User talk:Martin451/Archive 2

Sorry
martin what did i do wrong this is unbeleivable i cant believe this. this is crazy. mann whats up man what you did to me is crazy i cant beelieve it mann whats up with that Sorry, My younger brother was using this account to edit my high schools page. --Kyle  5:27, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you
Hi Martin451! , thanks for reverting Vandalism on my user page Atif.t2 (talk) 22:57, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

thank you
Hey, just wanted to thank you for the tip.-- Nemesis of  Reason  15:14, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

vandalism
Hello i was just wondering how you get the vandalism template thing on to people's user pages as i have tried many times and failed. help please.WILLDE 19:50, 7 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Willde1 (talk • contribs)


 * You need to enclose the template in two pairs of curly brackets e.g., not one pair e.g. {subst:uw-vandalism1} as you have been doing. Alternatively use twinkle, you need to turn it on in your preferences, and then it will give you a tab a the top of talk pages for adding warnings. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 19:56, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Smallville
Um, could you explain why you reverted the removal of a relevant link on the Smallville pages? The link is allowable by WP:EL standards. If you disagree then you should go to the talk page, given that the link has been there for a long time.  BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  22:30, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * This appears to be spam. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 22:32, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * It's not spam. It's a journal I found through my university website that discusses homosexual subtexts in Smallville across five seasons of the show. The guy who wrote it is a professor who specializes in the field, and has written other peer reviewed journals and books on the subject with other shows.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  22:35, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * It it still spam, you have added this to a lot of smallville articles as external links, that is spamming. Wikipedia is not a collection of links. (WP:NOTLINK) Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 22:38, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I've added the pages that are relevant to specific seasons to those season pages. The page that talks just about season five only appears on that page. The page that talks only about season 2 gets that page. That's not WP:SPAM. IMDb appears on every TV and Film page, yet that isn't considered spam because it has relevant to each individual subject.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  22:40, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The link appears to neither be WP:SPAM nor a WP:RS. I can't see why biggy would edit war to keep it in the article. Either way, the EW needs to stop. Toddst1 (talk) 02:40, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the revert on my user page. I blocked that editor and his sockpuppets/meatpuppets. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 21:42, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

You are such a good editor
You are such a good editor of people's work. How can I become a person that cleans up articles and edits them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by SylvieHorse (talk • contribs) 21:50, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Tourism in Spain-Religion
Hi Martin, I agree that that paragraph is unreferenced, but that is what we need, a reference. It is not OR not suspect, it is a well stablished and known (in Spain at least) fact. So instead of removing it, it is better to tag it as unreferenced, don't you think? Cheers! David (talk) 07:19, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Replied on article talk page. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 19:51, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

FYI: Sockpuppetry case Pptweddie
As you left a warning message on User talk:Pptweddie, you may be interested in Sockpuppet investigations/Pptweddie. Cheers, --4wajzkd02 (talk) 16:33, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Re:
Don't look at me, there's another user who needs this message for 18 Kids and Counting.

I'm just putting the episodes back the way they were when I came acrosss them. TH43 (talk) 19:47, 14 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I gave you both the warning, as you were both edit warring. But I reported User talk:Marin17 to WP:AN3 about this. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 19:51, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, I did not appreciate the insults or accusations. This user was claiming that I undid all of their hard work, but never contacted me to tell what "work" I supposedly undid. I did try to point out to him/her on their user page that as far as the individual colors for each season are concerned, it wasn't me who originally put them in. I was just put them back the way there were when I found them and added the TV specials, above the episodes. Who ever put them in, is copying the same format as the episodes for Jon & Kate Plus 8. Again, it wasn't me who decided this style. :o)

They also forgot, a few times, to add a closing tag for the end of the table for a couple of seasons. TH43 (talk) 08:51, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of JackBe declined

 * This article can't be speedy deleted because it has already survived a discussion at articles for deletion. It's a good idea to check the talk page before nominating an article, there was a notice there about the AFD. The discussion is at Articles for deletion/JackBe. If you feel strongly that it can't be fixed and should be deleted, you will need to re-nominate it for deletion via AFD. Alternately, you could edit the article to correct the perceived problems with it. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:38, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

carrie prejean
why are you undoing my addition? I have provided a reliable reference. If you do not find it satisfactory, please write about her breast implants with a more viable source yourself.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Filthyfix (talk • contribs)


 * There is a lot of discussion on the talk page, Talk:Carrie Prejean, about the inclusion. However what you have added is a sentence + a paragraph which includes WP:Original Research and appears to violate WP:BLP. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 18:31, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Craig narrow gauge
I don't think you meant to warn him for vandalism... --NE2 18:29, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I did not intend to vandalize your page, rather provide some ready access to a growing body of relevant material. I was (I agree) promoting my site that does contain relevant information on the Bodie & Benton. I'm new to wiki and learning the ropes and it never occured to me that what I was doing is interpreted as vandalism. Also, a big fan of things Bodie about 13 visits since the mid 1960's, including the railroad grade. The intent was OK, turns out the methodology wasn't!

