User talk:M.nelson/Archive 1

Naples waste management issues
My rationale is the exact same as before; it is not in following with the WP:MOS of Wikipedia. What goes on, on the other languages is their business and their different guidelines. However we are on the English Wikipedia. Also the section which you are attempting to give undue weight, against the WP:Recentism policy is already linked within the article during the part on its recent history. On this basis, I would revert an edit which would introduce undue weight.

The subject now has its very own article with all the information pertaining to it, where people such as yourself if you wish can write on it until their heart is content without messing up the correct MOS of the city guideline. - 02:56, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Well first of all, the article is not featured status in its "native language". People in Italy speak Italian not Spanish. Second of all, as I explained different languages on Wikipedia have different standards. What might pass on the Spanish Wikipedia might not pass on the English Wikipedia. Other parts of Wikipedia can't be used for rationale on such issues, in cases such as that comparisons are made to other Encyclopedia's and what weight is given, for example Encyclopædia Britannica or Encarta. I suggest you read the guidelines which I pointed out to gain a better understanding of the standards and weight distribution. Thanks. - Gennarous (talk) 03:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * You are ignoring the guidelines which I have pointed out to you, which answers your questions in depth. Take the time to read WP:MOS and WP:Recentism. If you can't be bothered to read these then there is no point discussing with you because the questions you ask are already discussed in there. Policy is policy. Wikipedia cannot be used as a reference for Wikipedia, this is also policy. Compare, as I suggested the weight given to said subject in Encyclopædia Britannica or Encarta to find quality expectations Wikipedia has to reach. Adding a "recentism" tag does not solve the problem, it only serves to make the article ugly. Tackling the problem is removing the recentism as it is already linked within the article in its appropriate place in following with WP:MOS.


 * An equivelent example, would be you going to the London article and starting up a section titled "7 July 2005 London bombings". In articles of such historic cities, undue weight on such issues sticks out as blatant recentism. And so in the article on London the terrorist attack is mentioned in passing in the "history" section with a link to its indepth, topic specific article. In the Naples article the waste management issue is mentioned in passing in the "history" section with a link to its indepth, topic specific article. - Gennarous (talk) 03:20, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "In addition", it appears as though you are an American making far fetched and bluntly, out of place personal assumptions. How does somebody exactly go about "putting in a better light" articles relating to subjects which for centuries were the epicentre of western civilisation and its development? - Gennarous (talk) 04:19, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I understand the concern that the waste management issue is recent (or at least that the growing concern over it is), but I think it is imperative to keep at least small section on the Naples page to direct people to the individual article about it. Its current placement in the history section does not seem right, given that "history" would imply the problem is a thing of the past. The point of Wikipedia, I believe, is to inform people! Whatever style guidelines are being argued, I would have to say I find the removal of information of this nature to be unacceptable. - mcclth (talk) 21:34, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Welcome
Hey there, Welcome to wikipedia. I saw your userpage comment :-). You could start out with telling us what you do and what you would like to do at wikipedia, your interests etc. You could also have some userboxes to help you out. Hope you enjoy, Muhammad (talk)  19:43, 28 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I also welcome you, and having only just noticed your message on my talk page, I updated the heptadecagon animation today. Jonathan48 (talk) 06:44, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

The Lines You Amend
— Preceding undated comment added 00:10, 25 October 2008‎ (UTC)

Moby Dick
Mr Nelson, Hello yes I took leave of my senses for a while and replaced rosetta@home with moby dick. Pretty childish but I think I achieved something. Some things in life are pointless but they make us smile, perhaps the smile gives the action validity. Happy holidays. Willarveschoug (talk) 21:37, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I Swear
yo. fix stuff about I Swear and I Swear (N-Dubz song). thx bro 137.122.79.188 (talk) 02:25, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

invitation
You're invited to sign up as a founding member, at WikiProject Council/Proposals ! :) doncram (talk) 06:30, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Mace and Mailer
Hi,

I don't really understand why you removed the mention of Mailer in this article.

Could you explain your point of view more precisely ?

Thanks.

DocteurCosmos (talk) 12:52, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

RBI
I have a question: How is run batted in, by far the primary topic? It isn't even used outside the Americas. Please respond at Talk:RBI (disambiguation)  --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 07:29, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Bike For Three!
A tag has been placed on Bike For Three! requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a club, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guidelines for people and for organizations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Ipatrol (talk) 00:42, 29 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I've brought it back from the dead, at Bike for Three!. :) Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 02:43, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of More Heart Than Brains
A tag has been placed on More Heart Than Brains requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a musical recording which does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, and where the artist's article has never existed, has been deleted or is eligible for deletion itself. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for music.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Passportguy (talk) 02:45, 29 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Third-party sources were cited, so that prevents it from being speedied. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 02:44, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

The MacNeil / Lehrer NewsHour
This can be fixed with a G6, since it was a controversial move. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 20:00, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Parkwood Hills
Hi. Please could you kindly help me with your local knowledge? I am in the UK and have no local knowledge of Ottawa whatsoever. I was asked by some regular residents of Parkwood Hills to re-start the page for them, which I have done to the best of my somewhat basic ability. They were not involved in the previous 2007 deletion, by the way. They were to have taken over from thereon, but are currently too busy to do so, which leaves me temporarily stranded and attempting to continue with this page until they can do it properly in the summer.

