confirms my thinking. And yes, while the grad school class is not a lawful WP concern, just as a courtesy IMHO it is not a bad thing to work around it! Thanks for the feedback. Bard गीता  04:31, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Guerrillo
Is there anything that you think has a pressing need to be written? --Guerillero &#124; My Talk  23:05, 1 June 2011 (UTC) Yes lots. But for starters, G., could we possibly pick a better graphic for the stub? The one you picked is brilliant photojournalistically but unfortunately is neither typical nor helpful for people in that predicament. I am sure you understand - severe obesity, schizophreniform dishevelment, lack of hygiene does occur amongst a sub population but most folks in that position are not quite as bad off as the poor bloke in that Parisian slum!!! I have some shots I took which I was going to add to wikicommons maybe you would like to pick one out? If you email me I will send you some (c) photos to peruse, there are some good ones or if I find links...I don't want to let my good photos go to CCL because I am afraid if I lose control they will be subject to abusive use but one would be OK. Also I asked and received permission to use the photos, which is more than most photographers do. Oh - we could use an article on Continuum of Care. Discrimination and Prejudice. Disaster Planning and Emergency Planning, no that would be OR. Give me a day to think on this!
 * I will look through a few things. The Issue is that the image needs to be representative of houselessness. --Guerillero &#124;  My Talk  00:40, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

OK Here's pictures
I took and own (c)

http://homelessinsb.org/wikis_view.cfm?id=170

http://homelessinsb.org/wikis_view.cfm?id=168

The guy in blue gave specific permission for the widespread use. The other guy also knew he would be "famous". Use either and I will certify but I want the tightest licensing available on Wiki Commons so the picture is not used for harming human dignity. The drummer one is no problem he looks so happy. I would recommend using that one. Yeah put them in the stub for Homeless please if you have technical or legal concerns Adrignola knows a lot about this stuff he is very cool about helping with answers to questions. Also, we might decide on either a Project or a Task Force or a Book or exactly what. There is a lot of reallyshclocking writing on the topic at WP. BCYSAD

Project
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals/Homelessness#Support_the_Project:_Please_List_Your_Name_Here.21

Portal???
I think a Portal is a great idea.

Also
I don't know that I quite see the point of http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Warming_center&action=historysubmit&diff=432082215&oldid=431726321 just wondering if it is better or not... Bard गीता 23:19, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Request for uninvolved admin
THANK YOU! It would be nice if an administrator might close the non-existent discussoin of a forced merger of Monastic silence which has 35 references into Vows of silence, which no one is interested in. The merger template is a nuisance and it discourages work on the article. The only person who has commented on the merger is myself, in opposition. The vows article is underdeveloped and no more relevant to the practice of monastic silence than the oath of office of cops, or the President are to the performance of their obligations. It is the tail wagging the dog to suggest that the vow to do something should become the superordinate topic and monastic silence is practiced by non-vowed laity and un-vowed monastic guests. Vowed silence occurs outside monasteries. The topics are not at all connected, they merely have some overlap. This is kind of a bummer because the admin who placed the merge header had deleted the page with no discussion, while it had both UNDERCONSTRUCTION and INUSE templates on it. I had to contact and plead for restoration and the MERGER proposal went on immediately, with no thoughtfulness whatsoever. The deletion was not a lack-of-content it was because supposedly the very poorly written Vows article already, in his opinion, covered the topic. As i pointed out it seemed there was a certain POV bias against articles about religion and spirituality. Anyway, it is a stressor and it would be nice if the fact of the article's existence were respected rather than be under this apparently permanent dangling sword... Bard गीता 17:37, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

A Wake Up call
I can't figure out whether or not you are requesting speedy deletion of this page. If so, the speedy delete tag should indicate the reason for speedy deletion. If not, please just remove the speedy delete tag, because you were the one who placed it in the first place, and restore the content. Right now you have the page blanked and a speedy delete tag that says the page shouldn't be deleted. Thanks. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:20, 3 June 2011 (UTC)


 * By the time I had a chance to comment it was deleted, but here's my opinion... The article was probably not a candidate for speedy deletion, as it didn't fit any of the categories used for that purpose... have a read through of WP:CSD. It was, however, about a subject that was extremely unlikely to pass any Wikipedia notability guideline. I would either have proposed it for deletion via WP:PROD or probably nominated it at WP:AFD.


 * I can't tell if you meant me by the 'senior admin' thing, but I'm about as junior as they come... :)  Catfish  Jim  (ex-soapdish)  11:10, 3 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't usually get involved with deleting anyone's good faith edits, but that article was clearly headed for deletion and I stepped in because it seemed that WP was at risk of permanently alienating potential future contributors. As per discussions at Wiki Meta, Strategy, etc. The article was well intended however it was self-promotional content which did not meet WP:Notability. To avoid hurt feelings on the part of well intended writers unfamiliar with WP, the content is userfied, which was the point. Thanks, and, BTW, Jim, you are a pretty damn good administrator IMO.  Bard गीता  04:17, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Denaar
I appreciate your frank discussion of baiting. A lot of it goes on here. Keep your chin up, mate. There are plenty of good people here. 08:33, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Nuuijin technical question
Do you know of javascript or something that will enable me to de-wikify. What I do now is copy paste into text editors and replace square brackets with blank space. This ruins image file:imae.jpg so i need to manually add the [[ back in or do the job in sections. I am working on a massive book series and would appreciate anything that will whittle the job down. Also, is there something that will color code citations when working on wikipedia pages I can hardly read some of these pages.08:32, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I think you're standing at the edge of regular expressions. I don't have much experience with how javascript is used here, but a regular expression can be tailored to replace 'all instances of square brackets except "[[file:*]]"'. See this for some further reading. In terms of the colors, something similar where you'd use a regex to find citation instances and then manipulate the style of them to change the colors. That might be harder given the variability of how people cite things around here. Folks at the help desk might be able to shred more light on these issues, however. --Nuujinn (talk) 10:46, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

SONGS
Doesn't the section on popular culture trivialize the whole matter?08:32, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

-BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

hQIMA+DblIy497DOARAAk8c7K8X40tEViofczVlZv69cNz0assG5i6hvrEAwiz/w vSCO7e64k+DPNfUctS/G7V1kbEQZhi0+NsZ/MnIfdT58gsnIf/KDNZfsCFUi0qky 19dINq/AzQDYKmSOkEcdgi2p6tTuymFHEPbKPTtaUK8hJbh9iolPf3LHWGkyS3QQ EbNGgKstUXG0e50pTv+VY+9u4DUDhRFKw8HW5EZT7TADRqnD+XACH4j1tchVoQtH oKXEzf1m5/PtMGXNI76/YG5Vfoq5UbkpKYCpTswnWPyVXJT01aG8CYwkEWc8Dd0Q KVLuDl1PqwiDCoNV34RJjFqJUpzr2r1L//V49RSh4EkK0s9JDZFlsthcmO5b7dw4 wv8HaRV/oXyJCKU9A2ZUVX54vAcrW/CxRPc+NoYgc1pEMiqpM54uaSiumPphMSbW 4b7oH0sQFWCg4umV0yhxartXj3OFlfb7N5jXTCxidCAC6WozJNwxLLT1GFMBYiWx iDWaMaSLBgT5w/0JoT/jTvy2CB9dOC8XiF8oRex1RQQjt2Y7hAlmCy96pXLhovDp ivtcKrZvy8h/4yEfIQG+lK6VQne9I/EXWmrWP5lljOYUsFnEsb+90Muo/Xi1cAUD LEEcPdHE36Jwja063OAySLfPkgrW+Jr4jPBLPtKDL9TZcbL7OIotyWbLOJHOC//S 6gEEXW50s1nPZN7CsqNSlZirFlWmztMqIhbBXfjV5jsXAbEBEe2Z5bdZ1heNCaYI c2xP7l0DqCD/7gNZAAVwrtQj8a/HF0bWB1caWmgSfwdDFPvDkFvSwVyUX/Wn85UE nQxIqipcDLey9Uyhk1eEtNq+2ealMJx3rm8CL21UXbHh152HHsVN3ABA8IPmDOg7 JYc9CVvcUta1ymm/0Vtb0Gs9BTwGNPKPVhcF7D4MBahMDDfE1sY54xcrPlOm1cYP eDGIQAedzW9+/Np8T07HgrcmRfCsBCM+Kj0lL+dvjBDXJl1ah/gZ/muUOxKjXHyJ k5CIyVqyW85EZGcOLzd2jJlZRoCMEU6S6VQU79Ds351lpOTqYWw8B+Uz0etJVhZR ovYVbKnCjxOjr9jReRZe+RU5XllY9tkKo+hk+Od9zR4fb0ITB0lwfMm866IT3B3/ fDKg4S13By4I2yNWVjezWu8/AvYpwaxtkYGZSZ/wXPuQug7rbPsE1nJoj/3AYfjr kaqtWcsBV4f8YSp7LBzOfvW0DvykrlxuO5zAaiW2QoCaBF5SXTO2vyqfhF4CXJAs 07a3j8GAig+TiuhExW54aNMtLPvoSusjTwiNhXgLpBFjuhpsLqS+nTOe38+tEHaq /PKvZQnFvzxFkSgNcsz2NThGaYDBcUYFBifm5PIfgAJqwwfS8KyYx1tnPK3ljRNI vve/KuDpNDCbpJz5k/qPM876yZYJGLNTkM/ng385/P1WMpQEhx6DqkKRDdUHsAQ2 UiP5gDuk3mzD+qVOYqKlzWS0oNy9vN/duscV5Fj+eAJpWXIjflonY+eYI3ZAtzlL xAjrBPuxI/ZcnBRhDl1/KtNjX3/nZ8ND7UlPXTiplcyS3ph91agjT177qSnwO91A dDmGJ4NgWjd/orXQV6I1Xr+/5iftHaXCV5FtQKs8mDDqaO/hnH4OgDgsb4HZmuD9 i3vMIOzefAVcViLQPc47OY6jpigGEfF6JRNA0LVU26MuT1ZOlmkJ65FCym+jo1Dz ytrkA7GODQ0igTDwBcXyGsQHQNp7/8C6UHwMqeNcZ4wh9PbUs7iyPMPw8U8utBJb A4hF2Hz+n3gYaK4y73v7uDspqXN41rRufoB9vZxq/9fayYOTsZbP0Q3yYibFmIJM XxJMiIATD4kRTubBslyCwKn10x1VAtfaYVzp/XwOXvTc56qvj/5eSCeMuNtKBUcu H3fMUgOHCyR5Ow2yKjA27f7fihCOeNacUBGbJKChTZKP0jitkgQ0mAN2Pyb9dwW+ g8gGQRXwxcqzHQuYxTAE+M6wPXHR4uR6JwMz9OsImaKQVDsEsmXZT+56Jg+7Ze9a X5gAVTlebbB+HRkx9iXSLkmzoAIvqul+6YKlTUwv+AfjBBd3z7kfa5QF7nUfysWr Q0Ay1+NkZmYbM2uCLGKVpQGCFyBVKGGBcFUbZS1cNKg1IsbhWoDDMRLzQVA5ybo4 +9dPK/pvO7iR/UPqwzzF0bdmOg25Pf8CNVPyajMhcvwIJEWNv2Dhd3mPKNxvwbTY 3Yh+9RMCqKJG7g7DHXFXNSzEjHQLuDpvaKHnLFC6S5U/CjR+MXuSsGySxUo7wC2d OVdK5V8= =WHl8