Would you reconsider? Sorry and thanks. Craig narrow gauge (talk) 18:49, 21 October 2009 (UTC)


 * It's not vandalism - that warning was incorrect - but it is bad to add links to your own site. I looked at what's on there about the B&B and it's not much, so I don't think a link to it belongs on the article. --NE2 19:40, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Seeing as I can't get an answer...
From here can you please tell me why this keeps getting reverted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.11.154.142 (talk) 18:36, 21 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Take your pick, it is WP:Original research, WP:Trivia, WP:UNDUE weight on a small detail, or one of several other reasons it should not be included in wikipedia. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 18:39, 21 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I did answer the IP on his own talk page. --NellieBly (talk) 17:20, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
...for reverting vandalism to my user page. Best wishes, Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 20:52, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Same thing here. Thank you for reverting the vandalism done to my user page.-- MarshalN20 | T a l k 22:51, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Law of Cosines
Martin451 Please note, the "Laws of Cosine" is plural, NOT singular. The Law of Cosines consist of three formulas, not one. Per the article's triangular drawing, the three formulas are as follows


 * $$a^2 = b^2 + c^2 - 2bc\cos(\alpha)\,$$
 * $$b^2 = a^2 + c^2 - 2ac\cos(\beta)\,$$
 * $$c^2 = a^2 + b^2 - 2ab\cos(\gamma)\,$$

HambergerRadio and Norweigianblue don't know their Trigonometry.

Sincerely, Mike Brady mbrady94107@yahoo.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.230.110.161 (talk) 23:38, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * No, they are all the same formula, with just the letters swapped around. Please can we leave this on the article talk page. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 23:44, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Martin, you are mistaken. Each of the three formulas are true for the article's triangular drawing. All three are crucial. The article does not have or alude to the three different proofs to obtain the three formulas. Therefore, they need to be stated ... Mike

Martin, all triangles have three Sines, three Cosines and three Tangents. The same goes for their inverses too. Wikipedia's "Law of Sines" shows the six idenity ratios, as it should. The Law of Cosines has three identies. The Law of Tangents had six identy ratios of which the present article (11-03-09) only shows one ... Mike

Thanks
I am new here, and i wanted to protect hideki matsui's page, because there was some vandalism. thank you

74.101.204.27 (talk) 00:36, 6 November 2009 (UTC)david


 * Only Admins can protect a page, and I don't think that there has been (currently)sufficient vandalism that an admin would protect that page. If you think it should be protected then please list it on WP:RPP  thankyou. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 22:46, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Err..
I didn't notice you'd warned the editor for that personal attack already. Sorry for removing that -- I didn't think you'd have left it there, and assumed you hadn't seen it :x SMC (talk) 01:04, 6 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't always revert things like that, or just leave it a while before removing. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 22:54, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Red Star


Tw3435/Clock/Pictures
It's my account! Please delete it! I didn't vandalize--125.25.81.65 (talk) 00:24, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, this looked like vandalism to me. There was no way of being able to see that you were the account holder until you logged in, and edited it. Many vandals make changes in user space to disrupt the user, and I thought you were doing this. I apologise for the warnings. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 00:37, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Please remember that if you see IP that start with 125.25. and like to edit Tw3435's page that means it's me!--125.27.49.134 (talk) 21:06, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Random Section heading
Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Even harmful edits that are not explicitly made in bad faith are not vandalism. For example, adding a controversial personal opinion to an article once is not vandalism; reinserting it despite multiple warnings is (however, edits/reverts over a content dispute are never vandalism, see WP:EW). Not all vandalism is obvious, nor are all massive or controversial changes vandalism. Careful thought may be needed to decide whether changes made are beneficial, detrimental but well-intended, or outright vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.106.205.76 (talk) 23:37, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

User:Painaware
Hi -- you quite properly reverted an edit this editor made linking from the Pain article to a draft article in user space. But since this is a new editor unlikely to be familiar with policy, hitting them with a vandalism template, without any explanation of the problem, seems a bit bitey. This is the sort of thing that can drive potentially good editors away. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 20:31, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thankyou for telling me this. I have put a strike through the warning. Thanks also for your note on his talk page. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 20:44, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Swindon 105.5
Hi,

Thank you for monitoring this page. It has been the subject of repeated vandalism. I work at Swindon 105.5, I am one of the presenters.

We have endeavoured to keep the page factual and accurate. I believe we have succeeded. If however, we have made errors, we would be delighted for some guidance from those that know. The page was set up by a computer-geek no longer associated with the station.

In our honest opinion, we would be delighted if you could actually remove the page - it's been more trouble than it's worth, and I have to keep monitoring it for sabotage.

If the page cannot be removed and the name barred, can you please tell a complete computer novice (me) how to protect the page... using simple language in words of one syllable

Ron Travolta (talk) 19:38, 18 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I have put the page up for deletion, here where we will try and gain consensus about whether to delete or keep it. I am happy for you to contribute to the discussion, but if you do you should include the fact that you word for the station. If the page is not deleted, then it is unlikely to be protected as the level of vandalism is low, and anyone will still be able to edit it.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 20:07, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Thierry Henry
User:Jbmurphy 22:34, 18 November 2009 (GMT)

I was trying to mention the handball that Thierry Henry committed in the box against Ireland in the world cup qualifiers. It defintly needs to be mentioned in his international page. How best should this be added?


 * Is it really notable enough to be included? "He will always be known for his double hand ball"? is a very dubious statement and I suggest you leave his article alone. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 22:41, 18 November 2009 (UTC)


 * It should be mentioned in the World Cup 2010 section and added too later on. There will be alot of talk about it in the next while anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jbmurphy (talk • contribs) 22:55, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Can you please explain why you gave this editor an "only warning" for vandalism ? His edit was non-neutral (I was about to revert it myself) but it was sourced and certainly wasn't vandalism. -- Neil N   talk  ♦  contribs  22:59, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree i was non neutral but believed it deserved a mention. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jbmurphy (talk • contribs) 23:02, 18 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry. I reverted an edit by 98selitb which, which I thought was Jbmurphy's second edit. When Jbmurphy made his second edit, I thought it was his third to a page which has received a lot of vandalism today and has already been semi-protected. I thought Jbmurphy was using an old account to carry on adding material as the page had been semi protected. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 23:18, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedian of the Day
Congratulations, Martin451! For your kindness to others, your hard work around the wiki, and for being a great user, you have been awarded the "Wikipedian of the Day" award for today, November 20th, 2009! Keep up the great work! Note: You could also recieve the "Wikipedian of the Week award for this week! Décémbér21st2012Fréak  &#124;  Talk 00:09, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Colette Hume
Colette Hume was deleted despite me having included information of notability. The article was also deleted at the same time as I was sent a message noting that it had been deleted - leaving me no time to include a hang on tag. (Misstinkafairy) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Misstinkafairy (talk • contribs) 19:05, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Martin - I have restored the article; I think it sufficiently asserts notability to avoid speedy deletion. Feel free to tag for AFD if you wish.  NawlinWiki (talk) 19:07, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * NawlinWiki - thank you Misstinkafairy (talk) 20:10, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving!
December21st2012Freak  Happy Thanksgiving! 16:35, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