So I should be most grateful if you could please kindly help by adding what you can to the infobox - as you see it's very small as my knowledge of local govt and postcodes is sparse. (The rest of the page I'll struggle on with as best I can, until the locals find it and start contributing).

Please inform me of any reply on my talk page. Thanks.--Storye book (talk) 17:58, 18 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi M.Nelson - thanks for the message, and for finding someone who might contribute to the page. I look forward to reading what they have to say - in fact, after researching the place, I'd quite like to see it, now.  Cheers and thanks again.--Storye book (talk) 23:21, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Commercial Street Sweeper Article
M.nelson – I understand that you removed a contribution to the Wikipedia site on commercial street sweeper that we submitted based on: “probable copyright vio”. The information was taken from and credited to a 1962 book entitled “The Sweep of Time” by William A. Richman and commissioned by the original founders of the Elgin Sweeper Company – which dates back to 1912 (first product offered for sale in 1914). Images provided of the Patents for the design of this early street sweeper are dated 1917 and are considered the historic documents of Elgin Sweeper Company.--nadachi (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:09, 7 July 2009 (UTC).

Remain in Light

 * There is no MOS proviso for or against italic titles. It came up in a FAC discussion and I also heavily enquired some of the bigwigs. Until you provide such regulations, I will put it back. RB88 (T) 14:56, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Replied at User talk:Rafablu88. -M.Nelson (talk) 15:57, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I doubt we're gonna make any inroads. The discussion seems to always go down the route of "But it's ugly" and then "That's what they said about new Facebook". To me, it looks more professional if the title follows the style as it appears in the text. Many encyclopaedias are now doing it. But I'd go along with any formal decision. Although to be honest, since we're overly democratic, we're always going to get the same 14-year-olds discussing the same pointless for and against, unless Jimmy Wales changes MOS himself. RB88 (T) 16:49, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Replied at User talk:Rafablu88. -M.Nelson (talk) 19:11, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * That's the thing though. "Common use". It doesn't say you're forbidden to use them in other pages. The discussions I had concluded that it's up to the editor's discretion to use or not use since MOS is not 100% explicit due to the no consensus. RB88 (T) 07:42, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Replied at User talk:Rafablu88. -M.Nelson (talk) 15:04, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * We're going round in circles now like every time this comes up.
 * *"I would argue that as there is no "special case" for album titles (whereas there is a "special case" for Flora), it should not be used." = Your opinion, not MOS, or my opinion, or consensus.
 * *"As for "common use", regardless of whether italics are used or not, all article titles (of the same type) should be consistent. If italics were to be used on album titles, then it should of course be done for all album titles; this would classify it as a "common use", which above states it is not." = Misrepresentation of advice which says "currently its only common use is for taxonomic genera and species" and nothing about common use within a group or the albums group. Finally, majority does not make something right. You, me, and the universe don't know if album articles would have all been written in italics or not as the received way should the technology have existed at Wikipedia's advent.
 * As it stands, the title is staying in italics unless MOS is against it or there is total consensus. RB88 (T) 15:10, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Politics of Gatineau Park
Thank you for wading in. - Ahunt (talk) 00:35, 11 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your note - your presence and input there are a great help! - Ahunt (talk) 12:02, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

COI
Thanks for all your work on the article and the COI note. If you read through Talk:Gatineau Park you will see a previous discussion I had with this user (as various similar IPs) where he denies all COI, but gives his e-mail address. He pretty much outed his real life identity there. - Ahunt (talk) 19:02, 11 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Glad that you thought that was appropriate. I am pursuing getting some "adult supervision" for that page as well. - Ahunt (talk) 00:44, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

3RR
I am sorry that it has had to come to that. IP socks are next. - Ahunt (talk) 15:46, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Master of Science
Hello. You added a template to Master of Science. It'd be helpful if you could indicate what you feel the main issues are, and how they could be resolved or addressed. -- Nicholas Jackson (talk) 00:38, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Replied at User talk:Nicholas Jackson. -M.Nelson (talk) 01:25, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

You might be interested in this
Uninvited, but very welcome, an admin showed up over at Talk:New Woodlands Preservation League‎, an adjunct article to Politics of Gatineau Park. You may want to have a look. - Ahunt (talk) 14:49, 12 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I figured your midterms were to blame. Your previous contributions were very helpful, you have a great technical knowledge of Wiki-procedures and policies! - Ahunt (talk) 17:50, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of New Woodlands Preservation League
An article that you have been involved in editing, New Woodlands Preservation League, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ahunt (talk) 15:09, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Gatineau Park Protection Committee
An article that you have been involved in editing, Gatineau Park Protection Committee, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ahunt (talk) 15:27, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for cross-referencing the two AfDs - I should have done that, but these were only my second and third AfDs, so I am still a bit new to the procedures. I try not to be a deletionist! - Ahunt (talk) 16:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your note. As far as I know they have to proceed as two different debates, although I expect that they will be similar in arguments made in both cases. - Ahunt (talk) 17:59, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Politics of Gatineau Park
An article that you have been involved in editing, Politics of Gatineau Park, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. - Ahunt (talk) 19:24, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Gatineau Park invitation
You are receiving this invitation to join other editors working on the Gatineau Park article, because you participated in the AfD debates at Articles for deletion/Politics of Gatineau Park, Articles for deletion/New Woodlands Preservation League and/or Articles for deletion/Gatineau Park Protection Committee and have thus shown an interest in this subject. The greater the number of editors who participate in articles, the better the articles become. - Ahunt (talk) 18:25, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Owl City
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Gunmetal Angel (talk • contribs) 17:29, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Beau's All Natural Brewing Company