June 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
--Kumioko (talk) 18:46, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

MaterialScientist: Thanks for the antivandalism. Is Mothers for Peace now vandalizing Wikpedia?
Based on the message from the anonymous user who blanked the page, they claim to be acting for San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace. After writing up several articles on Diablo, I thought someone would claim that SLOMFP was being unfairly left out of wikipedia coverage. Looks like no good deed goes unpunished. Anyway, it would not be surprising if more of that unethical conduct emerges. Maybe there should be a contact with Charter Communications, or a block from the Wikpedia side? Would it be helpful to address a cease and desist letter to Mothers for Peace? UNITED STATES CALIFORNIA ATASCADERO 35.489417 -120.670725 93422 -08:00 Net Speed ISP Domain DSL CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS CHARTER.NET 23:04, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Geolocate:

Boud
Don't forget. WP:DTRThe problem with that template is that there probably is not yet an intternational equivalent. The concept "Prison to Pipleine" is a USA political concept. There is not necessarily a development of the concept on an international basis. It will be necessary to research the matter. If there is in fact international development of the concept, that could be reported here. If there is no international development, it would seem the options are (1) write it up on another site, as OR, and then report that in this article or (2) remove the template. There is no prohibition on WP of articles pertaining to events intellectual and otherwise which are occuring in the US, or in the UK, or elsewhere. Do you have information to the effect that Prison to School Pipeline is a developed concept outside the USA? If so, the template is appropriate. If not, the template is not appropriate. Geo Bard Rap 02:01, 17 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry if you were upset by the tag - i certainly am assuming good faith by the editors of the article. :) WP:BIAS certainly does not claim that any editors are deliberately biased. Since you pointed to WP:DTR, i'd like to suggest that you look at WP:BIAS if you haven't read it before. It documents and discusses (statistical) demographic biases that are natural, for obvious reasons. It also makes some suggestions. i won't discuss the article itself here - that makes more sense on the article talk page. Boud (talk) 09:13, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Water pollution control


Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, Water pollution control. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Regional Water Quality Control Board. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Regional Water Quality Control Board - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). 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 [Water resource policy|Talk:Water pollution control|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. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. かんぱい！ Scapler (talk) 02:48, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I actually created both pages rather than a move I pasted. Looks funny, but is legit.

==Removing Speedy at Water pollution control== Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Water pollution control, a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, then you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion and appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. - SDPatrolBot (talk) 02:50, 21 June 2011 (UTC) To whom it may concern: the article is extant at Water resource policy.  Geo Bard Rap 02:19, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Explanation?
Please explain what you are doing duplicating the same page over and over to different titles and redirecting mainspace articles to user pages. I don't know what you are trying to accomplish. かんぱい！ Scapler (talk) 03:01, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Read the above please. I userfied. Just trying to rename. Hence, userfied. Only one net article. Look at my user page. I am settling on one and only one title. See? Geo Bard Rap 03:03, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, that is all well and good, but would it not be best to decide on a name BEFORE making a bunch of different pages and then simply redirecting the rest? かんぱい！ Scapler (talk) 03:05, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Obviously. But I did not realize there was duplicative content. Water is very messy needs reorganize. University library security are closing the library, gotta go. Glad we could work it out. If you are an admin please just delete the first two sorry about the confusion, it is understandable. My bad, But you see the intention, thanks.,  Geo Bard Rap 03:07, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Geofferybard for your addition to Water crisis of Water resource policy
Thank you Geofferybard for your addition to Water crisis of Water resource policy. 99.190.86.133 (talk) 05:02, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * My thanks also. 97.87.29.188 (talk) 19:45, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Be aware that User:Arthur Rubin (Arthur Rubin) hides/deletes other's Talk, such as May 19th on User Talk:Zodon http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Zodon&diff=429845197&oldid=429841834  ... on March 30th 2011 it was User talk:Granitethighs http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Granitethighs&diff=prev&oldid=421531277 and User talk:OhanaUnited  http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:OhanaUnited&diff=421531280&oldid=421528249 These are related to Template:Sustainability and Sustainability (and related topics).  There are many other examples of Tendentious editing such as Large Cities Climate Leadership Group... Special:Contributions/Arthur Rubin.  64.27.194.74 (talk) 19:56, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It is generally considered rude to mess with other people's user pages and talk pages so if necessary there are means to address the matter. On the other hand, anyone who edits in their real name should be presumptively in good faith. There are people who are viscerally opposed to anything that uses some of that terminology due to POV issues of their own but WP has means to address that. If you don't want to use a Talk page on your page please email me so we will have a line of communication.
 * I looked at things and it seems that Art is a tough cookie but well intended. Why not create a regular non-IO accuont for yourself with Talk, ask him not to mess around with your Talk page if you think he might, and if he steps over WP etiquette lines ask him to stop or take it to RFC or arbitration. He is very sharp but strangely subscribes to the simplistic reductionism of the libertarian party, which is his right, but raises POV questions; he also advocates that there be one and only link from scientific blah blah about climate change, which would be solely to Anthropocene global warming, which I disagree with. He does seem to be interested in suppression of linking which he considers to be "overlinking" but he acknowledges his requirement to comply with consensus and process so rather than get all Spy/Counterspy about it maybe both of you guys can collaborate.
 * Now if Art's issue is that he is a climate change sceptic, I am an old hand in that arena because my father, who has twice as many doctoral degrees as Art, was an early signatory to the global warming sceptic petition and I frequently engage my libertarian and conservative aquaintances with lively debate on the topic. But maybe Art just has a certain precise vision of how collaborative media should work. I think there are a lot of POV warriors on WP who kind of take a lot of the fun out of it, but I don't think he is one of them. I think by engaging him we might learn...but then you seem to have a good vision of what your concept of WP and maybe in time I too will become inclined to hold Art at arms' length, too. But I am not there yet, so I am not opposed to taking a dispassionate and basically nuetral POV to any disputes between ya's. I am not volunteering, but if yo guys need arbitration, I am probably still sufficiently nuetral to consider taking that job on. But if you need arbitrarion, don't wait too long because if yo and I communicate a whole lot and I don't communicate with Arther then perhaps he would not recognize me as nuetral. In any case don't hesitate to seek Arb Com intervention if need be.Usually, when people throw their WP weight around too much, and I am not saying he does, they step on lots of other people's toes, and you would be surprised how much sympathy you may obtain. In particular, I don't think anyone will support any user hiding or blanking other people's talk pages, so if need be, bring the issue to the light of day. On the other hand, it is not helpful that yo are not registering a username. I suggest you do so and keep an open mind. Even if you are engaging Arthur as an opponent, it is an intellectual opposition and IMO it is good to have intelligent, principled opponents because we learn from them, and he does seem to be intellectually formidable, even if he is into all that Ayn Rand stuff (which I would not know). Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap 20:13, 24 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your comments. I hope some level-headed, reasonable comments such as yours are sustainable within wp-land.


 * My experience with Art and occasional associates, have left me no desire to become closer to Wikipedia. His behavior, and the lack of Wikipedia stopping him, has been self-destructive to wp community building from my view.  Why well intended?  Not just rude (Talk page guidelines).  Art, who will at least lurk this page, is an open climate change denialer, as he has stated as such.  I don't know that Arthur Rubin is his real-life name, if you do.  He seems to know little-to-nothing about the Sciences, except some tangential mathematics, and has not shown a history of viewing new information as an opportunity to learn.  If you look further back in time (start with Special:Contributions/Arthur Rubin) you will find the opposite of Etiquette is his Modus Operandi: extremism, either-or, Tendentious editing consistently (particularly refusal to undertand), insulting, Overzealous deletion, etc ... a petty tyrant bully ... particularly against IP Users.   We disagree on Art, as small fleeting improvement(s) have statistically shown to be  overwhelmed by backsteps.


 * Thank you again for you thoughtful comments. may be of interest.  Best Wishes.  99.181.135.203 (talk) 01:47, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It's like this. I have no opinion one way or the other I have nothing to do with the individual but I would presume that it would be easy enough to justify the veracity just look up the county elections and see if there was in fact such a candidacy. But if the situation is as dire as you suggest then WP rules are in your favor. The key in these situations is to not let your patience be exhausted and to keep your cool. I have seen people burn out and walk away from WP or from certain topics. There are topics I avoid because of lititigious POV warriors. But others keep them in check on those pages. My areas of interest are apparent Now, no one can delete away properly cited NPOV information on the GHG debate. If so, that person would LOSE on commuity review or arbitartion and would be BLOCKED. Probably, your antagonist is too smart to transgress that overtly. But you can't lose if you have truth on your side. Why not set up an account with a talk page of your own for centralization of your concenrns? If you conduct yourself well you will win credibility and could even stand for arbitrator. Anyway keep a stiff upper lip. Facts are facts. Climate "deniers" come in all shapes and sizes. SOme actually admit the data and that there is a warming trend. They just argue about what the cause is. I wonder which he is. Any how if you believe there have been violation prepare a request for an intervention. Block request can be for a day or a week or longer and can be topic restricted. If it is the case that the man has incorrectly or arbitrarily made such deletions then the procedures are clear cut warn first, politely, then prepare a litigation process at WP. Cut and dried. The real issue is what issues matter the most to whom. Some people aree very ocncerned, eg., with middle east politics, so they play the dershowitz-finklestein intellectual marathon. Personally, that's not my bag so i tend to stay out of that topic. But when it comes to the issues that concern me such as Diablo Canyon Power Plant, I am all about NPOV and I have weathered arbitrary deletionism, theft of documents, attacks on my personal funding/backers the whole nine yards. It's all about committment to the truth. Don't give up. Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap 23:20, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * These: Dershowitz–Finkelstein affair and Diablo Canyon Power Plant ? Best wishes.  99.190.80.245 (talk) 07:37, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Mothers for Peace: Throwing out the baby with the bathwater?
Question #1:

I understand that taking the four contentions from the plaintiff website is not in your view a "reliable" source so I will find the citation to the ASLB where I have read the complaint and know that in point of fact that the SLOMFP website is not misrepresenting the nature of the "four contentions" they are bringing before the ASLB. However, you also deleted remarks from a prominent professor at Stanford. I am wondering if that was perhaps inadvertant. Please advise.