swiss minits
I am sorry if i did something wrong. i know I used the word "jerks" but I thought because it was a talk page that i sometimes see people use worse language on talk pages than that and it stay s on for a very long time. I mean t no ofense and request that you not look at me like a vcandal. 68.17.232.180 (talk) 00:57, 1 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Just adding "Probably because the're all jerks, thats all I can figure." is not a constructive addition to a talk page, you should be discussing the article, not the actual subject. Also you previous edit was also not constructive. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 01:17, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Page blanked by author
Hi. Though page blanking is usually vandalism and needs to be reverted, it is worth looking first at the page history, because quite often the author has blanked his own page, as with Paul Bennett (Financial Adviser born 1966) just now. In those cases the best thing is to tag it. It can be confusing for an author who realises his page is inappropriate and blanks it, if his page is at once restored and he is accused of vandalism for the blanking and told it was unconstructive. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:18, 1 December 2009 (UTC)


 * In this case I think I re-blanked the page almost immediately, and tagged it with, however I did not removing my warning on his talk page, which I have just done. Thanks for telling me. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 20:27, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

American Express
will all appreciation i am asking someone, anyone to help me do my editing of american express's wikiapedia page in a way that would not offend or otherwise cause members or wikiapedia a problem. please help me, maybe by taking the information i have written and showing me how you would approve of it being written.

btw... going to b-day party for my mother will check back in a few hours.

thank you DiNello DPS —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.127.87.194 (talk) 21:12, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

i put my post back up on American express... please tell me how i can state these facts in a way that pleases you. thank you


 * You appear to have a WP:Conflict of interest with what you are attempting to add, and you are also resorting to personal attacks on people who have removed your content. Wikipedia is not the place for a one person vendetta against a multinational company. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 21:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Could you please tell me how i was biased in my last article. though i may have a biased opinion toward american express, i have chosen to present two sided, both positive and negative about them, but sticking with a theme consistent with recent history.  in my presentation i presented both sides as facts and provided credible resources for both sides.  as far as attacking that user, i did not attack, i only chose to express my opinion of him as he so often has of me and my writings. only i don't choose to erase his posts.  he's a silly little man, mad at the world.  as i mentioned i will be gone a few hours, but please show me how i have been biased.  i stated two sides objectively.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.127.87.194 (talk) 21:34, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Toothpaste
My statement " funny facts" was valid and in no way offensinve or vandalism, it was merely stating the obvious as well as giving tips to people. Please undo it for all of wikipedia. Any reasons why u deleted please come forward and tell me so i can make the changes acceptable... " thanks from random guy"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.61.173.65 (talk) 00:14, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

what is this agreement and can you explain more about why it wasw bad and how to mkae it right " thanks from random guy" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.61.173.65 (talk) 00:16, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

i dont apreciate being ignored. if you odont answer my previous question i will be forced to go to ur peers. I know you dont want that.... i take my editing seriously and i don't like being treated in this manner " thanks from random guy" 202.61.173.65 (talk) 00:24, 2 December 2009 (UTC) :P


 * Dear "Random Guy", I am one of Martin451's "peers" and would like to say that you're hostile behavior will not be tolerated here on wikipedia. We understand if you need help or do not understand, but please be patient and do not make threats. Doing so may result in a block. Thank you,  IShadowed  ✰  00:26, 2 December 2009 (UTC)


 * To "Random Guy" your edit to Toothpaste did not add any encyclopaedic content, and given some of your edits to e.g. Thalassemia you do not appear to be here to be constructive, rather you doing many disruptive edits. Also if you want to make a complaint about me, I am quite happy for you to. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 00:35, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Ophélie Bretnacher
The case Bretnacher Ophelia is a problem of non-judicial and police cooperation between France and Hungary, violating the Treaty of Lisbon. is a matter concerningth are human rights and democracy in Europe

Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raymondnivet (talk • contribs) 09:21, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

The Vandalism on my Talkpage.
You reverted it. I am grateful. :) Crafty (talk) 00:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Ditto -- Scjessey (talk) 18:34, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

ISS FAC4.
Hello there! As an editor who has posted a comment in one of the recent Peer Reviews, GANs or FACs of International Space Station, or who has contributed to the article recently, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind commenting in the current Featured Article Candidacy with any suggestions you have for article improvements (and being bold and making those changes), whether or not you feel any issues you have previously raised have been dealt with, and, ultimately, if you believe the article meets the Featured Article guidelines. This is the fourth FAC for this article, and it'd be great to have it pass. Many thanks in advance, Colds7ream (talk) 16:46, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Christopher Phelps
The subject of the article has reverted the addition of his run for the U.S. Senate as a Socialist twice more within 24 hours without discussion. To offer input and for details, please see the article's talk page. -- btphelps (talk) (contribs) 20:29, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Repeat Red Star