 * Congratulations! - Ahunt (talk) 00:25, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Pavilion
I shouldn't have commented as much as I did on the noticeboard, but further to what I said there, it's a slippery slope to make such redirects/amalgamations; quite often with Alexis Creek and Alkali Lake and such reseves sharing that same name are nowhere near the named community (some are, though); Pavilion No. 1A is across the river in West Pavilion (aka Blueridge), while Pavilion includes the Marble Canyon reserves and others; but it also includes large non-native landholdings, namely two of the oldest ranches in BC. Where it gets to be a slippery slope is with Lillooet Indian Reserve No. 1 or Lytton Indian Reserve No. 1, which flank on the towns named in t heir titles but are separate entities from the municipalities; in Lillooet's case also flanking town are the Pashilequa IRs (of the Cayoose Creek band) and the Bridge River reserves (Bridge River Indian Reserve No. 1 being the largest, and also including areas far from Lillooet - it's a very large reserve). Ditto Williams Lake Indian Reserve No. 1, aka "Sugarcane" which is right by the City of Williams Lake...but not part of it....Care has to be taken with such mergers/redirects.Skookum1 (talk) 18:19, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * also the Kamloops Indian Reserve and many others (the Kamloops IR is fully withing hte boundaries of the City of Kamloops, but not part of it...); I wanted to add that I've been placing the IR category ("First Nations reserves in British Columbia", which I've been trying to get renamed for a while...) on the IR redirects, not on the target article, which in many cases is wholly inappropriate, as with places which have more than just an FN component to their geography/population....Skookum1 (talk) 18:21, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

CKLI-FM
Do you have a source for the information you inserted in this edit, claiming that this small unlicensed LPFM has been on-air since 2002? By all indications, "Mix 91.9 Ottawa" was a short-lived operation shut down in the first few weeks. --66.102.80.212 (talk) 18:27, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

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

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

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

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:14, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Danielle Smith biographical edits
I fail to see how selectively questioning a seemingly random piece of biographical ancestry information is acceptable. I don't care what idiotic policy pages you point me at, it's plain wrong. My edits were in good faith. What exactly is the suggested 'citation' for someone's ancestry?

I can't even begin to imagine the mental gymnastics involved in failing to see the problem with such an arbitrary and difficult to fulfill citation request.

Regardless, I guess you 'win' this edit war. I had no idea who Danielle Smith was before reading a news article a few weeks ago, and edited what I believed to be an excessive and irrational citation request upon finding her article. I should have better things to do with my life than argue over minutia.

Thank you mob rule Howel t (talk) 06:08, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Hal Bridge
Done. No sources, and even granting the debatable proposition that he did exist he's at a level where players don't get to claim automatic notability just because they're on a team roster. Gone she be, eh? Bearcat (talk) 04:30, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Clever; I was stuck trying to find a hoax-y tag to use (I must have missed at the time). Thanks, -M.Nelson (talk) 04:41, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Reginald Stephen Copleston
Thank you- my mistake Regards Bashereyre (talk) 21:46, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Pete Williams (journalist)
Thank you for your comment there. What you wrote is absolutely true, but some users here would never know that if I wrote such a comment, due to my reputation. It takes an "outside opinion" to make an impact. Bearian (talk) 01:02, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Discussion invitation
Ikip 05:06, 28 January 2010 (UTC) refactored, thanks, hoping to hear from you. Ikip 17:45, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Non Free Images in you User Space
Hey there M.nelson, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot alerting you that Non-free images are not allowed in the user or talk-space. I removed some images that I found on User:M.nelson/Talkin' Honky Blues. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use images to your user-space drafts or your talk page. See a log of images removed today here, shutoff the bot here and report errors here. Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 00:45, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry about the image!
Dear M.Nelson, you said you couldn't cropping images well, but don't worry about it because I have gotten another administrator to address the issue. So you don't need to do anything with the previously discussed photo and you don't need to crop it.