Deleted:

According to Professor Burton Richter, director emeritus of the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, most of the security measures with regard to spent fuel reactor pools are classified. -

Question # 2: Why is Mothers for Peace deemed "unreliable"? Isn't that up to the reader to decide if it is properly cited? I will as stated find the ASLB link which is a superior citation but I don't know that it is quite exact to characterize the plaintiff as "unreliable" if they are a 501(c)3 which has been around for decades. I understand that people who are principals of corporations often lift copy from their websites to self-promote, but that is not what is the case here. And I did verify the information at ASLB which is a difficult link to find due to some weird configuration at the NRC. It seems that a citation improvement request template would be superior to outright reversion, IMHO.

Question #3: Deleting the trace information on the Mothers for Peace TalkPage, which pertained to the vandalization seems to be covering the tracks of an event which occured publicly on WP. I am wondering where would be the proper repository for that data, if not the talk page. Is there a vandalism record elsewhere? Is there a specific policy on this matter? As it went, that user was blocked for a week then one day at another WP project, but I contacted that individual offline and the vandalism will not recur. But it seems that hiding or deleting might raise an appearance of covering up for misconduct and perhaps in the long run it raises an appearance of covering up for the vandalism, despite the apparent bias in the other direction at item #2.  Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap 17:31, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * 1 and #2 My concern here was that the entire section was sourced to a youtube video which the community has decided is not an appropriate reference. If you can find those same points mentioned in a qualifying source, you're welcome to put any/all of it back in.  I didn't say anything about the subject being unreliable - the source you provided to verify the information is not considered "reliable" (i.e. not appropriate on Wikipedia); please see WP:RS for the Wikipedia policy on sources. #3 The article talk page is for discussing the article; removing the information from that talk page hasn't blanked any of the usual Wikipedia/Wikisource logs - all edits remain in page histories and accounts also have block logs.  Hope that helps answer your questions; if not, please let me know - I'll put your talk page on my watchlist. Shell   babelfish 17:52, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * There are actually two distinct issues here and they are not at all related.

Issue #1: Video references
 * My contention: This has been discussed before, I think with admins, and relates to a stale policy which actually has been modified to reflect those discussions. Thus, if those mods have not been reverted, the technical position of the "community" has changed. The point is this: in this rapidly changing world, video of government meetings and high level conferences are appearing all over the place and very few institutions are willing to pay transcribers.


 * Therefore I proposed that if there is not transcription available that if the information is important and pertinent it not be subject to summary deletion but rather readers can decide whether or not to check the video. However, as I recall this discussion, it was advised to put the minutes and seconds on the citation.
 * Thus, since this was a university level conference on a very important topic, I included Dr. Barton's remarks and as I recall with minutes and seconds information. I am sorry I am not able to provide the link to the modified citation policy at this moment because I am close to running late for a lunch engagement. If requested I will provide that link and of course be happy to submit to an RFC which is probably a good idea on this issue.


 * Issue #2: The Barton conference statement was only the citation for the last sentence or two which refuted the position of the Mothers for Peace "Four Contentions" at the ASLB. I had thought that the contentions were cited to the SLO-MFP website. I will check after lunch and fix this problem which should not be controversial. If there is a good hard link I will revert the statement of the contentions, preferably with the actual NRC complaint citation.


 * Thanks for your kind and courteous attention to this matter. I am off to my lunch engagement! Ciao.  Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap 18:01, 29 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Okay, if you can point to where the community discussed youtube videos and indicated they were appropriate for sources, then I'd have no problem with that going back in. I looked around a bit myself and I didn't see it offhand, but I certainly don't follow all of the policy discussions that go on (or I wouldn't have time to do anything else) so just let me know if you happen to find it. Enjoy your lunch! Shell   babelfish 18:59, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Shell I simply overlooked citing the four contentions. The videotaped conference at Stanford was added later. I will patch things up let me know if you need any changes.  Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap 22:43, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Canadian fiddle?
Actually I did some research and there is hard copy material about Canadian fiddle music in Boston so I will add per your suggestion. But an independent article is due also on Quebecois fiddle I don't think I am necessarily the mot qualified author however.  Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap 21:24, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You will also find Scandinavian fiddling in and around Boston, along with Scottish and Irish, but I don't have a source to back that up. Mostly tunebooks and fakebooks in this house, with occasional skimpy commentary on fiddling styles. In real life, I need to learn that foot-jigging thing that Québecers and Cape Breton Islanders do in their chairs while fiddling. In Wikipedia, I will keep my eyes open, and pitch in when I can. Be well, __ Just plain Bill (talk) 23:09, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey Bill you know that is what I am doing is just typing in the content and citation from fiddle tune collection books I have. That is the way to do this thing. It would be awesome if you could type in on one of the fiddle pages the references and any factoids from the books. I am using Reiner and Ferrell as you may have noticed. Which what kind of books do you have? Any Down East? I can't find any written evidence of Scandinavians in Boston they seem to be in the Midwest. Hey why don't we start a WikiProject on Fiddling it is actually pretty easy and would help to get all of these pages organized. Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap 23:14, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The bits in Brody's Fiddler's Fakebook fall in the category of "skimpy commentary" in my opinion, as accurate as hasty generalities can be. Dave Reiner is a pretty accomplished fiddler, and can stir up a nice swinging sound at the drop of a hat. Down East, I don't know. Mid-coast and China Lakes area is about as far as I've ever gotten to Maine. Ya, sure, Scandinavians have settled in the midwest, but when I last looked (more than a few) years ago there was a thriving set of Scandinavian-style American fiddlers in Boston, gammaldans kind of stuff. Probably still there.
 * I would be willing to be a casual contributor to a Fiddling WikiProject, but my attendance can sometimes be spotty. As you may know, organizing fiddlers can be like herding cats. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 23:32, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Re: Stub proposals
Hi Geofferybard,

At least one of the new stub templates you've proposed already exists at a name which complies with stub naming conventions - Nuclear-energy-stub. Grutness...<small style="color:#008822;">wha?  00:34, 30 June 2011 (UTC)


 * OK. I thought I checked for it maybe it did not populate where I looked. I suppose the Epidemiology-stub proposal is in better shape anyway. Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap 01:21, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

SuggestBot
Frequency=30


 * align=top|
 * Cleanup
 * Zydeco
 * Culture of Louisiana
 * Leela and Ellie Grace


 * Merge
 * Phipps Institute for the Study, Treatment and Prevention of Tuberculosis
 * List of American folk musicians in Oregon
 * Three Mile Island accident


 * Add Sources
 * Texas country music
 * Great Peace March for Global Nuclear Disarmament
 * Nuclear energy policy


 * Wikify
 * John A. Kuri
 * Energy Northwest
 * Sandy MacIntyre


 * Expand
 * Naval Base Kitsap
 * Music of Mississippi
 * Music of Vietnam


 * }

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:48, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility
WW: I have created related pages and a book on DCPP and am so burned out now that I need to take a break and work on music related topics. I greatly appreciate you buffing that page up the topic greatly deserves expansion. I would be honored if you would collaborate on any of the other nuclear power WMF entities I have created here and at WB so please do edit boldly! Thanks again.  Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap 23:38, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You're very welcome! I'll take a look at the others at first opportunity! :) Wilhelmina Will (talk) 23:40, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Cool. I do make mistakes, and the topic is very fast breaking right now. One person can't keep up. Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap 23:42, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive invitation
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 09:01, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Bill

 * This is a Don't take the bait moment. That user has been harshly admonished long ago for deleting images without warning or explanation. The points you make are generally good but in this matter those items you listed are not visible to the naked eye in that picture. Please don't feed this guy he is WP:Wikilawyering and this new development plays right into that vicious cycle. Seriously, can you look at that bridge and tell it is curved? And you yourself pointed out that ....(to be continued.) Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap  02:53, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It's a picture of a plain vanilla violin. I think it is excess baggage in the Old-Time fiddle article, and I don't care about the history of the fellow who removed it. I myself pointed out that "we can do better," and now I will point out that there is no deadline. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 09:33, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Further, the side view of that violin does show something about the curvature of the bridge top, for those with eyes to see. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 09:54, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * YES, EXACTLY, WP:DEADLINE, and it was not proper to delete that as it is a photo of a fiddle and there is no better photo of a fiddle at Commons. I am not going so far as to say it was tantamount to vandalism, but it was not an edit which was helpful. I would have expected you would see that stirring up contentiousness rather than comradely deliberation was the predictable outcome of that edit series. ( I am not speculating as to motive and I assume good faith, but it was something that needed to be brought up at Old time fiddle's talk page not made as a fait accompli brute force edit. Yes I get your point that if one squints and looks real hard on a full screen blowup of that JPG on an expensive monitor, they can probably make an educated guess that the curvature of that bridge is straight off the bench for sale as a violin to the general market. But the edit I objected to was on the basis that the photo was of a photo of a "modern violin", as though a modern violin is not, in fact, a fiddle. Rather than support me on that point, you changed the dialogue to what is really a red herring, which is the issue of the bridge.


 * Regarding the bridge, that photo is not taken at the proper angle to show the bridge curvature. Someone who already knows what to look for might surmise the bridge has not been flattened, especially if they go to full screen with the original resolution. It is barely detectable. The photo is the forest, not the tree. Please upload photographs of your bridges, I am sure you, like myself, have several lying around in a drawer somewhere, with varying degrees of curvature. Fiddle is supposed to be about fun and community. "Let them that have ears listen". Let's not take ourselves too damn seriously. This is not a debate on the Israel-Palestine disupute, the nature of the Trinity or the homoousios. We're talkin' fiddles here. Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap 02:16, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * If you think about how the hair approaches the string, it is exactly a proper angle for gauging bridge top curve. When someone comes to me complaining that they have a hard time hitting the A string by itself, the first thing I do is look from the side, to see how much air there is under the string and above the D and E (assuming standard Italian tuning.) I know workers who would reach for their bridge template instead, but on a bridge from an unknown source, I would usually rather work with what's in front of me, with what the player has gotten used to, and what the player likes, than try to impose some notion of what is "correct."