Merry Christmas
  Click there to open your card! → → → Dear , Wishing you, your family, and friends a very merry Christmas (or whatever you celebrate at this time of year), and I hope that the new year will be a good one, in real life, and on the wiki. There is always a reason to spread the holiday spirit; it's a special time of year of almost everyone. ;) Love and best wishes, <font color="Green">Meaghan - <font color="Red">Merry <font color="Orange">Christmas!  - 00:13, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:red; background-color:fff; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">

<font color="Green">December21st2012Freak  <font color="Red">Happy Holidays! is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message. <font color="Green">December21st2012Freak  <font color="Red">Happy Holidays! 00:26, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Noel McCullagh
from Noel McCullagh

Hi Martin. Recently this page has become the target of some very personal edits from people on wikipedia. I myself have also been subject to a sustained krank telephone-call campaign since before Xmass. Im getting also really horrible emails from unknown people that are not signed. I'm surry Martin, but I am at my wits end. and all this does not make live living iwth a crippling illness any easier to do. So please, I don't know how to do it exactly, but I am very weak and ill at the moment.

Please remove this page and the statements, information, chat, fun it makes of my serious medical condition. Noel McCullagh 20:01, 6 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Barentsz (talk • contribs)


 * A look at the page history shows that it was created by you when you were running for the EU parliament, and at the time is was put up for AfD, and was kept. If you want it deleted then I suggest you try putting it for AfD again, however many wikipedians do not like wikipedia being used like this (page created when you want it, deleted when you don't like it). Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 20:25, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

IP Warning
Hello Martin, today you gave my IP a final warning. I want to explain to you that it is my high school that is editing information that should not be touched. If I edited anything... it will be by permission. I would ask in the Discussion/Talk Page of the article to edit the information, if needed. I, personally, never edit anything without admin or trusted user permission. So, again, I'm sorry that someone in my school(yes I am a 10th grader) was acting like an idiot and edited something that should not be edited. --KiumaruHamachi (talk) 21:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC)KiumaruHamachi


 * Ok I don't know which IP you are referring to, as I give out a lot or warnings, and cannot work out which one from you comment. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 20:13, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Bydales School
Why delete my edit to Bydales School ? That is the real motto! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bydales pupil (talk • contribs) 20:07, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Does your school really have the name of a recent fictional character as well as a Greek phrase as its motto. Please provide a reference. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 20:13, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Yossigoldlust
The second warning was redundant, as they hadn't added any since the first was issued. 98.248.32.44 (talk) 02:13, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

My bad. As long as you are playing wikipedia cop, why don't you take a gander at Effingham County High School's page, i'm pretty sure the edit concerning the art thief would constitute vandalism. Happy policing, won't have to worry about me again, thanks... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mleff (talk • contribs) 23:35, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

no prob.
knowing the ny post, i am surpised it wasn't titled "dick grabbing a dick." —Preceding unsigned comment added by PeshawarPat (talk • contribs) 00:23, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Michal Bucko article
Dear Martin, I have made several small improvements and hope that the article is now ok. It contains many credible 3rd party sources as it is a bio of a living person. I tried to keep it high-quality, hope You appreciate my input.\

Cheers, Kamil —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kamilborkowski3 (talk • contribs) 10:25, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Sock farm
A gaggle of quacking ducks have shown up, totally amusing, I am tempted to simply ignore them, after I stop laughing. Off2riorob (talk) 13:37, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * yes, very funny, especially the way they all turn up in quick succession. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 13:51, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Political candidates
Hi there. I noticed you participated in the Articles for Deletion discussion for Graham Jones (politician). I have started a discussion regarding a consensus position for candidates in legislative elections (by way of amending WP:POLITICIAN, in case you are interested in putting forward your views there. --Mkativerata (talk) 01:58, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks.
Thanks for the advice =). Im new to the Wikipedia Family thing and This I did my first ever Post called Hydra Malitia. If you have any comments or questions you can ask away.  Wish me luck!!!

--Wiki Sentinal 19:19, 9 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki sentinal (talk • contribs)

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  03:21, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Murder of James Bulger
Re : Lead section says that "if the page title is descriptive it does not need to appear verbatim in the main text, and even if it does it should not be in boldface."

"Murder of (person x)" is a descriptive, generic title. --78.34.195.144 (talk) 06:05, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

please go to link to support page nominated for deletion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Pit_Bull

Evereadyo2 (talk) 13:50, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
-- Gilderien Talk|Contribs 10:49, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Re murderer Christman
Back in 2009, you created article on Christman Gniperdoliga, which was rejected due to sole reference to German author who self-published. In case you are interested to know, I have at the moment under review an article on Christman Genipperteinga, with a set of better references. Arildnordby (talk) 18:50, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Vincent River
Earlier today, 5th Feb 2013, you removed a section I had written about Vincent River by Philip Ridley. Could you give me some more information as to why this was removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.150.176.182 (talk) 15:07, 5 February 2013 (UTC)


 * It appeared to be vandalism, which I now see that it was not. My apologises there. However it is a copyright violation, and cannot appear as it is. If you want to add to this article then you need to do so in your own words.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 15:11, 5 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you. As a lawyer in the UK (where the article was written) I can tell you there was no copyright violation as the original words are my own. I work alongside theatre and I am currently working with this production 86.150.176.182 (talk) 15:42, 5 February 2013 (UTC). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.150.176.182 (talk) 15:35, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * If you own the copyright to these words then you will need to contact wikipedia so that they can verify that is the case if you want to add these words to that article. See WP:COPYRIGHT. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 15:52, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Syrian Catholic Church
the page Syrian_Catholic_Church should redirect to Syriac_Catholic_Church. The Vatican considers the Syrian Catholic Church to be the Syriac Catholic Church. Please do not change. please see Annuario_Pontificio — Preceding unsigned comment added by 3abos (talk • contribs) 03:47, 12 February 2013 (UTC)


