User talk:Mfield/Archive 2

On blocked page
Hello, I'm writing in response to a page of mine you deleted under the username "milwaukeehome." I was unable to appeal under that username, so I have to use my personal one. Apparently it was deleted due to spamming and advertising, but I'm really confused as to how it was perceived that way and what, exactly, I did wrong. I tried to model it after other magazine wikis, and I also had no idea you couldn't use the name of the magazine as your username. I never intended to spam or promote a company, and would have been more than happy to change anything that was a problem. I also think blocking me from even talking to an administrator was a bit harsh. Sorry for the trouble, and I would really appreciate a response. Safety math (talk) 19:28, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Comment
Hello. I work at The Flea 88.2 and know that all the facts expressed on the page are true. The station has expanded over the last few years from a cottage bedroom into the Devonport Ferry Building. If you would like to reply to me please do on my talk page. Thanks —Preceding unsignedcomment added by RandomWikiNerd (talk •contribs) 07:16, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Response to your message
Take it easy. I made an honest mistake. I undid it after I noticed what I did. Relax. Use your "powers" to block the real troublemakers.Pflipper73 (talk) 03:44, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I have no need to relax and FWIW I have no powers. With reference to your contributions, I'd say it's you that needs to look at the number of disagreements you have racked up with other editors in your short time on Wikipedia. That's not a personal attack, everyone has to start somewhere. I refer you to Getting_started, New_contributors%27_help_page, Vandalism, Dispute_resolution,Removing_warnings for some good reading to help you learn about the way WIkipedia works and find information out about topics that seem to be causing you trouble. Mfield (talk) 04:30, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

can you explain
why the 3RR rule only aplies to me and not others involved in edit war?Oxyman42 (talk) 19:06, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * You are the one that made the original edit, they have reverted it to return the article to its stable form. In essence the article should be left as is until a consensus has been reached on the talk page. You cannot continue to make the same disputed edit without a consensus having been reached. The matter should have gone to some form of consenus building the moment the 3RR was reached, it was wrong of anyone to continue past that point. As I said on the talk page, I think everyone who has been involved in this edit war should now stop editing the article until the matter is talked over and agreed upon.Mfield (talk) 19:14, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank You!!!
So The symbols are nither good nor bad. Oh and can you help me understand this web sight better? &gt;.&lt; survent2&gt;.&lt; (talk) 17:21, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Blog link on Silver Lake, Los Angeles, California
For your orientation, the editor adding the link has posted to Editor assistance/Requests with mention of you. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:30, 1 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks, yes I caught that from running through that users contributions. I am slightly unnerved by someone demanding to know more information about me and going to all the trouble of hunting through my website rather than positing me a talk message. Anyway, the user has admitted that they have been adding links to their own blog, which is self promotional. I have removed it a number of times - it was originally added by a couple of IPs though rather than the logged in user, this time I left a larger explanation requesting third party citation of notability, i don't think its ranking on technorati counts for that, a mention in the LA Times would. Mfield (talk) 02:38, 1 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm a bit sorry I checked the EdAssist page that day, but now I'm involved. I'm generally sympathetic to activist-types; society needs such watchdogs.  This one is too intelligent to genuinely misunderstand WP's policies and terminology, and does so only when it suits her (not that words like 'site' and 'blog' are WP-specific).  I may have to go study the warning templates page - I'd thought that only admins used them. --Hordaland (talk) 13:10, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I am sure you are sorry, I certainly am, but thanks for keeping an eye on it too. I have come to the conclusion that it is a deliberate and often used tactic - walk into a situation, cause havoc and then cry harassment and refuse to deal. Even to the point of making up facts and claiming you and other people have done things that you clearly haven't. Its the same thing activists do with policemen and politicians all the time. The crazy thing is this is a constructive collaborative venture and there's completely no need for it. She has, as many activists end up doing, ended up devaluing and destroying her own position of debate by refusing to engage in intelligent discussion and come up with requested facts (something that should be routine to someone with a claimed history in journalism) instead preferring the attention to the outcome. Ironically I actually remain completely pro the things that she is campaigning for,  but that won't stop me opposing using this platform as a means of promoting one position when the chosen means of getting there is stomping your feet and screaming like my 2 year old.Mfield (talk) 14:05, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

I know practically nothing about images, Commons, permissions etc. The Commons page for the (now) top photo at Silver Lake says: Additionally, there may be errors in any or all of the information fields; information on this image should not be considered reliable and the image should not be used until it has been reviewed and any needed corrections have been made. Don't know how seriously one takes such. --Hordaland (talk) 15:36, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


 * That's fine, I checked the information and removed the warning. Don't worry about the speedy deletion template on the en:WP page of the image either, I mistakenly added a category to the en page and that created the page which now needs to be deleted. It will not affect the image on Commons or in the article. It's a strange system the way it opens Commons images in a fake en:WP page. Mfield (talk) 15:45, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Panorama's
I was wondering how you create your panorama's. What program do you use? What camera do you take pictures with? I know this seems weird, but I am a photography student on the side and I would like to know as my teacher wasn't very clear, and wouldn't tell us which programs. -- Cheers mate! C YCLONIC W HIRLWIND talk 14:45, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Edit Summaries
Thank You I will always put a reason for now on. Reallmmablogger (talk) 22:46, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Mfield, fixing up the screwed up FPC closings by Meldshal/LordSunday. Although one of the things he had done was to notify you of the promotion, he used the wrong template (nominator rather than creator/uploader). Just fixing it up.--jjron (talk) 04:48, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

L.A. Panorama
The "wide image" formatting resulted in the Los Angeles oimage getting stretched vertically, making the mountains and buildings appears much taller than they should. Anyway, now that the mountains are their normal height again, I think it is the Santa Anas on the left (as we'd originally said-someone changed it to Santa Monicas, which couldn't be true, and then I changed to the San Gabriels, on account of height). ·:· Will Beback ·:· 17:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


 * That's weird, it certainly wasn't being stretched on either of my two browsers here. I have never seen the wide format tag cause a problem like that. Maybe it was a caching issue of some kind, try changing it back to wide but with a different horiz value so it rebuilds the thumbnail. As for the mountains - I think it's probably the Saddleback ridge. Mfield(talk) 18:07, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I logged out to make sure it wasn't my skin. The image appears normal on your user page so I copied the formatting from there. I agree that it's probably Saddleback (the only prominent part of the Santa Anas). ·:· Will Beback ·:· 20:08, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Brian Schmitz
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Brian Schmitz, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of thespeedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached.

FYI. Hordaland (talk) 22:23, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I noticed the conversation about it. I then added all those tags, and then found one easy reference so I added it. That's the extent of my involvement/interest in the the article or the subject of football. For sure it has major issues with referencing and notability BUT I am kind of loath to think of articles subjects getting any special voice in their deletion, or with them getting deleted just on the basis that they are being vandalized by someone trying to have it deleted. That said I agree it should probably go until someone can rewrite it if notability can indeed be verified. Mfield (talk) 22:31, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Right. I know nothing about football, American or otherwise.  Just felt sorry for the guy, if it indeed was he who requested that the article be removed.  Some prior knowledge of the complicated protocols here is usually necessary to get anything done.--Hordaland (talk) 15:17, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your assistance with User talk:Abd/IP
Thanks for your assistance with User talk:Abd/IP. Because there has been so much vandalism of my Talk, and a lot of people watch it, it's been semiprotected, so I set up that user talk page so IP and new editors can make comments or ask questions for me to see, which sometimes can be useful, and I transfer them to regular Talk. The current IP editor has abused it, but edits to that page can be reverted without harm, and will be deleted routinely anyway. I left that little discussion open a little, on the perhaps vain hope that he'd look at his own behavior, since it was so clear. I've now removed all of it.--Abd (talk) 13:55, 28 September 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem, certainly this one doesn't want to go away quietly, I have just filed an ARV against his latest IP. At what point can/will his ISP be contacted? Mfield (talk) 16:06, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Ammar Nakshawani image
Hey, Can you please see Talk:Ammar Nakshawani? Cheers Muhammad (talk) 13:30, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I had nominated your edited version to replace the original image as the Valued Image at commons and have also replaced the originals use in the articles. Regards Muhammad (talk) 19:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Discussion about editor removing tags on Gridiron Grumblings
Hi, I just wanted to let you know that I invited the editor who keeps removing the tags on the Gridiron Grumblings article to a discussion on the article's talkpage. Your invited to join the discussion, your thoughts and input on the matter would be appreciated and welcomed! Thanks. Erebus Morgaine (talk) 12:01, 12 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I added some input and then on further reflection I nominated it for deletion. There's nothing more obvious of a give away of a non notable article than anon IPs removing tags - and no requested references being added since it was tagged several months ago. Mfield (talk) 17:05, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you foryour contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Not plentifuls (talk) 00:53, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Graphic_Lab/Image_workshop
There are some replies to your question... would you be wiling to give it a go and throw up your "quick go"---J.S (T/C/WRE) 22:49, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi
Hey, I was checking out your gallery on the Wikimedia Commons. Very impressive. I really like the panoramas. And nice shot of the Hollywood Bowl. Is your photograph "Dismantling the Berlin Wall" actually taken by yourself. Were you there?Manhattan Samurai (talk) 08:23, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * How did you do those panoramas? I don't see any seams. The Vancouver one is amazing. Are you using a digital SLR of a sort? And if so did you take the Vancouver one at different exposures superimposed by some kind of process?Manhattan Samurai (talk) 08:31, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey, some answers. Thanks for the compliments. Yes I did take the Berlin Wall shot, I was 18 at the time and lived in Berlin for 3 years from early 1990. As for the panoramas yes they are shot with a DSLR although you could shoot them successfully with a point and shoot, it would just take a lot more care. If it is done correctly you should not see any seams. Several of them are shot from multiple blended exposures. If you like them, I have a lot more on my website Mfield (talk) 15:36, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Huh, I will have to check out your web site.Manhattan Samurai (talk) 19:20, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Chung King Mansions
Just noticed on your commons gallery that image. Crazy/fascinating place. I stayed there when I was in HK last year. Probably wouldn't do it again though. ;-) Prisoners get better cells! Diliff  | (Talk)  (Contribs) 16:10, 27 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Certainly looked like it, I confess I was staying at the W Hotel up the road and stumbled across Chung King whilst spending a few hours checking out Kowloon. I had a wander round the ground floor and think I got a fairly good impression of what things are like further up. I have visited enough such places to guess the rest. lol. Mfield (talk)