 * Even at the resolution of that picture, it is plain to see that the bridge wasn't cut using the edge of a CD to gauge the curve, to take it to one commonly-seen extreme. The real issue with that picture, in my view, is that it overwhelms the "instrumentation" section, and hangs down into the "See also" and "References" like a random unexplained afterthought.


 * I see a picture of HHDL at the top of this page. You might consider examining what it is here that you are holding on to so tightly. I don't take Wikipedia edits personally (for the most part; once every two or three years it can get under my skin more than I like) but choose to focus on putting up and maintaining encyclopedia articles of acceptable quality. __Just plain Bill (talk) 14:06, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Dave
I never said you were not in good faith, I just have an issue with deletionism in general. I am offline in thirty seconds and will not be available online until tommorow. I am sure any major edits can wait until we have an opportunity to discuss them at that time thanks.  Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap 03:10, 13 July 2011 (UTC)


 * How do you think the person on the receiving end of comments such as "unhelpful", "don't feed this guy", "he is WP:Wikilawyering", "tantamount to vandalism", "stirring up contentiousness", is supposed to feel? I note that you yourself write "Separate the people from the problem" and "Focus on Interests, Not Positions" at the top of your talk page, so I hope you can manage to focus on the subject matter and wording at issue rather than editors' personalities in future. You might also want to read WP:OWN, as whether or not you agree with my opinions, I am also working to ensure that this and other Wikipedia articles become cohesive encyclopedia entries. Thanks. --DAJF (talk) 03:30, 13 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Dave, as always, it is the actions, and the particular action at issue, which is the concern, and nowhere were there any remarks posted about anyone's "personalities". But yes perhaps my remarks seemed a bit caustic. Not is not entirely directed toward the deletion of a perfectly servicable photo, without discussion, it is to some degree a result of frustration with what is characterized as "deletionism" at WP in general. But you are not responsible for the over zealous deletions performed by others, nor do I assert that there is a "Deletionist Conspiracy". But there is a widely recognized problem at WP of parties with specific content expertise feeling overwhelmed by litigious edits which burn up work based upon legalistic, literal application of broad WP guidelines. To the extent you are perhaps caught in some cross fire here, I apologize if you felt inhibited in your good faith intention of weeding out photographs which you feel do not pass muster. But the photo of the fiddle is the best one avaliable at this time and remember that the deletion followed hot on the heels of the prior deletion, which could have been avoided with at 200px parameter. So at the end of the day, we were both somewhat aggressively asserting our respective viewepoints. But look how nicely HHDL's visual presence is cooling this out. I don'[t think there is any lingering animosity and I don'[t think we will have any problem collaborating in a constructive manner. Someone somewhere said that your opponents and critcs are your best friends because they challenge you to rise to the occasion and respond to what substance there is to their points of critique. So we now have consensus that the photo in question needs replacement with a more authentically Old Time set up...so it is a net win for all concerned. So thanks for keeping a courteous tone, and I take your point, and I again apologize if my admittedly sharp remarks subjected you to a momentary annoyance. I am sure I would have felt annoyed at such articulate criticism, and I try to remember always that it is easier to criticize than to take criticism, just as it is easier to delete than to find and create good content. So, going forward, I hope we can agree to keep the channels of communication open; BTW, I did look at a few random portions of your talk, not any kind of major lurk, but out of that random sample, yes, as you noticed, I picked up a contested photo deletion, and I don't mean to escalate the importance of it by any means, it is water under the bridge and for all I know you were in the right on that issue. But I want to share that I noticed you actually had done a rather courageous edit, reverting what looked like an attempt by an interested party to cover up some sort of, tantamount to some sort of corporate crime. Whether or not that is an accurate characterization, i do appreciate that you were willing to stand up,albeit anonymously, to a pretty brazen attempt to white wash a publicly known event. For that, alone, I am more than happy to extent complete benefit of the doubt and confidence in your good faith. So, we are on to options for mutual gain...

Please, take a look
Hello, I really appreciated your edits in Eido Tai Shimano page, which have been in place for more than two months. However today I noticed that the editor Tao2911 has done some major changes there again, which make this page bias. Even top of page was changed. I reverted the page to your version adding only recent new info and reference which he also used. Now I see that he reverted this again. Many editors in the past have argued with Tao291. He is connected to the group of people who were damaged Shimano in blogs and and adding over period of months not accepted sources and with his own interpretations. I do not want to engage in discussion with him anymore, but we cannot allow this page to be owned by him and as it is now I do not think it reflects truth. Is there any chance, that you as senior editor can help this to stop. Should he be allowed to edit this page after his history of actions in Wikipedia? Please, help. Thank you.Spt51 (talk) 15:53, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * These things take time and they take patience. If there is a factual, verifiable series of events which detract from the reputation of the subject of a BLP, WP policy on the issue has a very substantial set of precedents. You will need to budget the time to study them and become aware of


 * (1) policies
 * (2) guidelines and
 * (3) precedents.
 * Additionally, there is a very substantial set of
 * (4) procedures for Arbitration/Policy and
 * (5) procedures for other third party interventions which are technically not arbitrations. Among the options at disposal of wikipedians are

Please note that with BLP's there are separate rules which allow for rapid intervention since BLP's may bvecome actionable libel. This is a separate avenue of
 * ((5.a) administrative lock on the page to prevent edits
 * (5.b) temporary disciplinary blocks against individual persons who commit inappropriate edits
 * (5.c) permanent blocks against individual persons (user ID and IP number) pertaining to particular topics or articles
 * (5,d) stay away orders, which are the same as 5.c except that they pertain to edits on userpages and talkpages.
 * (6) civil actions. These include some states which are false light defamation states however I don't think this is at issue here. In pursuing this issue, one thing you might look at is the extent to which the statement with regard to the incident is balanced in terms of (a) number of words.line or sentences dedicated to the incident compared to other topics, such as the teachings, other elements of the biography, etc. (b) you have the right to demand exactness and (c) that reliable secondary sources are used for assertions. Note that with regard to BLP's, you have the right to immediately delete unsourced possibly slanderous statements, and that everyone is subject tot he 3RR.


 * I glanced at Tao's user page and it doesn't seem that he is some kind of mean spirited and reckless vandal which means that, insofar as he or she presents the objected-to perspectives in a gentlemanly manner in accord with WP policies and guidelines, you will have to summon your best mindfulness in presenting a counterveiling approach to the article. If this case ends up before ArbComm, every little bit of sarcasm or annoyed tone of voice in your edits will come back to haunt you and if your opponent is cool calm and collected, you are sunk. So observe detachment - reread the Bhagavid Gita chapters 1-2 if you must - and remember to breath. Samsara is nirvana, right? So hang onto your bodhichitta, it and only it will never fail you. (Clinging to a heroic rescue phantasy well, we dealt with that in the Four Noble Truths, did we not?)Breathe. Be self aware; can you identify edits which were contrary to policy? If so, present them with the "diff" view, like this.


 * You undoubtedly have figured out that if the events are uncontroverted and expressed in valid secondaries, it is not likely that there is any way that the bare facts of the historical record will be kept off of WP. But what can be done is that


 * those facts can be kept in perspective rather than be presented with an unfair emphasis.


 * Rather than try to change what is in the article or lobby for removal of content, think about positive things you can add to the topic. For instance, Eido Shimano Roshi has publication credits. Consider writing a review of those books, which would be secondary, and posting it somewhere that WP editors can use to write up a WP article on that book. Or, if you are a good enough researcher to find secondary sources which discuss ESR's writings, you can start an article on those books in which you present, in encyclopedic form, a presentation of what the secondary literature has to say about Eido's books.


 * You can find themes in Eido's affirmative teachings and develope WP articles, WikiSource content, or a Wikiversity course based upon those themes


 * Take solace in that there are many otherwise productive individuals in various fields of endeavor who have succumbed to temptation and have an incident which has occured which they regret or would have handled differently. These things are as they are. ESR once said that his favorite line in the Lord's Prayer was "as it is". And so, the article, the historical record are "as they are". But Dharma continues... Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap 20:38, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on This talkpage

 * No comment. I don't have a dog in that fight and I don't advise anyone to bet on the outcome. 22:02, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Your sense of humor is not unappreciated.
At first I chuckled, now I laughing out loud. Yes, this is not the place for "hagiographic dissertations[s]" Nor for "burnishing the image"...of and here I am again audibly laughing ..."dearest gurus". Witty. I don't have a problem with the suggestion that my irenic remarks were taken as bias, and if you seem a bit combative to other editors, that might be because you are boldly correcting slacker mishaps. Make them do their homework. But do you really want to write me off as a potential "neutral" [?] mediator? WP is not the place for original research, but it is a place for collaboration and a tone of collegiality is generally more productive than adversarial argumentation. It might be better not to burn any bridges.

FYI I am a fan of Aitken's translations of Basho and also of Taoism, in general, which I have been drifting steadily towards as various Buddhist sects disappoint in practice despite theories of compassion and Right Conduct. In the Tao Te Ching, I particularly appreciate the advice that often the best action is non-action.

Cheers. 23:52, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Valfontis
 Thanks for the start on Foghorn Stringband. Yes, a bit unconventional.


 * I was wondering what would be the quick and dirty method of getting a good photo in there?


 * We also need a photo at Benny Williams. Somebody told me it was legal to take a promo shot at lo res if the artist was deceased, because you dont have an opportunity to take one anymore.


 * I know Sammy and Caleb and the boys would not mind so if we get to using the band logo can an email to me suffice for permission or does the email have to go to admins at wiki commons or what?


 * Maybe you have a photo you took??


 * I have a flyer for Foghorn Leghorn on my hard drive. I wonder if that is legal to use?

00:17, 18 July 2011 (UTC) Below text copied from GeoBard's user page for my convenience
 * Meanwhile, would you mind marking [{Benny Williams]] as patrolled? It is still yellow-blocked and that makes me nervous...it would suit me to be auto-patrolled. Wonch take a look at this backlog.

Thanks for the start on Foghorn Stringband.


 * I was wondering what would be the quick and dirty method of getting a good photo in there?
 * Go see them. Take a photo. Upload it Commons. ::grin::
 * See if there are any free use images on Flickr
 * Write the band, get permission to use a photo, deal with the WP:OTRS stuff


 * We also need a photo at Benny Williams. Somebody told me it was legal to take a promo shot at lo res if the artist was deceased, because you dont have an opportunity to take one anymore.
 * I'm not good at image copyright stuff, so you'll have to ask someone else.