Thanks, for you help uploading anyway -Zxcvxxcxcx (talk) 06:22, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

tks for all you do!!
......Thank you for all that you do here for Wikipedia....Go Canada go!!!!Buzzzsherman (talk) 07:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

National Capital Region
Hello, M.Nelson

I figured because Ottawa's metro area is actually significantly larger than it's CMA I thought it would still be mentioned. Similar to that on the Toronto page. I had concluded from the discussion pages that this was not part of the topic. If you think it shouldn't be mentioned in the infobox I can understand. Although I feel this pop figure is different from the city, or cma pops. PhilthyBear (talk) 16:15, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Undid Ahunt
I undid Ahunt's revision, because the article mentions the GPPC's activities, and more importantly, because the page of the web site http://www.gatineauparc.ca/home_en.html provides a referenced article illustrating the point made in the Wiki sentence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stoneacres (talk • contribs) 02:27, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Ahunt's bad faith
Ahunt is misleading all Wikipedians: in no way does http://www.gatineauparc.ca/home_en.html constitue spam. The site informs the public about confirmed problems, with accurate and verifiable sources. It does not advertise. Ahunt is showing bad faith, poor judgement, and a lack of understanding of the rules. Ahuntinterprets them to suit his POV. And that must be denounced by all honest men and women.

In what way, is http://www.gatineauparc.ca/home_en.html not a reliable source? The burden of proof is on Ahunt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stoneacres (talk • contribs) 21:54, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Your opinion needed
As you requested, I have placed references in the proposed modification to the Gatineau Park article. I would like your opinion/approval/disapproval/suggestions on the matter. --Stoneacres (talk) 14:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Ahunt also seeks your opinion
Ahunt and I are okay with the changed formulation; your okay needed to seal the deal. --Stoneacres (talk) 14:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Final discussion for Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:
 * 1) Proposal to Close This RfC
 * 2) Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip  03:20, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Anomalous scaling dimension
Hi Nelson,

Thank you for checking the change on the anomalous scaling dimension. I can confirm that the change was legitimate, a mistake had been made in the Taylor expansion. The current expression is correct, I checked the calculation myself and also looked it up in my lecture notes.

All the best —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.117.109.20 (talk) 16:22, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Ron Browz
The single was taken off of Jim Jones's album. See Slow Jamz with Kanye's album dispute for an example, and Browz album that the song was supposed to be on was cancelled. The solo singles section even verifies it by adding "Pray IV Reign" as the album of the song when that's a Jim Jones album. Str8cash (talk) 23:42, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Quebec City
I see you've removed the National Capital Region population figure from the Ottawa infobox and the Golden Horseshoe from Toronto's infobox. I've noticed Quebec City has a unreferenced population figure as well. I'm not sure how to explain the removal and reference the discussion on this subject. Your help would be appreciated. Thanks M.Nelson ... Po&#39; buster (talk) 04:14, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

FrescoBot/WildBot situation
Thanks for the heads-up. I hope I've adequately summed it up at User talk:Basilicofresco without stepping on the toes of the WP:BAG on something that possibly is an issue that belongs in front of them. ... Kenosis (talk) 02:36, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Josh Parris seems to have it covered now, as can be seen in User_talk:Josh_Parris. Josh's proposed solution was to move the maintenance templates to below the existing templates used to set the fundamental page context on many of the busier talk pages. Thanks for dealing with this. ... Kenosis (talk) 04:08, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

The R3-30
The charts used to be dated to the Thursday that ended the week for which they were published; I believe because the program aired on Friday but the podcast wasn't out until Monday. Concurrently with the site redesign that happened last year, though, they switched to dating them on the Friday that they're actually released — but the problem is that I don't know the actual date of the switchover, so I don't know where to begin changing the chart dates in our articles. I don't know if it's necessarily the best solution, but what I figured at the time was that at least until we could actually verify the correct date, the simplest and least confusing option would be to continue to list the following Thursday for the remainder of 2009, and then switch back to the official chart date at the start of 2010. But if you're able to figure out better than I am when the switchover happened — or if you think it would be appropriate to redate them all back to the Friday instead — then by all means feel free to swap out the dates if you wish. Bearcat (talk) 22:23, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * As for the missing chart, I guess they probably skipped it because it was the end of the year and they typically concentrate on a year-end chart instead. They typically haven't published a chart for the first week of January, either. Bearcat (talk) 22:29, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

And by the way, I should also let you know that there seems to be a consensus emerging at WP:CHARTS that because it's a "single station" chart rather than a CRIA-compiled sales chart, the R3-30 isn't actually a valid chart to reference a song's chart performance to — and thus, that the #1 list articles themselves may be deletable. (Nobody's suggesting that we delete the entire network's article, or even the main article about the show — but they are suggesting that hitting the chart doesn't, in and of itself, support the notability of a song or an artist.)