alligator
Hi Mfield. IMO albino alligator was much better off next to the text, which describes how albino alligators come about. This text is in the description section of the article.I agree albino is very, very rare, but the article has quite a few images of "normal" alligators, and IMO albino alligator should have been somehere in the middle, and not in the very end. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 01:24, 29 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I have actually moved the text down into the reproduction section as it is an inherited trait, this now puts it with the picture anyway. Having it in the main description gives the condition undue weight given how rare it is. It is also something that occurs in a lot of species other than alligators. Mfield (talk) 01:55, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi (re Srebrenica massacre)
Hi there,

Thanks for your reply over at the 'Editor help' page. Just wanted to let you know I'd replied to you over there; be grateful to have your thoughts.

Cheers Jonathanmills (talk) 13:12, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

first webcast - difference from films?
Can you explain why the very first webcast from the Hollywood Bowl has no place in the article about the Hollywood Bowl? If the entry was promotional than perhaps the same can be said about the films made at the Hollywood Bowl? I am always careful and consider such things before I make an edit and I feel this one has merit or I wouldn't have re-entered it. I really would like to understand the difference. Quite often when such questions are asked the editor just does not reply. I hope this is not the case here. Agadant (talk) 19:10, 2 November 2008 (UTC) Here's a full lengthly  article in the Los Angeles Times (the second largest metropolitan newspaper in the US) about the concert forAstral Weeks at the Hollywood Bowl that mentions the webcast. Is this a notable third party?Van Morrison discusses Astral Weeks which he'll perform at the Hollywood Bowl.
 * I replied on article talk. Basically if there are third party citations, then they should all be added to provide the requisite notability backing. Mfield (talk) 23:50, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply and your knowledgeable input—which is always helpful for editors to improve their contributions. Agadant (talk) 15:34, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Staples Center
FYI: the trivia tag is already in place in the Articleissues at the top of the article. As such, I removed the trivia tag you added to Staples Center. -- Gmatsuda (talk) 06:11, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
 * overlooked that. I've integrated/slashed it now anyway. Mfield (talk) 06:22, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Final periods in captions
Hello there, are you sure that all the periods you removed in these edits are in accordance with WP:CAP? From what I've read at #Wording, only nominal groups lack a final period, while full sentences should have them. Please let me know whether or not I may be misinterpreting that guideline. Thanks. —LOL T/C 03:55, 4 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey yes you are correct that periods should only follow complete sentences and that is what I have been doing. Did I remove any that I shouldn't - if so that's an oversight on my part. Mfield (talk) 04:08, 4 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Here I re-added some of the periods that were removed; if you see anything wrong with those edits, please correct them. Thank you. —LOL T/C 22:30, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

oops
I was just looking at the 3RR rules (about the recent activity in the Ear training article) when your message popped up on my user page. I've submitted the issue for resolution. Sorry about that. aruffo (talk) 00:06, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I was just answering you on Editor Assistance actually. I warned both parties as a standard measure. Mfield(talk) 00:10, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Ear training
It's like a car crash in slow motion.

I'm monitoring the talk page, but I'll leave you to mediate between them until somebody actually gets around to posting a concrete proposal for the text to add.

Let me know if you think the situation needs input. --GraemeL (talk) 23:11, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * thanks, it is a little like trying to safely convince my two year old to put down the scissors :) Mfield(talk) 23:12, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Geez, you're right. After that last comment you left it was painfully obvious that the only reason I've been participating with so much blather is because I feel I've been so unfairly attacked, not because I have a particular point of view that can be advanced any further.  Thanks for taking the reins; I'll duck out.  aruffo (talk) 22:14, 13 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I am still being hopeful but I am starting to get the feeling that the requested text is not going to be forthcoming. No amount of helpful pointers seems to be distracting the editor away from arguing about non issues. If the text doesn't materialize and get approved for inclusion and no other reasonable debate continues then further addition of the links in question is going to be treated as out and out vandalism. Mfield (talk) 00:24, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

false accusations
I AM NOT COMMITING SOCKPUPPETRY!! As for my username, I just wanted to change it so it would match my email address and be easier for me to remember. I would just delete my old username but there's no way to do that. Your'e falsely accusing me of malicious behavior, when in reality, I have every best intention of making things better. Just think before you jump to conclusions like that, okay???? —Preceding unsigned comment added bySbrown146 (talk • contribs) 01:59, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * These comments are for the sockpuppetry case page. A simple search on changing username would have returned CHUwhich would have been the correct course of action. Without that, and without some form of disclosure on both userpages there's no way for anyone to know what you were thinking unfortunately. best. Mfield (talk) 04:38, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

TehFreezer
Is there any way to block him for personal attacks? Are they even considered personal attacks? Lazylaces(Talk to me 00:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Missoula
Per this edit: I believe that current consensus holds that ambassadors are notable; but as WP:BIO doesn't say that explicitly, I'll not say anything more about it. Nyttend (talk) 17:55, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 * By the way, your coding looks to me as if you wanted three columns, not two: am I simply misunderstanding the coding? Nyttend (talk) 17:58, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Oops, its because I copied and pasted it from somewhere and forgot to change it to 'of 2'. Mfield (talk) 17:59, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Shelf Cloud
Hey Mfield,

Just wondering if your weak oppose still applies to edit 1/3 or of they've met your concerns with the image? Thanks,--Fir0002 12:18, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Nicholas Carr photo
Hi Matthew:

How are you? I was wondering if you could help me out with another crop of an image of Nicholas Carr.

I would like to use this one for the article's Infobox, moving the photo currently at the top of the Wiki article to the "Biography" section. I thought I would just ask you first since you did an excellent cropping of the other image of Carr.

Best, Manhattan Samurai (talk) 15:01, 22 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Matthew: Thanks. That looks good, but is it possible to also maybe get a closer head shot out of the image? There are very few pixels in the image so maybe it will look too pixelated? I would to use it more for its facial features, and keep the other one as an action shot.Manhattan Samurai (talk) 17:16, 22 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Matthew: Thanks again. I added your latest crop to the article. I wonder is it possible to get an even closer head shot? There doesn't seem to be a pixelation problem, which I thought there would be.Manhattan Samurai (talk) 17:39, 22 November 2008 (UTC)


 * That one's perfect. Thanks. You've been a great help with these images.Manhattan Samurai (talk) 17:55, 22 November 2008 (UTC)


 * It's funny how you can see the guy got a tan sometime in between May and June 2008.Manhattan Samurai (talk) 17:57, 22 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I'd say its a white balance problem with the new images not being corrected properly for the stage lighting, I can try to fix that if you need. Mfield (talk) 02:36, 23 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh, hey, I didn't see that you replied here. If you could correct for that that would be great. I wonder if you have any opinions on the layout and usage of the two photographs in the Nicholas Carr article? This is not in any way my area of expertise so I welcome any opinions that you might have. There is something a little off about the way I sized the photographs in the article, I think.Manhattan Samurai (talk) 17:22, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

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

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

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

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:35, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Machu Picchu image
The Image:Vista de Machu Picchu.jpg photo is an excellent addition to the Machu Picchu article! Kudos to you for this great choice! --Kralizec! (talk) 00:48, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Machu Picchu
I do not agree at all with the removing of the link on this article. I see nothing out of line with that site. It has valuable information that can't be added to wikipedia for copyright reasons. It does not exist primarily to sell a product. The mere fact that a site sells something doesn't exclude it from being linked. Not to be a smart-ass but if that were the case then we couldn't link to microsoft.com for example. user:Aaron BruceUser_talk:Aaron Bruce/Special:Contributions/Aaron Bruce 06:55, 26 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Which link are you referring to - the travel guide that sells maps? If so, it adds nothing to the article sincewikipedia is not a travel guide and it is not referenced at all in the text. Mfield (talk) 08:43, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Aaron Bruce.