 * please see the talk page for Syrian Catholic Church  3abos (talk) 04:00, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Re Johnny Palazzio
Thanks for the message, but I'm the original creator of the page Johnny Palazzio. It was not intended as vandalism. If you don't mind, I'm marking it for deletion once again. Arildnordby (talk) 18:50, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * This page has already gone up for AfD once, and the result was keep. So if you want it deleted, then please take it back to AfD. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 15:40, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Re:January 2013
Hi, im actually the user and has now closed the account incase your wondering and users can find me on User:Realdude85 now. User:89.241.66.125. I quit editing ages ago and i wouldnt edit people user pages without their permission thanks :D 89.241.66.125 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.66.125 (talk) 16:40, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorted. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 23:42, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Removing content that isn't vandalism but fact
Hi there. Please note the heavy handed approach on wikipedia to new content is not in the public's best interest. There was no vandalism and the information regarding the detailed seller ratings can be verified on ebay's own help pages and via their terms and conditions. Please explain why you marked valid content as vandalism? And how can ebay's own pages, regarding forementioned detailed seller ratings, not be considered a reliable reference? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Memollymoo (talk • contribs) 23:27, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I apologise for the level of warning I gave. What you added includes statements like "many people" which need decent third party references, this does not include ebay itself, and you are not providing a source to the actual statements you use. You are also edit warring to put your information into wikipedia.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 23:41, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Question about ref tags
What's wrong with the ref tag that was deleted in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2013_Southern_California_shootings&diff=537777463&oldid=537776997 Thanks Mathematician0 (talk) 00:16, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied on your talk page.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 00:25, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Your comment
Hi Martin. I saw your comment and replied to it. However, the editor removed it. So here it is. I'm sure you just misunderstood the point of what I was telling him. Thanks. --76.189.111.199 (talk) 01:29, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I read it in Huggle, thanks for telling me. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 01:46, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Have a great evening. --76.189.111.199 (talk) 01:53, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * You obviously didn't read my note on your talk page. RAP (talk) 1:33 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you should take a step back. Edit warring over red-links is silly, so is the "I'm right your wrong" approach, which I am guilty of sometimes.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 01:46, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * He's under the impression I'm "harassing" him and violating my editor rights. He's also consistently telling e he's gonna report me whenever I leave a message on his talk page. I believe he's young and unaware of what he's saying. RAP (talk) 2:04 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Constantly telling you he's going to report you? So what, if you have done nothing wrong you don't need to worry. Telling you twice he is going to report you is not constantly. TBH I think he is more mature than you.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 02:17, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * How so? I'm not threatening him with blocking or reporting, I'm scolding him over being fussy and believing we must bow to his requests because he'll "report" us for whatever. And I told him my removal of his comments wasn't meant o be marked as vandalism, I was on an IPad at the time and erroneously clicked vandal rather than undo. But I guess he's adamant I'm abusing my editor rights. RAP (talk) 3:08 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Your seem to like edit warring over minor issues, and put some aggressive messages in the comments box. Just try and relax a bit.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 18:30, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Piel de sapo
I redirected to the Santa Claus melon and tranferred the information to the new page (BOLD move). I don't see the need for two pages on the same subject. You may want to see the new page before you undo the redirect.207.117.33.135 (talk) 21:58, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, my bad there.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 00:27, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

McDonald-Seer Computer Poll
A friend using my computer was making some changes to Wikipedia pages mainly regarding McDonald-Seer Computer Poll. He said it had been suggested for deletion and then said he was harassed by a user. The McDonald-Seer Computer Poll is an algorithmic sports ranking system developed in 2009. The poll and algorithm are owned by McDonald Sports Enterprises LLC, an Idaho based company. It has named three national champions and two quarterback of the year awards. It is published on a weekly basis at www.oncampussports.com/mcdonald and is currently working with a handful of billion dollar companies for future endeavors. Links were being added to update this page, so it could be viewed from past winners of both National Championships and Quarterback trophies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JasonRichers (talk • contribs)


 * JasonRichers, I suggest you read WP:SOCK. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 23:44, 12 February 2013 (UTC)


 * FYI - Both editors blocked as ducks (SPI case). Excirial ( Contact me, Contribs ) 00:12, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Tom Aspell
Martin, thank you so much. It was extremely nice of you to do that. :) --76.189.111.199 (talk) 03:23, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Vertu Ti, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robust (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) 11:17, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Seventh Day Adventist Church
In the spririt of Wikipedia Neutrality the original edits are completly congruent with already present critisms, as this section refers explicitly to critisms ie plagarism, the other pervasive critism of mental illness falls within this category. You will find statements of fact referenced as such. Wikipedia does not have policy regarding unlikable posts, rather sides with evidence and contextual agreement 13:43, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Having re-read the edit, I agree that it was not vandalism, but I also agree with another author that your edit should remain in the article about the person. My revert of your edit was because it appeared as vandalism, rather than a genuine edit, and I apologise for being wrong in this case, and apologise for reverting you. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 23:44, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