I tried pointing out that it's a nationally-oriented service operated by a national public broadcaster in a genre that doesn't have any other chart sources that can be used (except chartattack.com, but that would be subject to the same disqualification), but that argument doesn't seem to have swayed anyone. I don't know if you have anything you can contribute to the discussion or not, but at least be aware that any work you put into the list articles may be subject to deletion if we can't make a compelling case for why it should count. Bearcat (talk) 23:18, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Ottawa election
Hiya Nelson, no I just took the information from his page... Sorry if I helped continue a piece of sleeper vandalism ;) TastyCakes (talk) 15:32, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Haha, no the furthest my ref hunting went was to check that that "Kanata Kourier" was an actual newspaper. There didn't seem an easy way to check what was said in April of last year...  TastyCakes (talk) 16:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Her Majesty in Right of Canada
"Her Majesty in Right of Canada" is represented by the Canadian Government, not the Monarchy. Perhaps you should do some research before joining in. Although I appreciate your cowardly puppet participation in the lynch mob. Po&#39; buster (talk) 23:52, 22 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the bad faith! I'm in the process of replying at that page as we speak. Cheers, -M.Nelson (talk) 23:56, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Redirects of non-notables
I disagree with your opinion of redirecting non-notable articles as being the same as a contested PROD. Do you have some place where the community has come to that consensus? Active Banana (talk) 13:57, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * A redirect perpetually leaves the target page there for anyone who may be searching for the article, a completed PROD would not.
 * And the person returning content to an article is under the obligation to provide accurate and reliable sources, which is clearly outlined under our policy. The situation in a PROD is different in that there is no unsourced content being added or returned to the article in violation of WP:V.


 * It isn't the exact same as a contested PROD, but the actions taken should be similar. Rather than continuing an edit war by reverting back to the redirect, the matter should be taken to discussion, per WP:BRD and more specifically WP:Deletion policy. -M.Nelson (talk) 18:26, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * While BRD has its place, the continued insertion and reinsertion of unsourced content is vandalism, particularly in situations where the reinsertion contains highly POV content. Active Banana (talk) 18:32, 11 May 2010 (UTC)


 * The continued insertion and reinsertion of unsourced content is absolutely not vandalism. Editors such as myself, Moxy, and MattGoodfan101 are clearly making good faith attempts to improve these articles. There is no reason for you to dismiss WP:BRD—favouring edit-warring over discussion—in the face of opposition from multiple editors.
 * Seriously, if you believe these articles shouldn't be in WP, take it to WP:AFD where more third opinions can be found. Personally, I'm certain that the majority of the articles discussed will easily pass AFD, so I'd be more than happy if you did so. -M.Nelson (talk) 18:52, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Point 1) "The continued insertion and reinsertion of unsourced content is absolutely not vandalism." You are correct that it is not one of the items on the vandalism page. I thought that such a clear violation of one of the policies would most certainly be outright vandalism. My bad.
 * Point 2) I dont believe the unsourced articles should be stand alone articles left in the condition that they are in. But because a reader quite possibly could enter many of the names in the search, a redirect to the appropriate content in the larger scope article is better than a non-existant page, hence I dont feel that an AFD process resulting in the page being deleted is at all appropriate in most circumstances. The existence of the page as a redirect would also allow an IP user to build an article if they have access to appropriate sources that previous editors did not have or for some reason did not include.Active Banana (talk) 19:28, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Don Fex AFD
Hi, just wondering why of the articles I added yesterday, you've only nominated Don Fex. Why not Fred Sherwin or Allan Hubley? I see there was a similar discussion over Ike Awgu, this is why I only focused on nominees which are mentioned in independent sources. I avoided those candidates which are only mentioned in the news for their nominee or for whom I could find nothing unrelated. I totally agree they should come down after the election, if they lose, but for now, I think it's contentious. The conjunction of X + Nomination seems to satisfy primary notability. As in the case of Ike. Andwats (talk) 23:49, 19 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Sounds good. But I would strongly suggest you look at the Ike Awgu article first. And, the discussion over it's deletion. I've based all of them on that.Andwats (talk) 01:53, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Infact you should probably check several of the articles on current councilors since according to the guidline you cited WP:Politician most may not qualify. See point 3. Most of these also lack verifiable sources. Or any sources whatsoever.Andwats (talk) 04:06, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Could you take a look at the Allan Hubley article? It's been edited far beyond what I original put it up. And, it looks as though it's been edited by the Hubley. I have in my watchlist: "(diff | hist) . . Allan Hubley‎; 03:01 . . (+1,305) . . Ahubley (talk | contribs)". Not sure about the procedure here. Andwats (talk) 01:57, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello hip friend
I have been trying to go over all of Active Banana edits that he as done to deleted pages sneakily. I may not have gotten them all if there are any off hand that you know of pls let me know!!! .. all the best your new friend ...Moxy (talk) 05:20, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello Sir, I've noticed the user, Active Banana continuously reverts changes to the page and is currently doing some "power tripping" within Philippine media wiki pages. Can he be stopped or banned? G8crash3r (talk) 20:04, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Soulja Boy
There's a pretty general consensus that only certifying agencies get quoted with reference to certifications. Every PR flack under the sun likes to claim gold and platinum, and they never use the same rules as the certifying agencies. Since the RIAA says the album isn't even gold, there's no chance that it is a platinum.&mdash;Kww(talk) 01:02, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

CBC
FYI, the section you removed is sourced to Althia Raj in the Ottawa Sun 's Parliamentary Bureau. It appears to be an article, not an op-ed piece. --Ckatz chat spy  05:54, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Po' buster/PhilthyBear
M.nelson - I've finally been provoked enough by an anon IP user who I suspect is Po' buster/PhiltyBear to file another checkuser into whether or not that individual is using an IP to evade his ban. It's at the same location as the previous two CUs: Sockpuppet investigations/PhilthyBear. Please offer whatever opinion you have. Cheers. -- Ħ   MIESIANIACAL  17:46, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