I don't understand why my domain was listed as spam. I only have google advertising and a banner of my travel agency. This site is my hobby, and work outside the office in it. I don't known that to include banners was prohibited in Wikipedia. All websites have banners. All Webmaster whom use our free time in personal projects do not deserve earn some money? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcomedina (talk • contribs) 18:38, 27 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Your link would be described as an inappropriate links per WP:ELNO because it sells services that are will benefit from Wikipedia traffic and it because it would add nothing extra to the article that could not be integrated from other sources into the article text.  What would definitely make it spam is if you yourself added the link to the article without discussion or declaration of your interest in the site. The way to avoid accusations of conflict of interest and spamming is to bring the link up for discussion on talk where uninvolved editors can assess its importance and relevance. In the case of self published sites where the author is not a recognized authority on the subject, the bar is going to be high, as WP does not want to be guiding people to what is unverifiable and possibly incorrect information. Mfield (talk) 19:15, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

My web is www.americageo.com no is a travel guide. You Forget it, you are of that type of people who burned people than don't share his ideas (Tomás de Torquemada, Stalin, Mao...Videla... We have been lucky than we born this century), you are a kind of virtual nazi. You are just a caricature virtual, not there in real life. —Precedingunsigned comment added by 190.232.124.148 (talk) 21:45, 27 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Your site has been blacklisted from WP for spamming (not by me). It offers nothing but a ad sponsered embedded google map. We already have map links to lots of other mapping resources via the geocode coordinates at the top of each article. You are providing nothing to the community. Mfield (talk) 21:50, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Ammar Nakhshawani
Hey Mfield, After the discussions we had about Ammar on his talk page, I think it was unfair of you to nominate his article for deletion and not notify me about it. IMO, it was a biased deletion since most of you had no idea what you were deleting. Muhammad (talk) 07:04, 29 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Well I am sorry you are taking such personal offence at the deletion of the article, I was not aware that you were the original creator, and the article has undergone a number of edits and the AfD would have appeared on your watchlist. I flagged the article issues back at the time we were discussing the image and later removed all the promotional hype and groundless original research. When that was done the article remained tagged for notability and as unreferenced for some time. No effort was made by anyone to add any referencing in, and none was easily found by myself or anyone else to back notability. The article could easily have been speedied at that point, but I AfD'd it instead to ensure that the notability was discussed by people who knew more about the subject than me. It was added to the list of Islam related discussions. All that was needed was a single reliable reference to back notability. I suggest that if that is available then you re-write it, it was only a short article and wouldn't take more than 10 mins. But facts are needed, not baseless claims and original research.Mfield (talk) 16:33, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Image:BrisbaneRiver02 gobeirne-edit1.jpg
Hi Mfield,

Thanks very much for the edit - I really appreciate it. I usually play with the curves and levels myself, but would appreciate a step-by-step description of exactly what you did in this case. What sort of level adjustment, in which direction you adjusted the colour balance, etc... Many thanks! - Gobeirne (talk) 22:04, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Here's what I can recall doing... (This is all with Photoshop CS3). Levels - dragged the black point to the right until it it was about half way along the flat line on the left of the histogram (to about 50) and the midtone point to around 0.85. Then a color balance adjustment. In shadows and midtones (but especially shadows) I dropped blue towards yellow and pushed cyan towards red. Then performed gentle noise reduction with NoiseNinja with no sharpening. I finally sharpened with unsharp mask (Amount 114%, Radius 1.7, Threshold 2). Mfield (talk) 03:13, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for that - works well in the Gimp also. Love your gallery, by the way :) Cheers! -Gobeirne (talk) 09:48, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Pittsburgh
i live in pittsburgh and the climate of pittsburgh according to city-data.com is human continental. and also the definition of humad continental is winter highs at 32 or below. i understand pittsburgh does not enter this threshold but then how can we include cities like new york,boston,indianapolis,chicago,cleveland,columbus,cincinnati, and many many more —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dzd (talk • contribs) 20:49, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * This is a discussion for Talk:Pittsburgh. One thing I would say is that you will habe to prove that City-Data.com is a more reliable source than the various other more recognized sources of climate data. Also, at htis point your edits without discussion are going to be treated as bad faith and reverted accordingly. Mfield (talk) 21:01, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Joe Babcock
You just beat me to that copyvio CSD, good to see someone on the ball. Cheers, Jonomacdrones (talk)  03:12, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Joe Bock
Hello, thank you for responding, this is very complicated to us. My son, Bret, started an article on me, Joe Bock, a couple days ago. Everything went fine until I tried to touch it up and add some facts and references, now, there are three big blocks on the top, one for scales of justice, one for autobiography and one for references, can you please advise how to get those removed. Thank you so much for any help you can provide. My name is Joseph Alan Bock (Joe Bock), former football player. Thanks again, this is all very new and difficult for us. Joe Bock 12/27/08/ 22:37 pm ```` —Preceding unsigned comment added byJoe bock (talk • contribs) 03:38, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Joe Bock Hello, WOW, that was quick, disregard the above, whatever happened in between, or whatever you did, it came out perfect. I checked back and the article looks great except they edited out the personal, about my son and daughters. It looks really, really good though. Thank you so much for your help. Wow, that was quick. Thanks. Joe Bock 12/27/08 22:51 pm ```` —Preceding unsigned comment added byJoe bock (talk • contribs) 03:52, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Impact sprinkler
Hi, at can you clarify please if you intended to change your vote from oppose to comment, or if you still maintain your opposition? Wronkiew (talk) 05:12, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * No, I never changed my vote, I still maintain my opposition (I would expect that that would be inferred without a concrete change). I was just clarifying that some of the prior comments may no longer make any sense to voters looking at the article though as I had cleaned it up quite significantly from its state when the nom was submitted. Obviously none of my article clean up changed the image or its relevance in the article though. Mfield (talk) 05:21, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks. Wronkiew (talk) 05:42, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Robert deMaine
Thank you so very much for your invaluable assistance! Best, and Happy New Year Fgrabowska (talk) 23:38, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Graphic_Lab/Image_workshop
Hi. I described what I did over on the page... but, changing two of the words in the text of the SVG seemed to change the file size by almost 1kb. Did I change the encoding or mess things up? (I did use only WordPad in XP). Oh yeah, and thanks for your help :) gren グレン 19:18, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * it's all good - replied there. Mfield (talk) 19:25, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Loves Art
First off, I apologize for the spam. You are receiving this message because you have indicated that you are in Southern California or interested in Southern California topics (either via category or WikiProject, or I happen to know personally).

I would like to invite you to the Los Angeles edition of Wikipedia Loves Art, a photography scavenger hunt to be held at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA) on Saturday, February 28, 2009, from 1:00 to 7:00 PM. All photos are intended for use in Wikipedia articles or on Wikimedia Commons. There will be a prize available for the person who gets the most photos on the list.

If you don't like art, why not come just to meet your fellow Wikipedians. Apparently, we haven't had a meetup in this area since June 2006!

If you are interested in attending, please add your name to Wikipedia Loves Art. Please make a note if you are traveling to the area (train or plane) and need transportation, which can probably be arranged via carpool, but we need time to coordinate. Lodging is as of right now out of scope, but we could discuss that if enough people are interested.