 * I know Sammy and Caleb and the boys would not mind so if we get to using the band logo can an email to me suffice for permission or does the email have to go to admins at wiki commons or what?
 * Again, I'm not good at that stuff, but generally you don't need permission to use a logo on an article about the company (band) whose logo you are using.


 * Maybe you have a photo you took??
 * Nope, haven't seen 'em for a while.


 * I have a flyer for Foghorn Leghorn on my hard drive. I wonder if that is legal to use?
 * Again, I don't know. See WP:COPYRIGHT for a start.


 * Meanwhile, would you mind marking Benny Williams as patrolled? It is still yellow-blocked and that makes me nervous...it would suit me to be auto-patrolled. Wonch take a look at this backlog.
 * I don't mark things patrolled unless I have time to clean them up also, and this article, as you noted, needs some copy editing. And I'm not a subject matter expert on music genres, so I don't feel qualified to clean up your backlog. Sorry!

Note that while you have provided references for Foghorn Stringband, there is still nothing that shows how they are notable, and two of the references are from booking agents and should probably be replaced eventually. Valfontis (talk) 00:28, 18 July 2011 (UTC)


 * I appreciate your detailed response, but they make me feel grumpy.


 * From booking agent yes but quoting a secondary. I thought we were long past notability. They are one of the most influential bands in the State of Oregon. Gee whiz. I am glad at least you didn't template it. I think I will stay away from starting articles on bands for a while. Copied from Valfontis (talk) 00:28, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
<font style="font-variant:small-caps;"> Little Mountain  5   04:45, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

OT strings and such
I don't really play OT much, but thanks for asking. In recent memory I've tried a little bit of ADAE (Boatmen Row, IIRC) and some GDAD (Bonaparte's Retreat) but 99.9% of the time I'm in good old GDAE. Prims, either medium or heavy gauge are well-spoken of, and have a name for tolerating a lot of cross-tuning. I played a set of those for a while, and they were acceptable. YMMV. So much depends on the individual fiddle and the player's style. Lately I've been sticking with Tonica or Zyex on the violin, and Zyex or Helicore on the viola. Some love Helicores, and others can't abide them.

My own bridge has a standard curve to it. Some people really do use a CD for a template, for a 60 mm radius. That is awfully flat. My "fiddle" bridge template has about a 53 mm radius, but it really comes down to what the player likes. There is a whole lot going on with a fiddle bridge; making a change to the top curve means a lot of other changes need to happen, especially around the thickness profile near the top.

Fellow showed me a trick one time, where you lay a small flat card across the outer strings and under the middle two just in front the bridge, and another card on top of the middle two. The cards should be parallel. If they aren't, you can file a notch down or build another one up until they are. The real trick is knowing when to stop. __ Just plain Bill (talk) 03:03, 18 July 2011 (UTC)


 * I was thinking about Prims or Helicores. I did in the past and they broke but...Dominants??? Good for sweet Irish airs but not necc. Hoedowns? Nah. But I got by with Tonicas, ironically! As a hybrid. They needed the break in but after that they sounded nice for fiddle and that Bach stuff too. Nuthin like cat gut, tho. Hope you can look at Benny Williams and Foghorn Stringband they need help and I am going offline. Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap  03:06, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll watch those. Just realized I should have said DDAD up there. Fun to tune the G string down a fourth... __ Just plain Bill (talk) 13:48, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

WP:SONGS
Please get consensus for this before adding it. —<font face="IrishJig"> Andrew s talk  03:30, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually you should specify what specifics you disagree with rather than do a blanket delete. I actually agree with you regarding the suggestion of writing off-WP to create secondaries; it is IMO a good idea but one that should be expressed in a separate space and subject to RFC. That was too bold on my part and actually I thought so after I logged off. Thank you for catching that so quickly.


 * But there is no need to nuke the entire edit. There is a glaring ommission of trad music and by glancing at your very nicely laid out user page I can see that you are into an entirely different kind of music so you probably won't have the kind of sensitivity to the topic that trad music specialists might. The bottom line is that WikiProject Songs is really oriented to contemporary mainstream and "modern" genres and is not oriented to bluegrass, even, much less trad and folk songs which are better understood at other projects such as RootsMusic, etc. But since the Songs project proports to have in its purview the broad full topic of songs it is incumbent upon the project to do justice, as far as it is capable, to trad. I am happy to help fill in the gaps.
 * My primary objective is to save everybody time from edit wars from so-called "deletionists" who apparently derive gratificatio from deleting perfectly decent articles on topics they know absolutely nothing about; my motive is not to shake things up at the Songs Project.


 * So I will ask that you going forward don't do summary blanking of entries unless you feel that each and every item in the entry is so dubious as to need prior clearance, and if so, please state what the specific beef is rather than using a brute force erasure. In this cas, I can understand your motivation because the surplusage about writing secondary material is potentially controversial so, no hard feelings. But please don't intermingle that separate issue if, going forward, you wish to discuss some edits. Thank you in advance for your careful consideration of this request. Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap 23:44, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Allmusic
Hi GB At Talk:Dick Campbell (singer-songwriter), you expressed surprise that Allmusic could be used as a WP:Reliable Source. Allmusic is not a blog, but a properly edited series of articles commissioned from well known writers such as Roxanne Blanford, Stephen Thomas Erlewine, Ned Raggett, and Richie Unterberger. who are notable enough to have their own Wikipedia articles. For more details of Allmusic writers - including their classical music writers - please see One thing to note is that Allmusic rarely, if ever, appears in Google searches - I assume they have opted out, or use "no-follow" tags. Arjayay (talk) 08:09, 18 July 2011 (UTC) Although several of your sources e.g. The Times, are "reliable sources", the coverage is only "trivial", so does not prove notability; whilst several others are "publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves ... including manufacturers' advertising" which includes record company catalogues etc. The article would also benefit from an info-box - the previous one was deleted because it was for a musical genre not a band. I often struggle with "Transcluded templates", so I just copy one from a similar article and edit the entries. Arjayay (talk) 08:25, 19 July 2011 (UTC) The previous info-box was deleted because it was about a musical genre not a band - not the previous article. The addition of the genre info-box was made in this diff:- by an editor called - oh - er - um - Geofferybard. I agree WP has too many deletionists - but is happy to have articles on every Simpsons episode, almost anyone who has ever played baseball (even in their backyard), or has a walk on part in a C movie. Oh well, back to work. Arjayay (talk) 09:55, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Very cool. But then I don't know that it helps establish notability. I am trying to keep Foghorn Stringband secure. I know they are a prominent, perhaps the most prominent exemplar of the style in the Pacific Northwest. Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap 23:42, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * If you follow the criteria at WP:BAND Allmusic can be one of the "multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself".
 * I didn't think one could view deleted articles. Perhaps as an admin, one can do that. I am surprised anyone tried to constitute Foghorn Stringband as a genre, that seems a bit odd. Well, I am not going to sweat it. There is a strange story behind the article because, to avoid deletion, I started out building the talkpage with notability proofs using (c) material which we can't use in mainspace. Just so happens that a sort of Oregon regional specialist was online and noticed the new talk page, so he jumped in and started the article proper. I thought we were destined to be best buddies, but it seems that we are not getting on so famously as I had expected, so I will be glad if we can stay out of each other's ways. Foghorn Stringband is bombproof against a notability attack; my only concern now is that the high standard they set will be used to bully less well known bands off of WP. I suppose I have two choices: devote a good chunk of this beautiful summer indoors engaging edit wars to defend band articles, or blow it off and let WP coverage of bands go to the dogs, and let interesting musical experiments and established, lesser-known bands do without (WP coverage). Apparently some people will get their underwear in a knot if solid, talented bands get WP articles without having a long list of credits...God forbid! We wouldn't want any "garage band" types polluting the pristine purity of Wikipedia.  Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap 20:32, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry - I obviously wasn't clear.
 * Just wondering if there is a rule that precludes utilizing an infobox for general background related to an article or if the deletion is based on your personal viewpoint? Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap 18:22, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I didn't delete it, it wasUser:Valfontis. In general, background that is already elesehere should be linked to, rather than repeated on a page about a specific subject. Arjayay (talk) 07:52, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually there is no legal basis as far as I know, in WP policies. Background infoboxes are actually better than mere links because (1) they print and (2) they can be viewed on line without clicking through, allowing, for instance, compare and contrast. Many projects have info boxes and as far as I know no one cited any policy to the contrary. See for instance how [] uses a background infobox... Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap 16:45, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

The WikiProject National Archives Newsletter
The first ever WikiProject National Archives newsletter has been published. Please read on to find out what we're up to and how to help out! There are many opportunities for getting more involved. Dominic·t 21:24, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

No merge.
This page is about geology. The other is about a plant. Talk about it more if you want but the template is an eyesore and is not helpful. Yo hablo espanol y estudiando historia de Chile mucho. Pero, en E.U. el topica es muy controversial. Por favor, hablas conmogo primero, pero no mas template. Muchas gracias amigo.  Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap
 * Yes, but I found that the nuclear plant earthquake thingy was redundant to have a stand-alone article; I have no strong opinion on this however, so you may be right :) ¿Estudias historia de Chile? ¿Quién fué el primer presidente conservador de Chile? ;P -- Diego  talk 00:37, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yo no se, exactamente. Diego Portales, en actualidad, pero Prieto, por technicalidad. Mi Espanol es muy terrible, lo siento. Pero you quiero en.wikipedia tiene mas articulos y detailles do Nueva Cancione, Violetta Parra y  Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap 19:52, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

July 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
--Kumioko (talk) 00:53, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:30, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Planned Parenthood
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Planned Parenthood. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 23:10, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Klezmer fiddle
Thank you for creating this interesting article. When you create beyond-stub articles with inline references, like Klezmer fiddle, please consider nominating your work for front page exposure at T:TDYK. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; talk 19:57, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

<S>Proposed deletion of List of wilderness medical emergencies</S>


The article List of wilderness medical emergencies has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Medical advice page