AOSC
Hi Nelson, good job on that article, it looks good. I don't know if I can improve it much from what you've done (I don't know much about the company) but I'll keep an eye out for information on it... TastyCakes (talk) 04:25, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi, friend
I'm reopening an old can of worms. Your input is welcomed... [] Carrite (talk) 15:46, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

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

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

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

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Tiptoety talk 09:41, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Census population figures
Hello M.Nelson,

I see you have reverted a recent population change on the Calgary article. Your comments were that 2006 census stats are to be used only. I have done the same with a recent pop change at the Halifax Regional Municipality article. I have reverted it once and it has again been changed. I don't know where the guidelines are or anything so I can't tell the IP otherwise. Perhaps you could help ? Thanks. UrbanNerd (talk) 00:29, 12 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I saw your edit to the HRM article, and you're completely correct to revert to the census figure. The correct guideline is at WP:CANSTYLE, which states that "The [population] estimates can be provided in the article body, but the infobox's population = field should reflect the census figure". Additionally, the numbers put in by the IP are unreferenced-- though there still is a citation (to the 2006 census), the new numbers obviously aren't from that citation.-M.Nelson (talk) 00:43, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleting of Notable Residents in Cranbrook BC
My question for you is how can someone from Ottawa reasonably deem who is notable enough for "notable resident status" without living here.

Playing in the NHL does not make you a notable resident, donating your time to speak at local schools, creating critically acclaimed sculptures to help foster a new level of understanding and help right past wrong doings with the local Native people does.

How about you let residents from Cranbrook BC have some input on who we think are notable residents as clearly this is a purely speculative section.

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.180.75.55 (talk) 14:46, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Canpotex
Hello! Your submission of Canpotex at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Smartse (talk) 21:51, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

McBarge DYK
Hi there. I reviewed your DYK nomination and made a few structural changes and copyedits to the article, so the Expand section tag could be justifiably removed. (DYK's shouldn't have maintenance tags on them.) You can always re-split the History section later if you get more material. Interesting article! Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:41, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

St Louis?
You messaged me: Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Cenovus Energy, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed.

this is wrong! My edit (adding a link) was corrected by you; before there was no link, so teamwork (my attempting to add link, albeit wrong, and your correcting my mistake) improved that page. Please don't accuse me of non-constructive edits and then mis-represent the actions on your part. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.215.7.179 (talk) 16:19, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for McBarge
 — Rlevse • Talk  • 00:10, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Canpotex
 — Rlevse • Talk  • 12:02, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Les Chemins de verre
Actually, that's not exactly right. Usually, yes, you only capitalize the first word — but if the first word is an article, such as un(e)/des or le/la/les, then you capitalize the second word too. Bearcat (talk) 02:24, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * To the best of my knowledge, it's because of the fact that they do the same thing we do in sorting (i.e. it would be filed under C rather than L), so the C also needs to be capitalized since it's the actual determinant of where the title goes in alphabetical order. Though I admit I'm not 100% sure that that's the primary reason for it... Bearcat (talk) 02:34, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

The Editor's Barnstar
Was just thinking the same thing about OC Transpo lots of mumble-jumble.....When you done you should look at how bad Lansdowne Park half the article is based on the past 2 years. — Preceding undated comment added 21:12, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

OC Transpo
That major pruning was overdue. The editors of this, and related articles, have created very clumsy childish entries. There has been too much stress placed on current trivial actions, like bus route or O Train diversions, new bus models and snow fall (in Ottawa?). I wonder if I should clean it up some more by spinning off fleet information from "Active fleet", "Retired fleet" and "Gallery of bus models" to OC Transpo buses, or something like that? The reference given is dated "3FE03" and the information seems more like OR but is probably acurate. I don't particularly want to get involved long term, as local residents can more adequately sort out fact from conjecture than I can. Thanks for this. Secondarywaltz (talk) 02:20, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * There's still some easy pruning that I'll get to, particularly the "Deadly Rampage" and "OC Transpo routes" sections. I personally have no problem with the buses as they don't take up too much space (thanks to the collapsible box), but if you seriously think that it would be better split, please be bold and split to, say, List of OC Transpo buses. I haven't taken a serious look at that info but it looks like it's being regularly updated (though perhaps through OR); I'll take a look at some point to confirm its accuracy. Cheers, -M.Nelson (talk) 00:58, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I think you are probably right, in that the collapsing tables hide any potential clutter. I'll not mess with this. Secondarywaltz (talk) 23:07, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

English speaking Quebecer
Hello my apologies for the inconvenience,just trying to write in the right facts :) I Have my sources concerning the numbers of the recent 2006 census, the official language minority statistics you have are of the 2001 census yet it is cited as 2006.