Thank you and I hope to see you there!  howcheng  {chat} 00:47, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Anna's hummingbird page
Hi, I made a change and added a reference on the Anna's Hummingbird article. The reference was to a non-commercial page on my semi-commercial website which provides information on wintering hummingbirds. (http://www.wildbirdshop.com/Birding/Annas_hummers.html) You changed it to what you claimed is a more reliable link at the Portland Audubon website. If you were to go look at the two links I think you would realize your mistake. My Anna's hummingbird page is very useful and informative, while the Audubon website has one brief mention of wintering Anna's hummingbirds buried on that page of generic information. When you cite a reference, you are usually citing an authority. If you have worked within a volunteer organization such as an Audubon chapter you will realize that these chapter websites are put together by whoever is willing to do it. They may or may not be well researched or accurate, but you certainly cannot cite them as an authority. My Anna's hummingbird page was written after considerable research and real personal experience, and has been continually edited over a 13 year period. I have gradually become a non-scientific authority on Anna's hummingbirds. My web page is one of the most frequently consulted sources on the web for information on wintering Anna's hummingbirds and I generally type my fingers raw giving advice to people by email when a cold snap hits the Pacific Northwest. I get lots of real feedback from people on what works for them, how their birds are surviving, etc. We no longer operate the Wild Bird Shop as a store and I mostly keep the website around just because the hummingbird info is so widely read. If it isn't obvious by now, my concern is for the birds, not for making a buck. (You don't make money selling a hummingbird feeder here and there. They don't even pay for the website.)  I try to provide the absolute best information available on them and on how to help them survive the winter. I fail to understand how that can be less authoritative than the pathetic page on the Portland Audubon site which you provided. (I might add that Portland Audubon also sells hummingbird feeders.) Anyway, I would like you to consider putting that link to my Anna's hummingbird page back onto the Anna's Hummingbird article. It will make the article more useful for people who are looking for real information. Thanks, Brian M. Godfrey FatBear1(talk) 00:05, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your position but the issues are this: What ever you may know, without a reliable source to say so, you are not arecognized authority. The fact that your site is well visited and you may have amassed a large amount of knowledge on the subject does not pass the bar for reliable sources. I was trying to provide a more reliable source to back the information you included, but if you dispute the reliability of that source then the information should go from the article completely until a reliable source can be agreed on. If as you say you have conducted a lot of research then you must have sources and references to back that, else it is just original research. That's the reality of the situation. You say that the birds require feeders to survive winter and a bunch of other people say that they do not. There is a dispute then which can only be resolved for encyclopedic purposes by a reliable reference, else both sides of the argument need to be neutrally laid out with sources to back each. The fact that you added a link to a commercial site that you are involved with also adds a conflict of interest issue. By this I am not implying that you are trying to make money out of adding the information, but you are trying to back up information you have added with yourself as the only source and without primary third party recognition that is obviously going to start alarm bells ringing for verifiability. If you want to add links and references to sites you are involved with to an article you should definitely be brining the matter up for discussion on the article's talk page first if you want to avoid the appearance of conflict of interest and assumptions of bad faith. Mfield (talk) 00:24, 13 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I do not know all that much about Wikipedia rules and such. I find it rather pathetic that the rules force you to delete a useful link and replace it with a useless one, but so be it.  It certainly does reduce my trust in Wikipedia information when I'm sure it is intended to do the opposite.  I guess Wikipedia probably does not consider the observations and conclusions of Charles Darwin on natural selection, or the proof by Christopher Columbus that the world was round, to be valid either, so I guess I'm in good company.  Fortunately, the folks feeding hummingbirds during the winter in the Pacific Northwest usually do find my page, anyway.  It's really the hummingbirds that I care about.  Hopefully they will survive us.  I don't think we will.  My addition to that article was intended to improve it, and it did, if only slightly.  It was in no way intended to benefit me and I repeat that if you looked at the page in question you would realize that there is no conflict of interest.  But I do not need the rather minimal information your article contains, so it is of no harm to me if you remove my info.FatBear1 (talk) 01:11, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You are missing the point slightly. The point is that your research is self published and as such has not been peer reviewed nor confirmed by any reliable third party source. I am not claiming that the Audobon society ref is any more reliable, in fact I have removed it in favor of links to published scientific papers on the subject that have themselves been referenced multiple times by experts on the subject. There's no need to cal into question the reliability of the encyclopedia as a whole, it is only reliable as its sourcing and referencing, hence the need to provide those citations and make sure facts and statements are cross checkable and verifiable. Mfield (talk) 01:30, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I checked on your newest update and it looks much better! I disagree that there are sufficient winter flowers to feed them, there are in the California end of the range, but not in the northern half.  But it's OK with me if you leave that there.  Most people who visit my Anna's hummingbirds website for the first time come to it because they have just seen their first winter Anna's.  Your page will help them to confirm that they are not going crazy and that's a good start.  Would it be OK to put my Anna's page in the External Links section in order to help them decide whether they should feed them and how?  It is an important consideration because you cannot feed them casually in the winter like you might in the summer.  They evaluate and decide upon their winter territory during the late fall.  If they include your feeder in their calculations and then you fail to fill or thaw it when they need it most, they will die.  It is not entirely true that there are sufficient winter flowers in the PNW to support them.  That is true in the southern half of their range (California) but not in the Pacific Northwest (Oregon, Washington, British Columbia, and southeastern Alaska.)  In fact, there are few or no flowers at all during much of the winter in that part of their range.  I know it is not the position of an encyclopedia to advocate for the safety and health of its subjects, just to report on them.  I advocate for their safety and health.  A link to my page would really help them to survive the winter without in any way degrading the quality of your information.  In fact, I now realize that I should have put it there in the first place.  Last month we had 40" of snow with an ice storm in the middle of it, temperatures below freezing for about two weeks, and a day or two when the temperatures were in single digits.  I had a report from one lady who said her feeder had frozen and the hummer just fell off of the feeder and lay on its back waiting to die when it discovered that.  I advised her on how to bring it back up to temperature, how to feed it, when to release it, and then to keep her feeder thawed after that.  The hummer survived.  This is the work I do and the real purpose of my page.  I keep it conversational because I want people to feel comfortable contacting me.  I really hope you can help.  Thanks.  --Brian FatBear1(talk) 02:23, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I am copying this discussion to the appropriate place onthe article talk page where we can continue and other editors will see it. Mfield (talk) 03:37, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks. But what about my question?  Is it OK to put a link to my page in the External Links section?FatBear1 (talk) 03:46, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I have answered there and left that question for a consensus to form one way or the other.Mfield (talk) 03:48, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Nordine Zouareg
Fully understand your concerns. His "sports field" is such a narrow niche that his notability is difficult to source outside that niche. However, I was able to add 2 WP:RS that cover him... Arizona Star and Tucson Weekly]... sources definitely away from that "niche" who have the resources to have confirmed their reporting of his endeavours. And too, a nice little review of his book at Armchair Interviews. He's starting to tickle past WP:N. Best,  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:06, 13 January 2009 (UTC)


 * In reply to your post, I did a quick search and though I have not yet gone through them in any detail, it seems that "Mister Univers" and "WABBA" are connected and that they do (or did) use this title.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:27, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I have done that search myself before. If you go through them you will find that all the Mr Universe terms apply to NABBA, it just that some articles are talking about both WABBA and NABBA in the same article. I have not found one mention yet of WABBA Mr Universe. Mfield (talk) 21:36, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes.. have found the same confusions myself. At least eveidence is available to show his victories for the NABBA. Fixing the aricle is now simply a matter of a few sourced tweaks.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 22:15, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Move professional photographer's guide
The page is now located at WikiProject Photography/Guide for Professionals. Continue to help make it better. You contributions as a professional photographer are greatly appreciated. Remember (talk) 13:21, 14 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Go ahead and add a testimonial to it, if you please. Raul654 (talk) 08:03, 15 January 2009 (UTC)


 *  * poke* Raul654 (talk) 17:49, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I haven't forgotten, but I am busy and it will have to wait until tomorrow at the earliest. Mfield (talk) 17:52, 17 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Just a reminder - can you take a look at this? Raul654 (talk) 21:35, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

I am the guy who nominated ostankino tower for FP
I had no idea you had just fought a long drawn-out battle over basically the very same issues, in the last few days. My apologies for stepping on your toes if that is how you perceive it. I just encountered the pic while I was surfing over fromCN Tower and I loved that pic. I understand completely what you mean that atmospheric distortion will make unclarity in a high resolution long range shot like that. Is that what people mean by artefacts? or is that something else. I know in general it means a distorted pixel, but I don't know how they use the term on FP. I will be posted more on the talk page, but I just wanted to let you know I like that mast pic of yours, and in its simplicity I think has a bit of stark beauty my nomination lacks. The main reason I did the nom. for ostankino was because of all the microwave dishes and catwalks hanging all over the place. Sort of the opposite from your reasons for the TV mast lol.

PS I usually use my IP instead of my login unless I have to do something restricted- so sorry if that gets confusing.

72.0.187.239 (talk) 22:51, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually my KXJB nom was a while back so it's probably been forgotten, no toes stepped on at all. The artifacting is a byproduct of too high JPEG compression which results in that crinkly look to the detail, it's pretty much unfixable (i tried to do it from the original version that was uploaded but I couldn't get a really worthwhile result without compromising the image too much). Mfield (talk) 23:50, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

No content in Category:RMS Britannic
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed onCategory:RMS Britannic, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:RMS Britannic has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:RMS Britannic, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact thebot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that'''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here''' CSDWarnBot (talk) 05:50, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for this fix
I'm glad you found the fix, because I was pulling out hairs trying to figure it out. What would possess you to move around the code to make it work? I would have never thought of it. Anyways, thanks much. Orange Marlin  Talk•Contributions 16:11, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

About Lupe's TBAs
I was the one who put the Grammy nominations in there in the first place, and the Leona Lewis page also has 2009 Grammy nominations that are listed as TBA, so how come you don't change those to "Nominated"? If Leona Lewis is TBA (to be announced), then so is Lupe Fiasco. —Preceding unsigned comment added byOsh33m (talk • contribs) 18:52, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Two wrongs don't make a right. If the Leona Lewis article says TBA when she has been nominated then that is wrong as well and should be changed. TBA implies a result when WP only includes reported facts. Mfield (talk) 18:55, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

In that case, I'll proceed in fixing hers. Oh nevermind, they are already fixed.

Lupe Fiasco's solo singles
Why do you keep on taking off The Instrumental and The Emperor's Soundtrack from Lupe Fiasco's solo singles list? If you don't consider them singles then you might as well delete those articles. If they are in fact singles, they belong on the list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Osh33m (talk • contribs) 05:17, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Not sure what you are talking about actually - I have never removed any singles from that list, it must have been someone else. Mfield (talk) 05:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm assuming you're someone of power, so here I'll show you the link --->http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lupe_Fiasco_discography#Solo_Singles I put them back in there, I believe that is the way it is supposed to look. —Preceding unsigned comment added byOsh33m (talk • contribs) 01:14, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Loves Art LACMA meetup
Due to some unforgivable confusion on my part, the meetup on Saturday the 28th needs to be rescheduled. Please see Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Loves Art/LACMA rules to vote for a day/time that works best for you. Thank you and I apologize for the inconvenience.  howcheng  {chat} 05:51, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