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Rabbitfang 07:15, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Please consult Black's Law Dictionary and limit your deletion proposals to pages which actually proffer what is considered to be advice. This deletion proposal has driven me to place "SEMI-RETIRED" on my user page because it is a complete waste of time to have to argue this kind of point. I have been drilled by legal, medical and professional trainers to not proffer advice where advice is not proper and I think I know enough of what I am doing that I can say that a list of emergencies does not constitute "advice". Please don't pursue the deletion idea it is a bad idea and will sour your prospects for administratorship if you appear to be over-zealously prosecuting what you think are policy viols. Thanks for being chill about this, consider it to be a trout slap. Yours is not the only edit activity which is responsible for this, but I am semi-retired from WP because I just don't have time for these arguments.  Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Rap 23:57, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Semi-Retired
I know that there are plenty of people who have all the time in the world to WikiLawyer, so I am curtailing my contributions at WP. I am no longer particularly interested in providing new contributions of the sort which I have provided in the past, at least, not at this time. Cheers, my friends. Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Semi-retired 00:10, 18 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I pray this was a quick semi-retirement and that you hang around and put up with the many trials which are part and parcel of contributing to an anarchistic system which has grand ideals but sometimes is indistinguishable from The Wild West. I havent closely looked at everything, but you're content work is nice and in a neglected topical area.  When you copy from another source, please always show that is copied text and provide a reference for it.  I like the cquote template as it is very obvious that the text is copied. e.g.
 * John Vandenberg (chat) 23:09, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I too hope your zest is renewed. Let me know if there's anything I can do. – Lionel (talk) 04:22, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Well yea these are nice comments. Thanks. I will look at things... Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Semi-retired 02:59, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 16:27, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:31, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

September 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
--Kumioko (talk) 15:29, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Backstage projects for deletion move
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Backstage projects 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/Backstage projects 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. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 09:30, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Move uncontested
See afd disc thanks  Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Semi-retired 00:56, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

RE: Thanks
You're welcome. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 00:51, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Feel free
Buff up any up my pages I really appreciate your style - no wreckage, just subtle improvements. Much appreciated, and a cut above the typical juandiced, hyper critical WP editor. Geo Bard <font color="#000000" size="-1">Semi-retired 00:55, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I'm involved in a different set of articles that need my attention. Thanks for the compliment. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 01:19, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

No prob
Stop by anytime. Coffee's brewin'....01:23, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:32, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

The Right Stuff: September 2011
<div style="font-family:Wedding Text, Linotext, Old English Text MT, serif; font-size:58px; line-height:69px; padding-bottom:7px;"> <div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:100%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; text-align:center;"> September 2011

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:90%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; padding-top:10px; ">FROM THE EDITOR

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:190%; background-color:transparent; border:none; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; ">An Historic Milestone

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> By Lionelt Welcome to the inaugural issue of The Right Stuff, the newsletter of WikiProject Conservatism. The Project has developed at a breakneck speed since it was created on February 12, 2011 with the edit summary, "Let's roll!" With over 50 members the need for a project newsletter is enormous. With over 3000 articles to watch, an active talk page and numerous critical discussions spread over various noticeboards, it has become increasingly difficult to manage the information overload. The goal of The Right Stuff is to help you keep up with the changing landscape.

The Right Stuff is a newsletter consisting of original reporting. Writers will use a byline to "sign" their contributions. Just as with The Signpost, "guidelines such as 'no ownership of articles', and particularly 'no original research', will not necessarily apply."

WikiProject Conservatism has a bright future ahead: this newsletter will allow us tell the story. All that's left to say is: "Let's roll!"

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:90%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; padding-top:10px; ">PROJECT NEWS

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:190%; background-color:transparent; border:none; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; ">New Style Guide Unveiled

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> By Lionelt A new style guide to help standardize editing was rolled out. It focuses on concepts, people and organizations from a conservatism perspective. The guide features detailed article layouts for several types of articles. You can help improve it here. The Project's Article Collaboration currently has two nominations, but they don't appear to be generating much interest. You can get involved with the Collaboration here.

I am pleased to report that we have two new members: Rjensen and Soonersfan168. Rjensen is a professional historian and has access to JSTOR. Soonersfan168 says he is a "young conservative who desires to improve Wikipedia!" Unfortunately we will be seeing less of Geofferybard, as he has announced his semi-retirement. We wish him well. Be sure to stop by their talk pages and drop off some Wikilove.

-

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:90%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto;padding-top:10px; ">ARTICLE REPORT

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:190%; background-color:transparent; border:none; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; ">3,000th Article Tagged

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> By Lionelt On August 3rd Peter Oborne, a British journalist, became the Project's 3,000th tagged article. It is a tribute to the membership that we have come this far this quickly. The latest Featured Article is Richard Nixon. Our congratulations to Wehwalt for a job well done. The article with the most page views was Rick Perry with 887,389 views, not surprising considering he announced he was running for president on August 11th. Follwing Perry were Michele Bachmann and Tea Party movement. The Project was ranked 75th based on total edits, which is up from 105th in July. The article with the most edits was Republican Party (United States) presidential primaries, 2012 with 374 edits. An RFC regarding candidate inclusion criteria generated much interest on the talk page.

A new medical resource
Please note that there is a new freely accessible medical resource, MedMerits (to which I'm a medical advisor) on neurologic disorders. A discussion on ELs to MedMerits and medical ELs in general is currently in progress ("Wikipedia and its relationship to the outside world"). Presto54 (talk) 18:00, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Objectivism (Ayn Rand)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Objectivism (Ayn Rand). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 07:43, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Independent Christian Churches/Churches of Christ
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Independent Christian Churches/Churches of Christ. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 13:17, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Astrology
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Astrology. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 14:15, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Campaign for "santorum" neologism
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Campaign for "santorum" neologism. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 14:17, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of new religious movements
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of new religious movements. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 16:17, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:09, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Pregnancy
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Pregnancy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 17:16, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Falun Gong
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Falun Gong. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 18:16, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Buddhism
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Buddhism. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 19:17, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 01:09, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

The Right Stuff: October 2011
<div style="font-family:Wedding Text, Linotext, Old English Text MT, serif; font-size:58px; line-height:69px; padding-bottom:7px;"> <div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:100%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; text-align:center;"> October 2011

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:90%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; padding-top:10px; ">INTERVIEW

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:190%; background-color:transparent; border:none; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; ">An Interview with Dank

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 85%;"> By Lionelt

The Right Stuff caught up with Dank, the recently elected Lead Coordinator of WikiProject Military History. MILHIST is considered by many to be one of the most successful projects in the English Wikipedia.

Q: Tell us a little about yourself. A: I'm Dan, a Wikipedian since 2007, from North Carolina. I started out with an interest in history, robotics, style guidelines, and copyediting. These days, I'm the lead coordinator for the Military History Project and a reviewer of Featured Article Candidates. I've been an administrator and maintained WP:Update, a summary of policy changes, since 2008.

Q: What is your experience with WikiProjects? A: I guess I'm most familiar with WP:MILHIST and WP:SHIPS, and I'm trying to get up to speed at WP:AVIATION. I've probably talked with members of most of the wikiprojects at one time or another.

Q: What makes a WikiProject successful? A: A lot of occasional contributors who think of the project as fun rather than work, a fair number of people willing to write or review articles, a small core of like-minded people who are dedicated to building and maintaining the project, and access to at least a few people who are familiar with reviewing standards and with Wikipedia policies and guidelines.

Q: Do you have any tips for increasing membership? A: Aim for a consistent, helpful and professional image. Let people know what the project is doing and what they could be doing, but don't push.

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 85%;"> If you've got a core group interested in building a wikiproject, it helps if they do more listening than talking at first ... find out what people are trying to do, and offer them help with whatever it is. Some wikiprojects build membership by helping people get articles through the review processes. - <div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:90%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; padding-top:10px; "> DISCUSSION REPORT

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:190%; background-color:transparent; border:none; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; ">Abortion Case Plods Along

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 85%;">

By Lionelt The arbitration request submitted by Steven Zhang moved into its second month. The case, which evaluates user conduct, arose from contentious discussions regarding the naming of the Pro-life and Pro-choice articles, and a related issue pertaining to the inclusion of "death" in the lede of Abortion. A number of members are involved. On the Evidence page ArtifexMahem posted a table indicating that DMSBel made the most edits to the Abortion article. DMSBel has announced their semi-retirement. Fact finding regarding individual editor behavior has begun in earnest on theWorkshop page.

Last month it was decided that due to the success of the new Dispute Resolution Noticeboard the Content Noticeboard would be shut down. Wikiquette Assistance will remain active. The DRN is primarily intended to resolve content disputes.

- <div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:90%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; padding-top:10px; ">PROJECT NEWS

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:190%; background-color:transparent; border:none; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; ">Article Incubator Launched

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 85%;"> By Lionelt Was your article deleted in spite of your best efforts to save it? You should consider having a copy restored to the Incubator where project members can help improve it. Upon meeting content criteria, articles are graduated to mainspace. The Incubator is also ideal for collaborating on new article drafts. Star Parker is the first addition to the incubator. The article was deleted per WP:POLITICIAN. WikiProject Conservatism is expanding. We now have a satellite on Commons. Any help in categorizing images or in getting the fledgling project off the ground is appreciated. We have a few new members who joined the project in September. Please give a hearty welcome to Conservative Philosopher, Screwball23 and Regushee by showing them some Wikilove. Screwball23 has been on WikiPedia for five years and has made major improvements to Linda McMahon. Regushee is not one for idle chit chat: an amazing 93% of their edits are in article space.

Please comment on Talk:Pray the Gay Away?
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Pray the Gay Away?. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 06:15, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Genesis creation narrative
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Genesis creation narrative. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 15:17, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Astrology
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Astrology. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 17:15, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Southern Baptist Convention
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Southern Baptist Convention. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 03:15, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Eschatology of Jehovah's Witnesses
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Eschatology of Jehovah's Witnesses. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 06:15, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 04:33, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mythology
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mythology. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 00:15, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ram Dass
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ram Dass. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 23:15, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astrology
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astrology. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 00:15, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jupiter (mythology)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jupiter (mythology). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 00:16, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

The Right Stuff: November 2011
<div style="font-family:Wedding Text, Linotext, Old English Text MT, serif; font-size:58px; line-height:69px; padding-bottom:7px;"> <div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:100%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; text-align:center;">

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:90%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; padding-top:10px; ">PROJECT NEWS

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:190%; background-color:transparent; border:none; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; ">WikiProject Conservatism faces the ultimate test

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 85%;"> By Lionelt On October 7, WikiProject Conservatism was nominated for deletion by member Binksternet. He based his rationale on what he described as an undefinable scope, stating that the project is "at its root undesirable". Of the 40 participants in the discussion, some agreed that the scope was problematic; however, they felt it did not justify deletion of the project. A number of participants suggested moving the project to "WikiProject American conservatism". The overwhelming sentiment was expressed by Guerillero who wrote: "A project is a group of people. This particular group does great work in their topic area[,] why prevent them from doing this[?]" In the end there was negligible opposition to the project and the result of the discussion was "Keep". The proceedings of the deletion discussion were picked up by The Signpost, calling the unfolding drama "the first MfD of its kind". The Signpost observed that attempting to delete an active project was unprecedented. The story itself became a source of controversy which played out at the Discuss This Story section, and also at the.