February 2013
Hello, I'm Sunray. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Pokémon X and Y because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Sunray (talk) 03:18, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
 * In this case, the edit I revert appears to have been vandalism/test edit.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 08:23, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Dockwise Vanguard
Hello! Your submission of Dockwise Vanguard at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it 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! -- Senra (talk) 13:43, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Dockwise Vanguard carrying JakeMalo Platform.png
Thanks for uploading File:Dockwise Vanguard carrying JakeMalo Platform.png. I noticed the description page specifies that this media item is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails thefirst non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media item could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media item is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write the reason why this media item is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject,requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:38, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Holding a DYK whilst a second article is created
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Did you know. Senra (talk) 15:24, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for ponzi scheme operator's page removal
I wish to take a moment to express my gratitude for your taking the time and effort in the matter.99.142.8.142 (talk) 01:52, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi again, if it's not too much to ask, could you possibly do the same for Anthony Morrison's page and nominate the article for deletion on the same grounds as for Graziosi? Thank you. 99.141.247.4 (talk) 17:07, 23 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I noticed you've attempted to propose to have the page pulled. Can you instead attempt to just nominate it for deletion, just like you did for the one before? As you may recall both articles were created on the same date by the same editor. There's no reason for an equally promotional material dedicated to an equally non-notable subject or individual to clutter any of the wiki space. Thanks in advance. 99.135.168.66 (talk) 20:55, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the "order"
Kaboldy 21:24, 26 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added byKaboldy (talk • contribs)

A page you started has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Chionodraco rastrospinosus, Martin451!

Wikipedia editor Gold Standard just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"Excellent work!"

To reply, leave a comment on Gold Standard's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

David Boulton (UK journalist)
Hello, and thanks for creating this article. I don't know if you're aware, but it's been tagged for notability for 4 years now. If you have the time, could you please look it over and help demonstrate it meets WP:NALBUMS? Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 19:26, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Dockwise Vanguard
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:02, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Newborn Monument
Please sign your comment at Template:Did you know nominations/Newborn monument. Thanks - Gilliam (talk) 06:53, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comments signed, there is a paraphrasing issue with one of the references.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 07:31, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Chionodraco rastrospinosus
The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Fast
I'm impressed that you found this: Articles_for_deletion/Death_of_Bal_Thackeray, I was to lazy to try to find it and link it. Trust me, though I was on the keep side there, the move proposal at Thatcher isn't a pointy tit for tat. I was looking at even applications of wp:RECENT etc. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 03:11, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I get the impression it is a bit of tit for tat given your canvassing and contributions to other AfD discussions. Playing a game like this could be construed as disruptive. Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 14:24, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Disruptive!? Game playing!? Strong words, where is the evidence? Yogesh Khandke (talk) 14:19, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Pussy (energy drink)
Hello Martin451,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Pussy (energy drink) for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks, <font color="Gray">undefined tausif(talk) 12:34, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Pussy (energy drink)
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:08, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of 2013 Cleveland, Ohio, missing trio for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2013 Cleveland, Ohio, missing trio 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/2013 Cleveland, Ohio, missing trio 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. --Guy Macon (talk) 16:48, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for making this edit. I'm not sure if you did it as a result of my edit request a few minutes earlier, but I appreciate it either way. :) --76.189.109.155 (talk) 02:19, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * it was because of the edit request, and that I saw his name spelt that way when reading references earlier and realised the mistake when you pointed it out.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 02:26, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Well thank you very much for your quick action. :) --76.189.109.155 (talk) 02:55, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Apology
I think I may have accidentally overwritten your edit at WP:ANI; we must both have been editing at the same time. Please accept my apology; it was inadvertent. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:41, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Apology accepted, I have reinserted me edit. This happens from time to time. Thankyou for notifying me.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 18:45, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges. A full list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on will be at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:
 * Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. <font face="AR Cena" color="black">INeverCry  17:22, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

"Spoken to politely"
"The IP regularly changes address, so the whole range would need blocking. However my experience with this user is that he/she often has it right, especially with BLP." - now why would that editor not wish to use a stable user name? Baffling, eh? Martinevans123 (talk) 00:56, 27 May 2013 (UTC) p.s. I think your views at Talk:2013 Woolwich attack are perfectly reasonable.
 * It is the IP's choice, why would he/she need to create a wikipedia account, it is within the ethos of wikipedia to allow anon editors to edit articles. I have seen who I think the same person is at talk:2013 Cleveland missing trio, and I may have seen the person in other articles. I don't like having to big an online profile, there was a blog written about an AfD I did recently (not closed yet). I have had anonymous attacks in other places, perhaps he/she is just trying to keep a low profile.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 01:25, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Kievan Rus'
This article lies grounding on materials of propaganda of Russia which interprets history in strange way: there were no towns at russia territories; no slavic tribes (only nomads which have been attacking Kievan Rus'); capital (Kiev belongs to Ukraine) but Russia tolds that they are successors of Rus (probably while names are one like another) forgetting that major part of their land (approx 90%) was been got after disintegration nomads empire Changes had been provided by Evil Empire fan "Superzohar" in what a way I must to react (I trying to talk to person removed my additions while there are no references but Im really knowing this topic from schoolbook and uni lectures) Ps Nobody reads talking I dont want to limit only by posting it in talk whiile article is incorrect Pps I have difficulties in English (its not my native language and Im not in English speaking country) user:Stillrockwood —Preceding undated comment added 23:19, 28 May 2013 (UTC)


 * First please sign your comments on talk pages (like this one) with four tildes i.e. ~ I suggest you take your arguments to the relevant talk page here Talk:Kievan_Rus%27.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 23:25, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Nobody reads talking I dont want to limit only by posting it in talk whiile article is incorrectStillrockwood 23:37, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Two editors have undone your edit's. Part of the reasons were WP:POV and poor grammar. In cases like this it is better to take the edits to talk pages so others can discuss them. If no editor is willing to discuss in a short time frame (a couple of days to a week) then put your edits back in.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 23:41, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, if you want please correct my two posts in "Talk" (or tell what I have to do)Stillrockwood 23:57, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Notice of ANI discussion
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Self-confessed sockpuppet - need an uninvolved admin to look over. Thank you. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 23:23, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Sockpuppet
Would you please stop being so harsh on me!? I didn't know and I apologized. How do I make User:Matthewb103 a legitimate alternate account? Leoesb1032 (talk) 23:36, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

E-Cat and WP:BLP policy
It would be advisable for you to revise your edits at Talk:Energy Catalyzer - WP:BLP policy applies on talk pages, and assertions of criminal behaviour are certainly within its scope. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:37, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

CSM.80 Re:
Hi! In response to your message, I did not vandalize the page C.S. Marítimo. As you can see, I create the page C.S. Marítimo versus CF União and CD Nacional to put that and other information that deals with the same subject. In order to not have the same information in two pages I deleted the information in C.S. Marítimo. My only intention it was to improve the page and not to vandalize.