replied on my talk page
later, Icsunonove (talk) 05:12, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Charles Laquidara
As one of the recent editors of Charles Laquidara, can you take a look at the discussion on Talk:Charles Laquidara and provide your opinion? Thanks. -- The Red Pen of Doom  16:31, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Untitled
Excuse me but I reverted the fact that Winnipeg is not the coldest city because it is not, that is untrue and untrue facts do not belong in Wikipedia. I explained that in the reason for edit and it is not vandalsim. As mentioned below Use your "powers" to block the real troublemakers. Look into things first before you revert a proper edit. —Precedingunsigned comment added by142.161.166.108 (talk) 07:46, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry but I do not have any powers. The reason that I reverted your edit was that you deleted a referenced fact with the simple edit summary of 'Removing untrue fact'. You did not correct the facts or supply a new reference, nor provide the correct explanation that you later provided on talk after my reversion. Next time I would suggest that supplying a simple explanation in the edit summary would help to avoid this as WP is plagued with content deletion, and removal of stable referenced content is always going to be a red flag when trying to combat that. Thank you for supplying the explanation on talk.Mfield (talk) 04:30, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Loves Art new date
Based on participants' votes, Wikipedia Loves Art LACMA has been rescheduled to Saturday, February 21, 2009 starting at 1:00 PM. Unfortunately, I have a prior commitment and cannot attend. I will need someone to be coordinator for that day. Let me know if you are willing. Thanks, and have fun!  howcheng  {chat} 17:54, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Michael Crook
Are we having fun yet? *sigh* I read through most of his material on Flight 3407. If you haven't yet... don't.  It's beyond vile. It's a defamation lawsuit just waiting to happen. DES(talk) 05:30, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I read a few lines and then stopped. I am sure a psychologist would have a field day with the reasons for that degree of attention seeking. If it gets the attention of a few coach loads of lawyers then there would be some justice for once.Mfield (talk) 05:49, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Interestingly, his web site is now offline. I guess somebody somewhere got themselves a lawyer. DES (talk) 23:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Definitely gone now. The domain is up for sale (as if anybody would want it) DES (talk) 21:07, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Loves Art preparations
Are you read for WLA this Saturday? Here are some last minute preparations you should do before you arrive.
 * 1) Be sure you have a spiral bound memo pad or notebook (and pen) to take notes and to use for writing the accession numbers, which you then have to photograph (see Wikipedia Loves Art/LACMA rules for details).
 * 2) Be sure to print out the scavenger hunt list at Wikipedia Loves Art/LACMA rules/list. You may also wish to visithttp://collectionsonline.lacma.org/mwebcgi/mweb.exe?request=onview1 to make a plan of attack.
 * 3) Since tripods and monopods are not allowed in the museum, consider making a tripod (not as good as the real thing, but better than nothing).

Additionally, we will plan to eat out afterwards at a nearby dining establishment (TBD) -- hope you can join us for that. And finally, I was able to make arrangements for my daughter so I will be able to attend after all. Looking forward to seeing you there!  howcheng  {chat} 19:32, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

admin
Hi. I've seen some of your contribs around and believe you would be a good candidate for WP:RFA. If you want to apply, I'll gladly nominate you. Let me know of your decision.   JGHowes talk  00:05, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

 JGHowes would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact JGHowes to accept or decline the nomination. A page for your nomination at Requests for adminship/Mfield . If you accept the nomination, you must state and sign your acceptance. You may also choose to make a statement and/or answer the optional questions to supplement the information your nominator has given. Once you are satisfied with the page, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.


 * [[Image:Pictogram reply.svg|15px]] Mfield, excellent answers at your RfA!   JGHowes talk  03:03, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks, sometimes I surprise even myself :) Mfield (talk) 05:57, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

GTA series
Since I sort of know you, and I don't know anyone else to tell or report to, I've done a lot for the GTA series page, and it's much more organized now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Osh33m (talk • contribs)

Hello, Mfield
You have new questions at your RFA page. You don't have to answer them right away, I'm just notifying you.  Simon KSK  18:47, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Photographer for Oscars needed
Hi there, you are listed at Wikipedians/Photographers, so I wanted to tell you, aboutthis. Regards,--Flominator (talk) 13:32, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

You are now an admin
I want to congratulate you on your successful RFA. The community has seen fit to entrust you with the tools, and so I have made you an admin. You may want to test out your tools first at New Admin School first before diving right into the action. Thank you for the hard work you have done to prove your trustworthiness, and I hope you continue this work ethic with your newfound tools and trust. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to ask me or any other admin here. Cheers,  bibliomaniac 1  5 21:16, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to add my congratulations. Good Luck ;)— Ched (talk) 23:37, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you both. Mfield (talk) 19:32, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Please sir
hey Mfield, sorry for this, but I think you realize that Melbourne article is in a vandalism period, you know since I placed some appropriate images, some users go directly to reverting the article and so vandalising it, like the remooval of the culture section that exists long time ago; I know you find very strange why a section is remooved like this, but you gotta restore to the complete version previous version as now the article is really incomplete and a part is removed from it with no reason ! DutchSupremacy (talk) 07:57, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

I do not agree with you, no more, as you know that a section has been removed and Im trying to restore it, realize please that this section: Culture is existing long time ago, so there is no reason to remove a section.DutchSupremacy (talk) 08:07, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Please see the protection message on the article and my message on your talk - the version the article is protected in is not a reflection of anyones opinion on who is right or wrong, the article has to be protected somewhere. Everyone needs to talk now and come to consensus. Mfield (talk) 08:10, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Culture section on Melbourne article
The Culture section is still damaged, its not the original version, the original culture section is more long and contain more under-sections, the article is still incomplete. DutchSupremacy (talk) 08:11, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Once again, these are discussions for you to have over the next 3 days with the other editors on the article talk page. The state the article is currently protected in is not an endorsement of who is right or wrong.Mfield (talk) 08:13, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

re: Brian Dawkins
Gracis. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 08:34, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Heads up re abuse
Thanks for the notification, but most importaantly thanks for addressing the editor's issue. I added some details at the abuse page and I would have been happy to reply if I had known. Thanks again for your efforts. Alansohn (talk) 20:08, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

No Line on the Horizon
Re the new U2 album, i did use the word "ridiculous" but I should have pointed out that this was to describe the situation in general and by no means aimed at editor's or their actions including yourself. thanks for your help. --Merbabu(talk) 09:12, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

GTA series
I have added a great deal of work to the GTA series page, particularly the summary of games. I couldn't figure out the codes for colors, so I had to add {{won and such. Take a look at the page, and tell me what you think. If it should be changed, I at least want appreciation for helping out.

Osh33m (talk) 03:47, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Kannaphon/Royal Cliff Beach Resort
Dear Mfield,

Thank you for your message, the reason I move the article to subpage because I want to fix the article by the recommendation from other admin.

Please advise if I would like to move the article back to article space after I already fix it.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Kannaphon (talk) 06:14, 4 March 2009 (UTC)Kannaphon

Sockpuppet accounts?
Hi, could you take a look at the history of Fourth dimension? There are two similar vandalisms by similarly named accounts ("123456789gary" and "123456789riita"). A search on usernames that begin with "123456789..." show that these may be sockpuppet accounts. What is the normal course of action for dealing with this? Thanks!&mdash;Tetracube (talk) 17:12, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, those two are obviously related, filing an SSP would be the way to go, providingthe username search along with it, someone with checkuser can run a check to see if there are any other matching instances as there may be sleeper accounts. There seem to be quite a few 123456789x usernames with no contributions yet. You can file the SSP and report and tag the two listed users or let me know if you need any help. Mfield (talk) 17:53, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: ANI
. Cheers again. :-) Scarian Call me Pat!  21:49, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you very much for your swift action on Olympic Airlines. I really appreciate it. Take care. Tasos (Dr.K. logos 03:54, 7 March 2009 (UTC))

Protection
Thank you for answering my request. Much appreciated. MegX (talk) 03:58, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi
Would you like to consider unprotecting the Creativity Movement article so an uninvolved editor can revert to the neutral version and fix up the citations a little? The article cited by title (though an incorrect url: proper linkhere or from another sourcehere) in the second sentence disputed by the CM-sympathetic editor clearly refutes their claim. There doesn't seem to be any basis for their legal threats. Nevard(talk) 07:32, 7 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the quick reply. I've posted a modified version on the talk page. I don't think there's any particular problem with the sourcing, just a URL in a source that got muddled. Nevard (talk) 01:06, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Reviewmageddon Wiki page
The Reviewmageddon article was unfairly deleted. It was falsely flagged by user:Ryoga3099 for no reason other than he claims that he works for the company, (which would mean that he is breaking Wiki's conflict of interest guidelines) He has also flagged several other pages illegitimately.--FirecrackerDemon (talk) 14:33, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I was also have sources now for the article.--FirecrackerDemon (talk) 14:57, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi, I have a press release issued by Portland Enterprises / Xleague.TV on gamespress.com, as well as several episodes posted online (if that's notable that the program exists).--FirecrackerDemon (talk) 17:34, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * A single press release will not work as it originates from the channel itself, likewise online episodes. Thenotability guideline centers around independent sourcing, that means non trivial coverage in primary media sources. Do these exist? If some independent sourcing exists I will gladly reverse the speedy but the article will need to be able to survive an AfD which will likely follow without significant improvements. Mfield (talk) 19:46, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Could you possibly give me some examples of what might be considered noteable at all? I'm sure I can uncover some. Also please can you look into user:Ryoga3099, he has incorrectly flagged several other articles for speedy deletion, all of which were reverted by admins bar this one.--FirecrackerDemon (talk) 22:26, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I am already looking into that user re. COI and am awaiting a response, in respect of that and the other taggings and in the mean time I will undelete the article. You should add what extra sourcing you can ASAP. best. Mfield (talk) 23:44, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, that's excellent news, thanks ever so much for you help in this matter, I really appreaciate all you've done!  I've noticed in the past that the user has deleted and reverted several comments from the UKeSA article that criticised the company.   But once again,  thanks ever so for your help!--FirecrackerDemon (talk) 00:48, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for the block on User: 86.145.113.100. That whole thing was getting kind of silly. :0  Lychosis  T / C 19:40, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Spoke too soon :) Another IP (presumably the same guy) has just reverted again at Characters in Resident Evil 4.bridies (talk) 20:09, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * and My Name Is Bruce and Conflict: Desert Storm II. bridies (talk) 20:12, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * And another IP 81.157.83.84. Geoff B(talk) 21:36, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Blocked IPs and semi protected all three articles. Are there any more and is there an open SSP on this guy?Mfield (talk) 21:45, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Back as 86.132.133.246, articles concerned are Syphon Filter: Logan's Shadow and Syphon Filter: Dark Mirror. There is anarchived sockpuppet investigation with a list of IPs.  Geoff B (talk) 00:53, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for quick help
Thanks for helping with User:Jgriffin4211. Definitely did not have NPOV about the child model/actress article.AeonicOmega (talk) 06:32, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Nice job. &mdash;Dark talk 06:53, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Normally, I'd suggest just semi-protecting the redirect pages.
But, in theory, that would have to be every redirect ever... Half Shadow  18:02, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Harriet Tubman
Is there a standard length of time after an article has been TFA that it's kept unprotected? Harriet Tubman is a constant target of vandalism, since she's so frequently researched by children. I don't want to request indefinite semi-protection again, however, if there's an agreed-upon period of unprotectedness. Cheers. Scartol •  Tok  00:05, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Will do. Thanks. Scartol  •  Tok  22:35, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