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:54MaeFkPVrsJ:www.qcgn.ca/files/QCGN/aThe_Gazette_2009.01.31.pdf+here+to+stay+the+hip+anglo+stats&hl=en&gl=ca&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESiNt_1wiml2RhYkKV3yCCCgtZhljwp8hp2Vdy7u9pHZZgrCtYbjX32bIwN0RIzUtaiq_uEbVb6wRHfkC3JXDMHDET_M5SjbUL_AtYPEJKLl48dQroVRrRUMEi8j-wllTbd5n8VP&sig=AHIEtbRfORATYtKIeEQHsItemM4UG20sIw

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89-642-x/2010002/tbl/tbl221-eng.htm

the numbers in the gazette represent the numbers in mother tongue and home language not just having it as their only language but if english is atleast one of their mother tongue or home languages spoken which i feel better represents the community as a whole. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bohemian93 (talk • contribs) 23:35, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I can assure you that the numbers here are for the 2006 census, not the 2001 census (whose numbers can be found here). If there is any discrepancy, it is either due to differing definitions within StatsCan or numbers being mixed up as they are repeated by the Gazette. I personally think that we should stick to "English only mother tongue" for simplicity's sake (also we should keep only to census, not data repeated in the Gazette, for accuracy), but if you want to propose a change to that (ie using the sum of English Only + English and French) then feel free to do so, at talk:English-speaking Quebecer. Cheers, -M.Nelson (talk) 03:23, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I was regarding only the stastistic of Official language minority being cited from 2001 in which i provided evidence through statistics Canada in my source above -Bohemian93 (talk) 02:54, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Ahh, I see what you mean now. I'll try to correct what I can; let me know if I missed anything else. Your StatsCan source seems legit to me btw. -M.Nelson (talk) 02:48, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Ramona Milano
Hi

After 5 hours on it rescuing it from deletion I shouldn't have expected perfection lol - Thx for the copyedit and its nice to see a Canadian on it already!

Chaosdruid (talk) 02:31, 2 November 2010 (UTC)


 * No problem; I saw your note on the noticeboard. Unfortunately, the only good sources I can turn up have already been used :(.  Cheers, -M.Nelson (talk) 02:34, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Sherman Mine
Thanks for the nice pic! I wasn't sure if such a photo would exist for Sherman's article. It is an article I have been wanting to expand for a while, but I just I have not seen much information about it from reliable sources. I am currently collecting loads of data to expand the Temagami greenstone belt article, which is in horrible condition right now. Most of Temagami's mines (including Sherman) are within the greenstone belt, as well as a great deal of igneous and economic geology. Anyway, feel free to take some areal pics of the other open pits of Sherman or other mines in Temagami; they will eventually have their use in articles related to Temagami.  Volcano guy  18:24, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Just figured if you are interested in this handmade map of Sherman. It was originally in Sherman's gate house but I took it last year because it is good detail and it had no use sitting in there for over 20 years after the mine's closer.  Volcano guy  06:26, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Lansdowne Park
Thanks for watching the article. The LPC seems to want to use the article as a press page. It was protected for a while before the municipal election. Regardless of anyone's feelings about the issues, it's not appropriate for Wikipedia. I predict that the LPC will probably undo your revert. &#x0298; alaney2k  &#x0298; ( talk ) 18:06, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Wiki Creditability
Please go to linkedin and review the resume of one Doug Cottrell.

When the submission of information to Wiki is from the actual source of the information external references are not applicable. However, the reference to the press of the time including newspapers and Business Week IS in the submission. The references are easily verifiable although not so easy to provide links since most papers do not allow links to archival material even when users can locate, search, and read it.

Regards

Doug Cottrell Senior Advisor NorTel International —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amiablecdn (talk • contribs) 19:54, 26 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the note. Unfortunately, even if you (or I, or anyone else) confirm that information is true, it must still be explicitly cited to a source (see citing sources), because "the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth". The article is missing material in this area of the subject, but since we can't include unreferenced material, it would be best to add it little-by-little as sources are found. A useful tool for finding old sources is Google News' Archive Search. Cheers, -M.Nelson (talk) 20:07, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

A link to the official Nortel Networks history page (which doesn't include political or organizational issues) is now included as well as a link to Funding Universe's corporate history for Nortel Networks (used by any organization wanting to do business or invest in a company) which does include some of the dirt. The most reliable sources of course remain those who were there and involved - BOTH the above sources are secondary sources gathering information from primary sources.

I am one of those primary sources and I am being quoted and I am being referenced by showing on the History page of the Wiki entry.

Your policy remains stupid when the contributors to Wiki are the primary sources, backed up by secondary references.

Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amiablecdn (talk • contribs) 20:31, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

It's signed, it's referenced, go to linkedin and check who Doug Cottrell is and what his history with BNR Nortel is. For now I submitted a perfectly valid addition filling a 15 year hole in Wiki's history for Nortel.

You don't want people to contribute ... fine with me. Good luck to you all.