Best regards! — Preceding unsigned comment added by CSM.80 (talk • contribs) 18:59, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Jennifer Parker (Back to the Future)
One can add a Template:Db which speeds up the deletion process for obvious cases. This one would likely qualify. See Criteria for speedy deletion Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 19:08, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Message
Martin - According to the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ELOFFICIAL#Official_links Official Links Page, it would qualify. Also you can see that the District is missing from the List. http://www.ocbsa.org/leadersvolunteers/district-contacts/ OCBSA Doesn't have a page for Tiburon that points to the District Page, thus the URL Supplied to the Official District Page was supplied. The other Districts were listed, but the new district was not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshjdart (talk • contribs) 23:11, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I Reverted you partly because of the way the edit was made. You tried to turn the section heading into an external link, which looks very spammy. Feel free to re add the link.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 23:18, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Non-admin closure at Articles for deletion/List of unusual deaths (6th nomination)
There are three things wrong with your non-admin closure:


 * 1) There wasn't a consensus formed
 * 2) The nomination hadn't run for seven days
 * 3) What you cite as rationale isn't a policy or guideline

p b  p  04:46, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The five prior AfDs all arrived at keep or no consensus, the previous one was closed just 4 days before and had a lengthy discussion which arrived at no consensus. A new AfD straight away will clearly not arrive at consensus. Starting a new AfD just days after the previous one was closed because it did not arrive at the consensus you wanted is disruptive. Are you going to keep renominating it until you get the result you want?Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 15:34, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Maybe I will. You don't seem to understand how improper your closure is.  The "don't renom until two months have passed" isn't policy and never will be.  Even if it was, the nomination didn't qualify for NAC.  You were completely out of line in closing it the way you did  p  b  p  18:59, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Good closure, as backed up by the "this again" comments from other editors. -- Neil N  <sup style="font-family:Calibri;"> talk to me  19:10, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * How can you say it was a good closure, Neil? It violates the principles of NAC  p  b  p  19:18, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:IAR to counter your WP:IDHT. A 6th nom days after a 5th nom was closed? Really? -- Neil N   <sup style="font-family:Calibri;"> talk to me  19:27, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * If you can ignore rules, so can I. Furthermore, there wasn't any consensus in the previous discussion, and I for one believe that something closed as "no consensus" can and should be relisted immediately (and no policy contradicts that, and even if it did, I can just invoke IAR).  It should have been relisted, or better, the admin who closed it needed to grow a backbone and realize that more than half the keep votes hinged on "I like" or hit count, and many were kneejerk keepists from the ARS, and should have deleted it on those grounds.  That article needs to be deleted ASAP, and if I have to nominate it a seventh time, I will.  I don't care if you like that or not  p  b  p  19:34, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * There is no point in relisting it if we are not going to reach consensus. This is wikipedia, if there are 20 editors commenting on something, then there will often be 20 views, sometimes more. Relisting this article until it is deleted is just going to hurt wikipedia.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 20:21, 25 June 2013 (UTC)


 * So you non-admin closed with a supervote to prevent the article from being deleted... for the "sake of Wikipedia"? If you're using your close to guarantee a result then it's a bad close. I actually came here to quietly suggest that next time it might be best to let an admin close something that contentious, but your last comment is concerning. If that was the motivation then it was a very bad close. Sorry. There's no guarantee consensus won't be reached just because it wasn't last time. The last discussion was dominated by bludgeoning and ILIKEIT/IDONTLIKEIT votes on both sides. While immediately renominating something that closed as keep can be considered pointy, there is absolutely no prohibition or restriction on renomination after a no consensus result and the citation of an obscure user essay as a closing rationale doesn't change that. If an admin wants to closed it and take PBP to ANI, let them. But your close was, unfortunately, not a good one. Even less so given your subsequent defence of it. Stalwart 111  04:28, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I did not close it to prevent it being deleted, it was not a supervote. If you look at the 5th nomination you will see I did not even comment in it. If PBP renominates it I promise not to do a NAC. As for my subsequent defence of it, am I not allowed to reply to comments on my own talk page?Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 23:38, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * "Relisting this article until it is deleted is just going to hurt wikipedia." Allowing consensus to form in favour of deleting the article would "hurt Wikipedia"? How? Consensus can change and after several keep results and, more recently, several marginal no-consensus results (that relied on big helpings of WP:IAR), it seems like that change is well-and-truly underway. You stepped in to close the AFD because relisting, allowing that consensus to develop and eventually deleting it, "is just going to hurt wikipedia". That's a supervote, I'm afraid. WP:NACs are for "non-controversial discussions". Under what circumstances did you think closing that AFD with that rationale would be "non-controversial"? Oh, and you can defend your close, of course, but my point was that your subsequent defence had actually exacerbated original concerns rather than address them. Stalwart 111  03:40, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Having one trainwreck after another is not going to obtain consensus, that time would be better wasted on other things. By BPBs own comments he won't let it rest until he obtains consensus, but that is the consensus he wants. He claims that many of the keep votes were invalid, that is not conclusive to consensus. Yes consensus can change, but this is not the way to go about changing consensus. I suggest if either of you feel what I did was wrong then take it to WP:ANI or elsewhere.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 01:05, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Swaminarayan Mantra
Hi,