UKeSA Logo
Basically, it was myself and two other designers that have designed the UKeSA logo. This is the reason why I am in possession of the high resolution CMYK print version of the logo. I am not an employee of UKeSA. If I was, that would mean I would be on their annual payroll and part of their board, which I am not. I do have an invested interest in UKeSA, but that's because I have an invested interest in eSports in general. I was going to add other eSports governing bodies (such as the International eSports Federation) to the list, but I have not found any substantial sources or information to include in other Wikipedia entries. Ryoga3099 (talk) 01:47, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Request
Could you protect my talk page? I am retiring, and I would not want anyone to vandil my page. And could I also request protection for User:96.245.84.175, User:71.185.180.70, and User:71.175.27.49, until it is cleared that I am not a sock puppet? - Rockyobody (talk) 20:42, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Per user request I can protect your own user and talk pages if you are retiring, but I cannot protect the IPs - that is for the SPI case. If it closes in your favor the messages will be removed anyway, you should not have removed them yourself. Per policy we do not protect reassignable IP pages for extended periods anyway. Mfield (talk) 21:37, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Sydney Opera House
Hi, Not sure if you've seen this but your image of the Sydney Opera House is being used in this website alongside one of mine. Check it out. Cheers.        Adam (talk) 02:20, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Protection
Thanks for semi-protecting ! Wildhartlivie (talk) 05:20, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion you made at articles for protection
I appreciate the suggestion, but what can they do? The person who keeps coming through is using a dynamic IP address, and never comes back with the same one (at least not that I've seen) -- it's a repeated drive-by one-off IP. Maybe the suggestion you made would work, but I can't see an entire swath of IPs being blocked from editing for one dynamic IP user's actions. Thanks in advance for any help/clarification on this! JasonDUIUC (talk) 07:59, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation, I'll give it a try -- who knows if they'll do it, but it'd at least save me time every couple months when I catch the guy that keeps doing this. JasonDUIUC (talk) 08:05, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Further question (sorry to bother you) -- I get how this can stop the addition of the fansite, but that's only half the problem. The same user keeps altering the reviews section to be very positive, even deleting the sourced reviews that others have added that show otherwise; it's not a specific bit of content that gets changed there, but it is half of the vandalism that's occurring on a repeated basis. Any suggestions other than semi-protection for that stuff? It's never been a registered user, always drive-by anon IPs. Thanks! JasonDUIUC (talk) 08:14, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Wild Mercury Sound
I declare myself the copyright holder and holder of intelectual property rights. Sorry for any confusion in the last typing error.

Rockyobody
I believe a couple of days ago you protected the user pages of Rockyobody after he retired for the second time in a week. After his pages were protected due to his retirement he made another edit. Also, as you know, it has been suggested by myself and another editor that this user is using a number of sockpuppets and there is an open report located at. Unfortunately both Rockyobody and Eaglesfan619, which is one of the accounts that has ben suggested is him, have been interfering with the investigation including editing the page to remove suspected sockpuppets from the listand repeatedly removing the suspected sockpuppet notice added to the userpages.

There hasn't been any administrator input so far into the report, so I was wondering if you could have a look or advise on what can be done next, surely the suspected sockpuppets shouldn't be able to interfere with the report/investigation like this?

JimRDJones (talk) 21:06, 11 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay Mfield, I'll leave the tag. But could you tell me if it's legal for them to accuse me without asking me about it, and if I can prove I have no part with them, because I don't think they believe me.Eaglesfan619 (talk) 21:21, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your help against vandalism with the recent protections of Church of Scientology and List of Scientologists. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 21:10, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for cleaning off the vandal. Keep up the good work!--Caspian blue 20:09, 13 March 2009 (UTC) Hey, the vanda created another account. . I'm certain that he is block evading See: Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive521. Would you also block this vandal? Thanks.--Caspian blue 20:21, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Someone already did it. Mfield (talk) 20:36, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Message
No worries, just want to set the record straight. IP users are on shaky ground to begin with, so I just want to walk the straight and narrow. 74.69.39.11 (talk) 21:12, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Sock vandal account
Hi, you recently blocked an ip for removal of content from Laurie Brett and protected the page too, per a request I made on page protection. User:Master133 has since engaged in the same edits and appears to be a sock account of the blocked ip. Is there anything you can do about this please? Many thanks GunGagdin Moan 18:02, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I see you're already dealing with this :) GunGagdin Moan 18:04, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi, User:Master133 has gone straight back to removing content without discussion, despite his block.GunGagdin Moan 18:48, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

March 2009

 * Your warnings are deserved. You cannot remove a speedy deletion template without it having be contested. If speedy deletion is not the appropriate way then only the user who gave it can change it. And what right did you have to remove comments from a talkpage? --→ Ãlways Ãhëad (talk) 22:16, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanx for your support on Islamic Extremism among British Pakistanis. this is about a credible threat to the USA.  Proud to be an American. Cheers--Wikireader41 (talk) 22:27, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Please all note that my actions have nothing to do with the subject itself, my support is only as much as supporting the non POV deletion of material and the stability of the encyclopedia as a whole. I am (neutrally) preventing disruption to the community. Mfield (talk) 22:31, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * It seems you have been involved in this from the beginning, perhaps you wouldn't mind stepping aside so another admin could resolve it neutrally? And again you seem to being missing the point. Sources aren't the only thing providing credibility to an article. As an experienced editor, you should realize this. Sources 4-10 are used to list known terrorists as Pakistanis. That leaves only 4 sources that aren't related to known terrorists. Only 1-2 of which relate to the article's name.--→ Ãlways Ãhëad (talk) 22:46, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I have not been involved at all, having not made a single edit to the article (or any related article) except for reverting removal of content after blocking the edit warring IPs. I have no interest or stake in the topic, butI have re-referred it to colleagues via AN/I so that it can be watched by more people. Mfield (talk) 22:55, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Also, why do you not have it on your userpage that your are an admin? --→ Ãlways Ãhëad(talk) 23:09, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem, I just never got round to adding it, a lot of admins don't have it on there, I have added it now I'll see if it helps or hinders anything. Mfield (talk) 23:25, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Every admin I've seen had it somewhere on their userpage(guess I haven't seen a lot of admins), had to look up your name to verify you were an admin because I thought it was standard to have it on every admin's userpage. --→ Ãlways Ãhëad (talk) 01:15, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Nangparbat sockpupptet
this ip user you dealt with is up again vandalizing
 * Above comment is unsigned and not by me but yes, User:86.156.208.231 is a new sock of the same old hand.--Boston (talk) 19:21, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * is an additional (admitted) offering from Nangparbat's never-ending sockdrawer. --Boston (talk) 14:30, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

I am exposing bostons lies about the real affect of canvassing which is it had no affect what so ever to the turn out of the poll just goes to show how desperate he is to keep the pov article cheers86.151.123.180 (talk) 14:39, 19 March 2009 (UTC) Mfield when will my block expire ? 86.151.123.180 (talk) 14:40, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Your comments needed
Hi, would you mind responding to Wikireader41's accusations here that I was vandalizing by placing a speedy deletion tag on that article earlier. Thanks--→ Ãlways Ãhëad (talk) 20:33, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Olympic airlines
I am afraid that you are playing the game of  Dr.K. who seems to be interested only in desperately blocking any possible negative comment about Olympic airlines. He has first tried the excuse that Skytrax is an opinion site. Now I hear that Skytrax is a forum. It is not! I urge you to sit back and reconsider before continuing this war. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Schwertleite (talk • contribs) 16:34, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

From the skytrax website:

2 STAR RANKING : A 2 Star rating for a poor Quality performance - falling below the industry average in the different competitive rankings of Product and Service standards. This Ranking is assessed by SKYTRAX after detailed Product and Service standards analysis for each featured airline, and is NOT connected in any way to customer ratings across the Forum pages on this site. 2 Star ranking represents a poor standard of Product and / or poor and inconsistent standards of Staff Service delivery in Onboard or Airport environments.

Schwertleite (talk) 16:43, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

The Gay Marriage Thing a valid entry
I am just putting this page up and it is already deleted when I have not even had a chance to finish it. I did not want to lose any information in the sandbox because I was afraid I would not get to finish this before it reset itself.

This is a perfectly legitimate entry within the context of the subject matter where it was entered, and I was under the impression I could edit this page continuously and add to it. If I am mistaken, I will correct the error. I very simply got the page started, and then had to stop because my son was sick. I was shocked that bare minutes had gone by and I received a message it was deleted. I at least expect to have a decent chance to be able to complete my task of filling out the page. There was enough information there to start it, and now I move on to rounding it out.