Two days after the project was nominated, the Conservatism Portal was also nominated for deletion as "too US-biased". There was no support for deletion amongst the 10 participants, with one suggestion to rename the portal. In other news, a new portal focusing on conservatism has been created at WikiSource. Wikisource is an online library of free content publications with 254,051 accessible texts. One highlight of the portal's content is Reflections on the Revolution in France by Edmund Burke.

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 85%;"> October saw a 6.4% increase in new members, bringing the total membership to 58. Seven of the eight new members joined after October 12; the deletion discussions may have played a role in the membership spike. Mwhite148 is a member of the UK Conservative Party. Stating that he is not a conservative, Kleinzach noted his "lifetime interest in British, European and international politics." Let's all make an effort to welcome the new members with an outpouring of Wikilove.

Click to keep up to date on all the happenings at WikiProject Conservatism. - <div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:90%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; padding-top:10px; "> DISCUSSION REPORT

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:190%; background-color:transparent; border:none; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; ">Timeline of conservatism is moved

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 85%;"> By Lionelt Timeline of conservatism, a Top-importance list, was nominated for deletion on October 3. The nominator stated that since conservatism in an "ambiguous concept", the timeline suffers from original research. There were a number of "Delete", as well as "Keep" votes. The closing administrator reasoned that consensus dictated that the list be renamed. The current title is Timeline of modern American conservatism.

Please comment on Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses and congregational discipline
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses and congregational discipline. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 01:15, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Thanksgiving
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Thanksgiving. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 01:15, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ariel A. Roth
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ariel A. Roth. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 15:15, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:John of Damascus
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:John of Damascus. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 22:15, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
--Kumioko (talk) 01:44, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 16:11, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

GOCE newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 10:42, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Christmas Eve
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Christmas Eve. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 21:15, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Catholic Church and abortion
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Catholic Church and abortion. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 10:15, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Catholic Church and abortion
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Catholic Church and abortion. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 11:15, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

GOCE 2011 Year-End Report
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 06:18, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Secular humanism
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Secular humanism. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 02:15, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:History of early Christian thought on abortion
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:History of early Christian thought on abortion. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 03:15, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Calvary Chapel
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Calvary Chapel. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 04:15, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christianity
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christianity. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 20:15, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 05:27, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Joseph Smith
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Joseph Smith. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 21:15, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

January 2012 Newsletter for WikiProject United States and supported projects
--Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 19:01, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Religion in Africa
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Religion in Africa. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 22:15, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Circumcision
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Circumcision. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 23:16, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Christianity in India
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Christianity in India. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 00:16, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Kingdom of God
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Kingdom of God. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 02:15, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Secular humanism
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Secular humanism. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 03:15, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 15:15, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

The Right Stuff: January 2012
<div style="font-family:Wedding Text, Linotext, Old English Text MT, serif; font-size:58px; line-height:69px; padding-bottom:7px;"> <div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:100%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; text-align:center;"> January 2012

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:90%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; padding-top:10px; ">ARTICLE REPORT <div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:190%; background-color:transparent; border:none; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; ">Wikipedia's Newest Featured Portal: Conservatism

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 85%;"> By Lionelt On January 21, The Conservatism Portal was promoted to Featured Portal (FP) due largely to the contributions of Lionelt. This is the first Featured content produced by WikiProject Conservatism. The road to Featured class was rocky. An earlier nomination for FP failed, and in October the portal was "Kept" after being nominated for deletion.

Member Eisfbnore significantly contributed to the successful Good Article nomination of Norwegian journalist and newspaper editor Nils Vogt in December. Eisfbnore also created the article. In January another Project article was promoted to Featured Article. Luís Alves de Lima e Silva, Duke of Caxias, a president of Brazil, attained Featured class with significant effort by Lecen. The Article Incubator saw its first graduation in November. A collaboration spearheaded by Mzk1 and Trackerseal successfully developed Star Parker to pass the notability guideline. -

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:90%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; padding-top:10px; ">PROJECT NEWS

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:190%; background-color:transparent; border:none; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; ">Project Scope Debated

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 85%;"> By Lionelt Another discussion addressing the project scope began in December. Nine alternatives were presented in the contentious, sometimes heated discussion. Support was divided between keeping the exitsing scope, or adopting a scope with more specificity. Some opponents of the specific scope were concerned that it was too limiting and would adversely affect project size. About twenty editors participated in the discussion.

Inclusion of the article Ku Klux Klan (KKK) was debated. Supporters for inclusion cited sources describing the KKK as "conservative." The article was excluded with more than 10 editors participating.

Project membership continues to grow. There are currently 73 members. Member Goldblooded (pictured) volunteers for the UK Conservative Party and JohnChrysostom is a Christian Democrat. North8000 is interested in libertarianism. We won't tell WikiProject Libertarianism he's slumming. Let's stop by their talkpages and share some Wikilove.

Click to keep up to date on all the happenings at WikiProject Conservatism.

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:90%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; padding-top:10px; ">DISCUSSION REPORT

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:190%; background-color:transparent; border:none; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; ">Why is Everyone Talking About Rick Santorum?

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 85%;"> By Lionelt

Articles about the GOP presidential candidate and staunch traditional marriage supporter have seen an explosion of discussion. On January 8 an RFC was opened (here) to determine if Dan Savage's website link should be included in Campaign for "santorum" neologism. The next day the Rick Santorum article itself was the subject of an RFC (here) to determine if including the Savage neologism was a violation of the BLP policy. Soon after a third was opened (here) at Santorum controversy regarding homosexuality. This RFC proposes merging the neologism article into the controversy article.

The Abortion case closed in November after 15 weeks of contentious arbitration. The remedies include semi-protection of all abortion articles (numbering 1,500), sanctions for some editors including members of this Project, and a provision for a discussion to determine the names of what are colloquially known as the pro-life and pro-choice articles. The Committee endorsed the "1 revert rule" for abortion articles.

<div style="clear:both; width:100%; border-bottom:3px double #999; border-top:3px double #bbb; padding:3px;">

Please comment on Talk:Ethereal being
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ethereal being. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 04:15, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 05:38, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Troll
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Troll. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 05:15, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Richard Feynman
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Richard Feynman. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 05:15, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Heart Sutra, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chan (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) 10:24, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Genesis creation narrative
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Genesis creation narrative. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 17:15, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Richard Dawkins
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Richard Dawkins. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 18:15, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Intelligent design
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Intelligent design. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 19:15, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Big Bang
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Big Bang. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 20:15, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 21:15, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Dave Camp
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Dave Camp. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 21:15, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:John Bosco
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:John Bosco. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 08:15, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:41, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 09:15, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Rajneesh movement
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Rajneesh movement. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 09:16, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 20:15, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Universal Life Church
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Universal Life Church. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 19:15, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 19:15, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Anti-Pakistan sentiment. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 20:15, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Nation of Islam
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Nation of Islam. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 21:15, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2012 Midi-Pyrénées shootings
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:2012 Midi-Pyrénées shootings. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 22:15, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:42, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Easter
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Easter. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 22:16, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Tirumala Venkateswara Temple
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Tirumala Venkateswara Temple. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 23:15, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 06:15, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Islamic–Jewish relations
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Islamic–Jewish relations. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 01:16, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Atheism
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Atheism. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 18:16, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Atheism
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Atheism. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 19:15, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 25
Hi. When you recently edited Lucidity Festival, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Coachella and Lucidity (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) 09:47, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Big Bang
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Big Bang. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 20:15, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 22:31, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Secular humanism
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Secular humanism. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 21:15, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 06:51, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Category:Songs with lyrics by Robert Burns
Category:Songs with lyrics by Robert Burns, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. WWGB (talk) 23:30, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Category:Songs written in style of folk traditional songs
Category:Songs written in style of folk traditional songs, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. WWGB (talk) 23:33, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Category:Pages with links to audio
Category:Pages with links to audio, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. WWGB (talk) 23:38, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Category:Songs with disputed authorship
I have nominated the above for deletion. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 09:46, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Questions about Wikipedia & SuggestBot
Hi, we’ve been running a research experiment with SuggestBot and would like to ask you some questions about Wikipedia and SuggestBot. You can find more information and the questions on this page. It should take less than ten minutes to respond. We would greatly appreciate if you had the time to participate! Regards, Nettrom (talk) 22:06, 15 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi, just a friendly one-time reminder that we'd really like to hear from you. And thanks for using SuggestBot! Cheers, Nettrom (talk) 16:54, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Coordinator sought for the US National Archives WikiProject
Greetings, WikiProject US National Archives member!

We are seeking a coordinator to help reboot the project and work on new initiatives! The role is modeled after other Wikiproject coordinators, like the WikiProject Military History coordinators. The coordinator will work with the Wikipedian in Residence to organize and increase participation in the WikiProject, with the goal that the WikiProject is an active space for collaboration maintained by and for the Wikipedia editors, rather than the National Archives.