Swaminarayan Mantra is not a living person, it is a mantra meaning sound, syllable, word, or group of words that this sect uses to pray. I just was correcting a mistake that identifies Swaminarayan as a faith. It is a sect of hinduism and for some reason, it is being called faith. I looked up wiki's definition for sect and it's a subgroup of a religious, political or philosophical belief system, usually an offshoot of a larger religious group. Also I wanted to ask you, could you help me with some article edits because I am being attacked on here and wasn't sure about it. Will you revert the article or should I.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.217.203.131 (talk) 00:02, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry for taking my time to reply. Sect (at least where I come from) is often used by the opponents as a pejorative, i.e. and insult to demean others. Many major religions started off as sects. To go through wikipedia wholesale changing faith to sect needs discussion first.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 00:28, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Mistake (?)
You said that while editing User:Gionosai It was a test. This is a mistake. I don't know what a test means to you but, under Gionosai's permission, I made this page for him. Please message him for questions.

Dianasweetiegina (talk) 01:36, 29 June 2013 (UTC) <br style="clear: both;"/>

Of course it was constructive. I mentioned a reliable source, for one thing, and eliminated reliance on a personal website, which is against policy for this encyclopedia. It was quite out of line for you to remove the flags, so I put them back.98.109.238.95 (talk) 02:31, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Introduced species article- section on "genetic polution"
Hello Martin, as I've posted clearly with each edit the subject of so called "genetic pollution" is not directly relevant to a page on "introduced species" and thereby doesn't belong there.. Maybe you are having trouble viewing my edit comments? in any case please stop reverting the content unless you have specific reason to believe otherwise. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.182.156.39 (talk) 04:35, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

PLEASE STOP DELETING MY ADDITIONS
Alright I just read your updated post on the Navy Yard shooter. It looks like you did add some information about the police report and him hearing voices that he claimed to be electronically generated. I will examine what you have added more closely and will likely get back to you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.170.59.80 (talk • contribs)


 * Your additions have been removed by four different users. They cite unreliable sources, and a could have been written by you. Wikipedia aims to be neutral, and authors adding speculative pieces based upon their own books is not neutral for articles such as this one.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 11:00, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

bollocks to it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.229.37.151 (talk) 15:40, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Steven Adams
In regards to the edit of the jersey number on the page Steven Adams, you told me that I did not provide a source. However, in my comment on what I edited, I provided a link to a video posted by the Oklahoma City Thunder showing Adams wearing a #12 Thunder jersey. If that isn't credible, then I don't know what is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.87.104.110 (talk) 04:23, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

EDIT: Here is another link showing that my change is legitimate and credible. http://www.nba.com/thunder/gallery/photoshoot_130629 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.87.104.110 (talk) 04:26, 1 July 2013 (UTC)


 * You need to provide an inline link using tags to a reliable source, e.g. a news article, or a press release from the team. A link in the comments is not enough.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 04:28, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Ana Ivanovic
But I'm hardly vandalizing at all. All the information I've removed is on the Ana Ivanovic career statistics page. If you look back on the history of the page, you can clearly see that someone's added the information there. I'm just following the standard and format on all the other pages re: tennis players. 210.195.217.186 (talk) 18:28, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Duluth mid air collision for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Duluth mid air collision 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/Duluth mid air collision 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. ...William 13:50, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Duluth mid air collision


The article Duluth mid air collision has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * WP:NOTNEWS

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. ...William 21:32, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

The Avengers External Links
Hello, I just wanted to say that there are multiple other pages that have external links to wikia websites. The only ones I can think of at the moment is Dawn of the Planet of the Apes and the pages for almost all of the pages related to Star Wars. Wikia even has it's own page on Wikipedia which you can find here. Also, wikias are just websites that go deeper into the things that Wikipedia only has one page for. A wikia focuses on one certain topic and makes pages for every notable character in the topic that that wikia is on. In conclusion, I think that we should keep the External Links on every one of the pages about Marvel Cinematic Universe movies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Milomilk (talk • contribs) 06:22, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Storms
Thanks for that link, will add my info to that article, which was started much earlier than the one I did. Mjroots (talk) 22:59, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Request for comment
As you previously participated in related discussions you are invited to comment at the discussion at WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC for AfC reviewer permission criteria. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:46, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

File:Skydist Huge-LQG CCLQG.jpg
Hi, I've replaced File:Skydist Huge-LQG CCLQG.jpg with File:Huge-LQG CCLQG.png for greater legibility. I'd like to go ahead and delete the original image. Please let me know if you have any objections. Regards, ˉˉanetode╦╩ 06:51, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * No objections here.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 11:32, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Martin
Hello Martin, if you are referring to me using my ip address to edit the page then it was me simply being new to Wikipedia and having not known I wasn't signed into my account. If it is something else then please tell me as I'm not sure. I am trying to help this article, not abuse it, so any advice on how to fix this would be helpful. Thanks. Rumbatangs (talk) 00:39, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!
for the info here. I though that the template applied to all current events. :) Anir1uph &#124; talk &#124; contrib 23:29, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Deletion sorting
Hello Martin, thank you for helping with deletion sorting but please be careful not to sort discussions twice such as you did at Articles for deletion/Ilija Dodić as it had already been sorted by Jinkinson. Therefore I have removed the duplicate sort from Actors and filmmakers and Serbia and striked your delsort. Regards &#9733;&#9734; <font color="Fuchsia">DUCK IS <font color="Fuchsia">JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 13:05, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thankyou for the message and correction.Martin<font style="color:#FB0">4 <font style="color:#F00">5 <font style="color:#F60">1  16:05, 8 January 2014 (UTC)