What do I do to restore or apparently restart this page? —Precedingunsigned comment added by Millies (talk •contribs) 19:54, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

AP:AfD/IEaBP
Collapsing the sections about canvassing at Articles for deletion/Islamic Extremism among British Pakistanis is a good thing. This sickening debate has me wishing I had said less, or else, even better, never stumbled across it. I don't feel strongly about the debate itself as much as unclean character of the debate makes it hard for me to keep my big-but-polite mouth shut on points of process. I get the strong sense that years from now, on my death bed, I will hear my computer say "you've got mail" and it will be an another maniacal diatribe from a User:Nangparbat sockpuppet. Then the beep beep beep machine goes beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep. Then fade to black. --Boston (talk) 21:48, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Thanks for doing that. --→ Ãlways Ãhëad (talk) 22:22, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Danke
Thanks for the swift response at Daniel Cohn-Bendit, I appreciate it. Regards, Skomorokh  23:14, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Brain fart
Unfortunately we all have them. Did you really mean to say "protection" and link to the protection policy (rather than block and the block policy) over at your decline at WP:AIV? Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:17, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Parp. Mfield (talk) 15:21, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Parp: I had to look that up!--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:23, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Programmable logic controller
Just to let you know user is currently editing from other accounts such as 202.93.37.90 and User:Alexandermorgontop. ThanksUser A1 (talk) 17:48, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * All accounts and recent IPs blocked. Mfield (talk) 17:55, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Thomas Boothby
I agree he is not notable: the Earl Shilton article is the cause of the problem but the content of the Boothby article has been restored by another editor.Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 18:04, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Red Dwarf Pictures
Thank you for cropping those pictures. I intend to do more work on some of the Red Dwarf pages soon, so I will bear in mind cropping/sharpening before uploading more. Regards magnius (talk) 17:10, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Re:
As long as the story is nice and boring, s'all good. :P &mdash; neuro <font color="#5A3696">(talk) (review) 21:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Without commenting on the request, I am informing you that the user has requested unblocking. Comment if you feel inclined.Toddst1 (talk) 09:02, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of an entry
Hello, you have deleted the entry about STOXX Ltd. on the grounds that it would be advertising. Could you please give me more details on that statement.

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by84.75.101.11 (talk) 09:18, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Olympic airlines privatization
Thanks for your help. But out of pure curiosity, how can you manage the Greek text if (according to your own user page) you do not speak Greek? Schwertleite (talk) 15:06, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I am afraid I do not agree on the skytrax rating. It is part of history as much as the financial information is. I understand the concern about "synthesis" but a minimum of synthesis is required to make any article readable. But I will try to find more references to alleviate your concerns.Schwertleite (talk) 15:20, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I am not following your argument. In the Greek and international press the problem of Olympic has been characterized: finances and services. I do not see why one should treat them differently. Again one should look for quotes. But what are you concerned about exactly? The possibility that poor service has played no role in the privatization?Schwertleite (talk) 15:30, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I think you are being very disingenuous here! If somebody says I'm going to turn the airline I bought into an airline of quality, he DOES MEAN among other things that what he bought is not an airline of quality. This is not an original piece of research, and it does not require synthesis, it rather requires the analytic faculty of understanding language.Schwertleite (talk) 14:53, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Gay Marriage Thing entry - help?!
Now it seems a lot of work has been removed from the page, the work that added the very outside resources wiki now says the page does not have. It also was listed very appropriately alongside other Documentaries in the Documentaries and Literature section of the Same Sex Marriage wiki entry. Why was it removed? It has every right to be there, it has external references, it is a legitimate entity. Removing it from that page then removed the link to us and then we're flagged for not having links?! This makes no sense. Why would the pertinent information be removed? And that is a lot of work lost.

This film should absolutely be listed as a resource in the Same Sex Marriage entry. And there is no explanation on my talk page as to why. How can I keep fixing it, if you are going to keep removing it and then tell me I need to add the information that you just took off? Help me help you. Seriously. Millies (talk) 22:17, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Not me that removed it - I answered your questions about other editors cleaning up your work on your talk.Mfield (Oi!) 03:37, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Insufficient warning
Hello, Mfield.

In regard to this denied report, what's the maximum acceptable gap between the last warning and a report? Thanks. SamEV (talk) 18:23, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. It does help. SamEV (talk) 19:30, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

One more thing: if I revert anon vandalism, should I not even issue a warning if the culprit's last edit was hours earlier? How about if it was a day earlier? Where do you come down on that? Where does WP? SamEV (talk) 09:26, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Help
I see you are an admin, so I wonder if you would look at Jdimypai Damour and tell me if you think this guy fails the "one event" guideline. I was going to afd myself, but I am loath to log in at the moment owing to privacy concerns.70.251.56.57 (talk) 05:34, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think it merits speedy, but I have AfD'd it under WP:ONEEVENT as it could maybe be moved into an article on the event itself. Mfield (Oi!) 05:46, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I do appreciate it. Take care, amigo! 71.153.241.39 (talk) 06:31, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

FUZE Meeting
Hi Mfield,

Thank you for stepping in on FUZE Meeting and making a neutral assessment of the article and the situation. I really admire your neutrality and appreciate your support. We need more users like you on Wikipedia :)

FabulosWorld (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:10, 1 April 2009 (UTC).

John M. Reich Bio
Dear Mfield,

The first part of this text is also on the article discussion board, but I wanted to address it to you also and add a few notes that are more Wikipedia-general concerns.

What's the substance of the dispute? I would be happy to correct it - but I'd have to know it first. Every opinion attributed to Mr. Reich comes from his own words. Every judgment about the propriety of his agency's actions comes from a combination of the most-trusted financial journalists AND his agency's own parent department's findings. Mr. Reich AGREED to the findings himself in a letter to Treasury. Not only that, any fair assessment of FredEthelMertz series of edits finds an editor who is trying out different "spins" on such things as Mr. Reich's resignation - for example, calling that resignation an "early retirment" and then backing off the characterization. Moreover, it is the FredEthelMertz edits that are unsourced, not mine and there has been no specific dispute as to the correctness of any of my sourcing.

In addition, I want to add personally that my obviously intense interest in this has nothing to do with Mr. Reich but with the really positive experience I have had with Wikipedia. For me, this all started with some awkward, newbie comments I made on the IndyMac bank failure. They weren't good enough to remain on the page, but fortunately for me they were removed by agenda-driven editors. That inspired me to do good citizen-journalism. I went to original sources and asked questions. I talked to experts and corresponded with reporters who cover banking at the major financial news outlets, one of whom - a former bank regulator himself - wrote an email admitting that he "should have caught" what I did catch for the benefit of the site. And I admit that I am proud to say that the Wikipedia page on IndyMac bank was, for months, the one place I know of to which interested people could come and find the whole story on why this major institution fell apart and when the key pieces of data came to light -which story has been borne out to an extent I couldn't even imagine.

I have tried hard to react only to mischaracterizations of the IndyMac story on Wikipedia. I have left many mischaracterizations in place because they reflect the popular mind on the subject. But even with the vox pop included, if you compare Wikipedia's record of detailed truth-telling with that of Mr. Reich - the ideological, influential, and failed head regulator charged with *preventing* three of the most-important financial collapses in history - I think you will find a yawning discrepancy that validates the Wikipedia citizen-journalist model.

When this scandalous behavior at OTS was confirmed a number of times, I felt it was finally time to address the record per Mr. Reich. Therefore, I ask you to look at the series of edits this FredEthelMertz put in and judge their intent per the record. And please note that I went out and *sourced* one of FredEthelMertz's unsourced contentions - from the Treasury department's files. This did not turn out to reflect well on Mr. Reich, but it was not really my original intent to pore over Mr. Reich's every word - and all the better for him, I think. I was mainly concerned with his actions and those of his direct reports, as multiply-sourced from the major financial news outlets.

I dislike writing about people. I will bet that Mr. Reich is a perfectly decent person and I'm sure what he's going through now is very painful. But he was at the helm of an institution America - and, as it happened, the world - trusted to prevent on of history's great financial disasters and he didn't just fail, he became almost a champion for failure. Personally, I don't think he did this out of maliciousness, but beliefs that turned out to be mistaken, but my personal opinion is meaningless here. Wikipedia's purpose is to set the record straight. --216.254.24.133 (talk) 19:03, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Woops, Dlawbailey here, writing above. --Dlawbailey (talk) 19:04, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