Amiablecdn (talk) 14:18, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your contribution to the Nortel article
Your continued contributions via reversion of bad edits, but mainly via additions of new and updated material, are appreciated. Ottawahitech (talk) 19:21, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of List of The R3-30 number-one hits of 2010 for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of The R3-30 number-one hits of 2010 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/List of The R3-30 number-one hits of 2006 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. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 00:11, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Cascades (company)
Hello. Look at the Cascades page. Copyvio again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.5.103.50 (talk) 09:59, 11 September 2011 (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) 13:46, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Just to let you know
You have been mentioned at Missing Wikipedians. XOttawahitech (talk) 15:37, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
 * You have been mentioned at Missing Wikipedians. Ottawahitech (talk) 00:25, 4 January 2016 (UTC)please ping me

Possible removal of AWB access due to inactivity
Hello! There is currently a request for approval of a bot to manage the AutoWikiBrowser CheckPage by removing inactive users, among other tasks. You are being contacted because you may qualify as an inactive user of AWB. First, if you have any input on the proposed bot task, please feel free to comment at the BRFA. Should the bot task be approved, your access to AWB may be uncontroversially removed if you do not resume editing within a week's time. This is purely for routine maintenance of the CheckPage, and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You will be able regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Bixi (company)
An article that you have been involved in editing&mdash; Bixi (company) &mdash;has been proposed for merging with PBSC Urban Solutions. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Mindfrieze (talk) 22:42, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

McBarge
McBarge has an open house on Sun. Oct 21. I may go visit and see if they can CCby some images. They also have an official website you may want to add to the article http://newmcbarge.com/. Google McBarge open house for RS details. https://globalnews.ca/news/3803597/mcbarge-ocean-discovery-centre/ is one article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.55.104.236 (talk) 01:32, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Benevity logo 2020.png
Thanks for uploading File:Benevity logo 2020.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:18, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Şırnak Silopi power station
Please see note on your DYK review. Yoninah (talk) 21:02, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

I have added a little more info and cites and combined some paragraphs. If more needs doing please let me know.Chidgk1 (talk) 18:16, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Benevity has been accepted
 Benevity, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer. Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!  DGG ( talk ) 05:25, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Benevity help desk] .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Disambiguation link notification for July 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
 * Central Plaza (Dublin) ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Central_Plaza_%28Dublin%29 check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Central_Plaza_%28Dublin%29?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Temple Bar
 * Lockport, Manitoba ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Lockport%2C_Manitoba check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Lockport%2C_Manitoba?client=notify fix with Dab solver])
 * added a link pointing to Red River

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:22, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Question about Brookfield Business Partners
Hi M.nelson. First, I want to let you know that I really appreciate the time and effort you've spent on improving Wikipedia articles about Brookfield (my employer, as you know), as well as Canada-related content in general. My question is about how to resolve the ongoing issue at Brookfield Business Partners, where the RfC is about to expire. The article has declared since March 2019 that the company is connected to the Saudi Royal Family, a statement that has no support from any reliable sources anywhere - not even the cited CNN source says this in any way. I'm surprised that the only ones who appear to understand this are you and a small handful of other editors. Is there any way to resolve this situation in a way that respects Wikipedia's policy against original research and synthesis? Thank you, Dvruthven (talk) 13:20, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi thanks for the note. Though I think WP's policy clearly supports one side and not the other, there isn't a consensus, so I posted a request to close the discussion at WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure. An admin or experienced editor should now step in and close the discussion (or advise on another course of action). Cheers, -M.Nelson (talk) 23:02, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Sherman Mine
Hi M.nelson. I just wanted to say thank you again for File:Sherman Mine East Pit from air.jpg. It is the front cover of a book I finished writing in August. I also gave you credit in the book. Volcanoguy 20:56, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Wow, User:Volcanoguy, you're more than welcome. I'm honoured that you chose that picture and happy that it's being put to good use. Congratulations on the book - could you send me a link to it? Email is fine. -M.Nelson (talk) 18:22, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Canadian bank failures of 1985


Hello, M.nelson. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Canadian bank failures of 1985".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 00:15, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Liffey Boardwalk
Hello, M.nelson. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Liffey Boardwalk, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Bot0612 (talk) 04:50, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Irish Life Centre
Hello, M.nelson. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Irish Life Centre, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 00:03, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

How did you...
Hey thanks for your edits to London, Ontario car attack. Out of curiosity, how did you find the article? Was it through Wikipedia talk:Canadian Wikipedians' notice board or somewhere else?VR talk 20:37, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Yep, noticed the post on the noticeboard. Good work on the article so far and thank you for starting it. -User:M.nelson (talk) 20:58, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Kilmainham Mills
Hello, M.nelson. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Kilmainham Mills, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:40, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Canadian bank failures of 1985
Hello, M.nelson. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Canadian bank failures of 1985, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:16, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Irish Life Centre


Hello, M.nelson. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Irish Life Centre".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗ plicit  11:14, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

From Orange Train. Freshplus is a real business in Australia in QLD
Hi, Nelson Freshplus is a real place of business in QLD Orangetrain (talk) 04:37, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Orangetrain, I'm sure it is a real place of business, so rather than removing I just reverted the inclusion of an external link. An external link to their official website isn't appropriate in this type of list per WP:ELLIST. -M.nelson (talk) 22:17, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Canadian bank failures of 1985


Hello, M.nelson. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Canadian bank failures of 1985".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 17:31, 5 January 2022 (UTC)