Please see the full information at GLAM/NARA/Coordinator and contact me is you have any questions. Feel free to pass this note along to any interested parties. Thanks! Dominic·t 21:03, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

de:Benutzer:Dudenfreund/Dudenfreund’s Law

Please comment on Talk:Anti-Christian sentiment
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Anti-Christian sentiment. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 22:15, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High. The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:05, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of vegans
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of vegans. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 23:15, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Islamophobia
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Islamophobia. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 00:15, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Wikipaediae for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wikipaediae 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/Wikipaediae until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. TheChampionMan1234 00:35, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Lord of the Dance (hymn)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Lord of the Dance (hymn). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 01:15, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:MassResistance
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:MassResistance. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 02:15, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Category:Public policy and citizen participation in California
Category:Public policy and citizen participation in California, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:42, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Wiki Medicine
Hi I'm contacting you because, as a participant at Wikiproject Medicine, you may be interested in a new multinational non-profit organization we're forming at m:Wikimedia Medicine. Even if you don't want to be actively involved, any ideas you may have about our structure and aims would be very welcome on the project's talk page. Our purpose is to help improve the range and quality of free online medical content, and we'll be working with like-minded organizations, such as the World Health Organization, professional and scholarly societies, medical schools, governments and NGOs - including Translators Without Borders. Hope to see you there! --Anthonyhcole (talk) 08:01, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:La Luz del Mundo
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:La Luz del Mundo. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 03:15, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Portal talk:Judaism
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Portal talk:Judaism. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 03:17, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Effective method
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Effective method. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 04:15, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Lucidity (festival) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lucidity (festival) 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/Lucidity (festival) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 07:26, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Bluegrass fiddling
Hello, Geofferybard. Just curious, what may be so controversial about Bluegrass fiddle? (In the meantime you might wanna consider a talk page archive)

Cheers, ☯ Bonkers The Clown  \(^_^)/  Nonsensical Babble  ☯ 07:54, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Richard Dawkins
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Richard Dawkins. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 05:15, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Pope Francis
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Pope Francis. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 06:16, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Baptists
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Baptists. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 17:18, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library now offering accounts from Cochrane Collaboration (sign up!)
The Wikipedia Library gets Wikipedia editors free access to reliable sources that are behind paywalls. Because you are signed on as a medical editor, I thought you'd want to know about our most recent donation from Cochrane Collaboration. Cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 20:33, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Cochrane Collaboration is an independent medical nonprofit organization that conducts systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials of health-care interventions, which it then publishes in the Cochrane Library.
 * Cochrane has generously agreed to give free, full-access accounts to 100 medical editors. Individual access would otherwise cost between $300 and $800 per account.
 * If you are still active as a medical editor, come and sign up :)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, pleaseconsult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:01, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:27, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:19, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:31, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Folk music of Ireland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Drone (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) 09:00, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:27, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

GOCE March drive wrapup
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:32, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

bodhisattva listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect &. Since you had some involvement with the 'bodhisattva' redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 06:08, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

December 2014 GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:15, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

GOCE holiday 2014 newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

GOCE 2014 report
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:55, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of School-to-prison pipeline


The article School-to-prison pipeline has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Written like an essay, has a very distinct point of view, is not neutral, and is not encyclopedic.

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. --L235 (talk) Ping when replying 22:06, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

February 2015 GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

GOCE March newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:41, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of School-to-prison pipeline for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article School-to-prison pipeline 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/School-to-prison pipeline until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DS Crowned (talk) 08:49, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

April 2015 GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:28, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

GOCE June 2015 newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:08, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

GOCE August 2015 newsletter

 * sent by via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:43, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

October 2015 GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 26 October 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) 14:30, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors April 2016 Newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:48, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors September 2016 News
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:36, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:38, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors December 2016 News
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors February 2017 News
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:21, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Noise Khanyile


A tag has been placed on Noise Khanyile, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 "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 deleted 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, then please contact the. CHRISSY MAD ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  18:23, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Proposed deletion of Lucidity (festival)


The article Lucidity (festival) has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Rv blatant promotion (much of it in we-form!) Would need blowing up and starting over to have any chance of becoming an encyclopedia article. No significant coverage in reliable third-party sources offered."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Bishonen &#124; talk 01:21, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors December 2017 News
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:04, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

GOCE February 2018 news
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:00, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

June 2018 GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:26, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

The Right Stuff June 2018
<div style="font-family:Wedding Text, Linotext, Old English Text MT, serif; font-size:58px; line-height:69px; padding-bottom:6px;"> <div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:100%; background-color:transparent; border:none; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; text-align:center;"> June 2018

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:90%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; padding-top:10px; "> FROM THE EDITOR

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:170%; background-color:transparent; border:none; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; ">The Right Stuff Returns

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 90%;"> By

Fellow members, I'm pleased to announce the return of the newsletter of WikiProject Conservatism. And considering the recent downsizing at The Signpost the timing could not be better. The Right Stuff will help keep you apprised of what's happening in conservatism at Wikipedia and in the world. The Right Stuff welcomes submissions including position pieces, instructional articles, or short essays addressing important conservatism-related issues. Post submissions here.

Add the Project Discussion page to your watchlist for the latest updates at WikiProject Conservatism (Discuss this story) - <div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:90%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; padding-top:10px; "> ARBITRATION REPORT

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:170%; background-color:transparent; border:none; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; ">Russian Agents Editing at American Politics?

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 90%;"> By

After a series of unfortunate events largely self-created, bureaucrat and admin was the subject of an Arbitration case for conduct unbecoming. Prior to the case getting underway Andrevan resigned as bureaucrat and admin. A widely discussed incident was when he suggested that some editors he described as "pro-Trump" were paid Russian agents. This resulted in a number of editors from varied quarters denouncing the allegations and voicing support for veteran editors including and the notorious.

Editors who faced Enforcement action include (no action),  (three month topic ban ARBAPDS),  (no action) and  (indef topic ban ARBAPDS). (Discuss this story)

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:90%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; padding-top:10px; "> IN THE MEDIA

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:170%; background-color:transparent; border:none; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; ">Breitbart Versus Wikipedia

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 90%;"> By

Breitbart News, in response to Facebook's decision to use Wikipedia as a source to fight fake news, has declared war on our beloved pedia. The article in Haaretz describes the Facebook arrangement as Wikipedia's "greatest test in years" as well as a "massive threat" to the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Breitbart's targeting of Wikipedia has resulted in an "epic battle" with respect to editing at the Breitbart article. The article has also recently experienced a dramatic increase in traffic with 50,000 visitors according to Haaretz. There is no love lost between Breitbart and Wikipedia where editors at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard have criticized the news websites unreliability and have compared it to The Daily Mail. (Discuss this story) - <div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:90%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; padding-top:10px; "> DISCUSSION REPORT

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:170%; background-color:transparent; border:none; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; ">Liberty and Trump and Avi, Oh my!

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 90%;"> By

There are several open discussions at the Project:

Recently closed discussions include Anti-abortion movements which was not renamed, and an RFC at Trump–Russia dossier. (Discuss this story)
 * There is an RFC regarding Liberty University and its relationship to President Trump; see discussion
 * Activist and commentator Avi Yemini is listed at AFD; see discussion

Delivered: 11:12, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

The Right Stuff: July 2018
<div style="font-family:Wedding Text, Linotext, Old English Text MT, serif; font-size:58px; line-height:69px; padding-bottom:6px;"> <div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:100%; background-color:transparent; border:none; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; text-align:center;"> July 2018

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:90%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; padding-top:10px; "> DISCUSSION REPORT

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:170%; background-color:transparent; border:none; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; ">WikiProject Conservatism Comes Under Fire

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 90%;"> By

WikiProject Conservatism was a topic of discussion at the Administrators' Noticeboard/Incident (AN/I). Objective3000 started a thread where he expressed concern regarding the number of RFC notices posted on the Discussion page suggesting that such notices "could result in swaying consensus by selective notification." Several editors participated in the relatively abbreviated six hour discussion. The assertion that the project is a "club for conservatives" was countered by editors listing examples of users who "profess no political persuasion." It was also noted that notification of WikiProjects regarding ongoing discussions is explicitly permitted by the WP:Canvassing guideline.

At one point the discussion segued to feedback about The Right Stuff. Member SPECIFICO wrote: "One thing I enjoy about the Conservatism Project is the handy newsletter that members receive on our talk pages." Atsme praised the newsletter as "first-class entertainment...BIGLY...first-class...nothing even comes close...it's amazing." Some good-natured sarcasm was offered with Objective3000 observing, "Well, they got the color right" and MrX's followup, "Wow. Yellow is the new red."

Admin Oshwah closed the thread with the result "definitely not an issue for ANI" and directing editors to the project Discussion page for any further discussion. Editor's note: originally the design and color of The Right Stuff was chosen to mimic an old, paper newspaper.

Add the Project Discussion page to your watchlist for the "latest RFCs" at WikiProject Conservatism (Discuss this story) - <div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:90%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; padding-top:10px; "> ARTICLES REPORT

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:170%; background-color:transparent; border:none; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; ">Margaret Thatcher Makes History Again

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 90%;"> By

Margaret Thatcher is the first article promoted at the new WikiProject Conservatism A-Class review. Congratulations to. A-Class is a quality rating which is ranked higher than GA (Good article) but the criteria are not as rigorous as FA (Featued article). WikiProject Conservatism is one of only two WikiProjects offering A-Class review, the other being WikiProject Military History. Nominate your article here. (Discuss this story)

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:90%; background-color:transparent; border:none; color:#666; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; padding-top:10px; "> RECENT RESEARCH

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:170%; background-color:transparent; border:none; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; ">Research About AN/I

<div style="font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size: 90%;"> By

Reprinted in part from the April 26, 2018 issue of The Signpost; written by 

Out of over one hundred questioned editors, only twenty-seven (27%) are happy with the way reports of conflicts between editors are handled on the Administrators' Incident Noticeboard (AN/I), according to a recent survey. The survey also found that dissatisfaction has varied reasons including "defensive cliques" and biased administrators as well as fear of a "boomerang effect" due to a lacking rule for scope on AN/I reports. The survey also included an analysis of available quantitative data about AN/I. Some notable takeaways:


 * 53% avoided making a report due to fearing it would not be handled appropriately
 * "Otherwise 'popular' users often avoid heavy sanctions for issues that would get new editors banned."
 * "Discussions need to be clerked to keep them from raising more problems than they solve."

In the wake of Zarasophos' article editors discussed the AN/I survey at The Signpost and also at AN/I. Ironically a portion of the AN/I thread was hatted due to "off-topic sniping." To follow-up the problems identified by the research project the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-Harassment Tools team and Support and Safety team initiated a discussion. You can express your thoughts and ideas here. (Discuss this story)

Delivered: 09:27, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

August GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:25, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

December 2018 GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:04, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

GOCE 2018 Annual Report
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:30, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

March GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:12, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

GOCE June newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:29, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

September 2019 GOCE Newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:58, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

GOCE December 2019 Newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:05, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

GOCE March newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

GOCE June newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 15:46, 5 June 2020 (UTC).

Guild of Copy Editors September 2020 Newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

December 2020 Guild of Copy Editors Newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:46, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

GOCE June 2021 newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 12:37, 26 June 2021 (UTC).

September 2021 Guild of Copy Editors newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

December 2021 GOCE Newsletter
Distributed via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:02, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

GOCE April 2022 newsletter
Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:42, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

June GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors' October 2022 newsletter
 Baffle☿gab  03:07, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors December 2022 Newsletter
Sent by Baffle gab1978 via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors December 2022 Newsletter error
The GOCE December 2022 newsletter, as sent on 9 December, contains an erroneous start date for our December Blitz. The Blitz will start on 11 December rather than on 17 December, as stated in the newsletter. I'm sorry for the mistake and for disrupting your talk page; thanks for your understanding. Sent by Baffle gab1978 via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:30, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors 2022 Annual Report
Sent by Baffle gab1978 using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors June 2023 Newsletter
Sent by Baffle gab1978 using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:38, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Septermber GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 10 September 2023 (UTC)