"Wikipedia's purpose is to set the record straight", thing is, Wikipedia's purpose is absolutely not to set any records straight. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an investigative journalism medium. In order for Wikipedia's content to remain notable, neutral and verifiable, information must all have been reported by reliable sources. This is a benchmark for the inclusion of facts. As wikipedia is edited by thousands of anonymous editors, none of whos integrity or motives can be accurately guaged, there have to be ways of ensuring that the information presented remains mainstream and verifiable. In order to achieve this, the synthesis of reported facts into unreported conclusions and original research are strictly forbidden. Note that I am not saying that you have been doing these things, I am just re clarifying how the project works and the reasons for it. Editors have to steer clear of drawing their own conclusions from facts and claims and presenting their conclusions, how ever obvious those conclusions may be. The drawing of conclusions has to be left to reliable sources, which can then be reported as part of a balanced article. The consensus process is an important part of what makes this all work as other editors can provide objectivity to decide whether material is notable and relevant enough for inclusion.Mfield (Oi!) 20:56, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I will reply on article talk with some thoughts on how to proceed with this dispute.Mfield (Oi!) 20:57, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your response, but how do I form a consensus with an editor who has never participated in the discussion? How do I even find out what is at issue? How can I create "neutral" section when I have no idea what the other side contends? The other side only erases. I put out thoroughly cited edits, but my edits are rejected and I don't even know the basis for the rejection. --Dlawbailey (talk) 21:38, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * if the other side refuses to participate at all over the next few days then their input has no merit, as long as you abide by the editing guidelines, and set out what you think should be included and why then once the protection ends you can add it.Mfield (Oi!) 21:50, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I detailed the points and the citations. I would like to understand more about how the process of putting on protection happened. I put a lot of time into phrasing and citing my edits so that they would meet Wikipedia standards and something like this wouldn't be necessary.--Dlawbailey (talk) 00:25, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Time does not allow discussing issues on a daily basis. A BLP is intended to provide facts and, although an editor may feel their facts are substantiated, by producing only those “facts” that support an opinion, it is no longer truly accurate. If strong opinions exist, a blog or other chat device would be a valid location for those discussions – not a BLP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FredEthelMertz (talk • contribs) 01:23, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Andrew Van Vranken Raymond
Hi Mfield. Can you please undelete Andrew Van Vranken Raymond? The article named him president of a notable college which counts as an assertion of importance. The author also left a number of links on my talk page, among them: Cheers, Amalthea :<font style="color:#accC10;background:#0000fa;"> Chat 21:41, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9D00E0D61F31E033A2575AC0A9659C94659ED7CF
 * http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9B00E0D81330E733A25757C0A9619C946397D6CF
 * http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9F00EFD81E3FE433A25755C0A9629C946996D6CF
 * done. Mfield (Oi!) 21:47, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Amalthea :<font style="color:#accC10;background:#0000fa;"> Chat 21:56, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Article: CONFINTEA
Dear Mfield

I kindly ask you to undelete the article CONFINTEA. Since my colleagues and I edited the original pagehttp://www.unesco.org/en/confinteavi/... ourselves it is not a matter of copyright infringement. We can easily provide the right to use the text.

CONFINTEA is an interntional conference (without commercial background, by the way, if you are suspecting stealth marketing) that might interest people from the whole world who are in contact with the subject of education (students, people who work in politics, NGOs etc.). We are sure that Wikipedia users search for information about this conference - at least they might want to when the conference has started in May. Our purpose is to create a basis of information that can be edited by any user. You will be aware that the first step is always the hardest in creating an article. In addition, we are directly at the source of information as we are organizing this conference.

I hope you understand that it is not easy to write several different texts about one topic without interference. The article in question was adjusted to the purpose of Wikipedia. So we would deeply appreciate you to undelete the article at least partly.

Thanks for consideration Björn Otte, Public Relations, UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning --Bohamburg (talk) 10:08, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

SSP of FabulosWorld
Hi Mfield: Just a heads-up for you that you placed the SSP investigation notices on User:User:Vchaudhary (instead ofUser:Vchaudhary) and User:User:CrazyAboutTech (instead of User:CrazyAboutTech), as well as the corresponding talk pages. Regards, Jim Ward (talk·stalk) 21:52, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Pesky twinkle, wish it would parse those boxes for unnecessary User: prefixes. Mfield(Oi!) 00:00, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

User:Dico Calingal


The user, now as his IP, is contiuing to add the images to his user page, even after being warned not to. If he isn't going to follow our rules, his block needs to be extended, and the IP needs to be blocked for a long time.—  Dæ dαlus <sup style="color:green;">Contribs  06:06, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh good! The user page was a couple of days ago, I already blocked the IP for that, but the other stuff is new. And he has uploaded a bunch of blatant copyvios just to add to it. Well, him and his IP have a week to read all those guidelines again, along with the latest explanation. He should really do that and not fall back into the same pattern as next time there will be all the time in the world for reading. Mfield (Oi!) 07:15, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

AN/I report
Courtesy notice: I have filed an AN/I report here in attempt to deal with a discussion at Talk:Barack Obama, in which you have been involved, that I believe needs some administrative intervention. Thanks, Wikidemon (talk) 07:09, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * As an aside, if we are truly concerned for the fortunes of a newbie editor here, I think reaching out to them is more helpful than infighting among the established editors. Although I do share Scjessey's concern it may well not be a good faith account I've tried to leave a helpful comment on their talk page in hopes that I'm wrong.  Wikidemon (talk) 07:09, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I most certainly was concerned with the impression left on a new editor, hence my jumping in on the discussion in the first place. It rapidly got hijacked by other issues which as an uninvolved admin I was not going to get drawn into. It is evident that patience has worn understandably thin around that article, but every effort has to be made to AGF and not bite, even if it is happening 20 times a day. Mfield (Oi!) 07:17, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Proposed move on talk page (Michael Robert Alexander Brown)
Thanks for taking on that article. There is a comment on the talk page as well, proposing a move. I also left a reply in the BLP noticeboard thread, as there was another article there that wasn't strictly a BLP, but I was looking for someone who might be able to work out how best to tidy it up. Carcharoth (talk) 21:28, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Request for text of a deleted page
I am doing a random check of AnomieBOT's activities at WP:PUI, and I noticed that someone complained that the bot made an error regarding File:DABARKADS.JPG. Will you please make available to me the file page wikitext for that file as of 16:55, 3 April 2009 (UTC)? I have no need of the file itself, just the wikitext of the file page at that timestamp. Thank you.Anomie⚔ 16:01, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Image Lab Request
Care to take a look at this? No obligation; you just did such a nice job on my supreme court photo that I thought I'd ask you. ~  ωαdεstεr 16  «talkstalk»22:12, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. Mfield (Oi!) 23:03, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, again! ~  ωαdεstεr 16  «talkstalk»02:13, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

User you blocked
As an admin who had previously blocked this user, you may be interested inAdministrators'_noticeboard.--Otterathome (talk) 20:33, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Griffith Observatory
File:Griffith observatory.jpg Ever thought of a go at FPC with this one? Wonderful pic; famous location. Brings back memories. :) Durova Charge! 01:09, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, feel free to nominate it, I have gone off self nominating images at FP but I'll obviously support it, it's been the article for ages and is used in the Los Angeles infobox image too. You might also like this ongoing project of mine...http://www.photography.mattfield.com/griffithobservatoryvr/tour.html Mfield (Oi!) 01:14, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Stunning! Durova Charge! 03:29, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Question re changes to Billy Bob Thorton CBC interview
I noticed you changed the protection level on the Billy Bob Thorton CBC interview controversy. I felt the story was way too long (1/2 the size of his career) and I created a shorter version. Could you please answer 2 questions? 1. When I previewed the links instead of appearing as [11][12], etc they appear as [1][2]. Is that normal and if I saved the changes they would correctly appear as [11][12]? 2. I've never made a change this big to an article. I've cut it down to under 200 words. Should I just post it, or could you give me your opinion on it? All the appropriate linking is in the one I'd post. Even now, it seems too long. Thanks, Doug. BashBrannigan (talk)

Here it is:

On April 8, 2009 Thorton and his musical group The Boxmasters appeared on the CBC Radio One program Q, hosted by Jian Ghomeshi. Thorton began the interview sounding nervous and confused, replying "I don't know" when asked how long the band had been together and expounding at length on "Famous Monsters of Filmland" magazine in response to his musical influences as a child. Other members of the band answered Ghomeshi’s questions without incident. Mid-interview Thorton clarified he had "instructed" the show's producers to not ask any questions about his career as a screenwriter and actor.[1][2]Ghomeshi had mentioned Thorton’s acting credentials in the introduction. Thorton also complained Canadians were too reserved, like “mashed potatoes without the gravy”.[3] The interview received attention and criticism around the world.[4][5] The following night, Thornton's band opened for Willie Nelson at Toronto's Massey Hall. When Thornton explained mid-set he liked Canadians but not the popular CBC radio host, boos and catcalls erupted.[6] Local reviews of Thornton's Toronto performance had not been positive.[7][8][9] On April 10, Thornton announced The Boxmasters would not be playing with Nelson during concerts scheduled in Canada due to members of the crew and band having the flu.[10]

User:Dico Calingal


The user is continuing to add fair-use images to their userpage, under the guise of an IP address, as seenhere. The user has made it blatantly clear, after several warnings to stop and blocks, that he plans on continuing the same course of action should he get blocked again, and should that block expire. I recomend a full-protection of the userpage with an indef-block on the account.—<font color="Green">Dæ dαlus<font color="Green">Contribs 09:11, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Image edit request
Hey Mfield, you've done some great work for me at the Image Lab. I was wondering if you'd beintereted in taking on two more: Anything else that you think is wrong with either of them, feel free to make the change. Thanks in advance! ~  ωαdεstεr 16  «talkstalk»01:02, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * File:EMPACTwilight.JPG: This needs to be straightened and un-distorted. Is it possible to make the left and right edges of the building vertical? That's what annoys me the most.
 * File:NYC NYSE.jpg: This needs distortion fixing. It's used on United States, so it should be as high quality as possible, really.

File:Bar harbor from cadillac mountain arcadia np.jpg
What a beautiful image! Thanks for adding it to the Acadia National Park article. I took the liberty of adding it to theMount Desert Island article as well; hope you don't mind. —BMRR (talk) 21:19, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * thanks. Mfield (Oi!) 22:29, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of The Truth (painting)
An article that you have been involved in editing, The Truth (painting), 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. Newross (talk) 18:05, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

199.216.194.143
Heads up, you warned this IP they'd been blocked, but you don't appear to have actually blocked them :P --Closedmouth (talk) 04:59, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Compressing SVG file
How do I compress SVG file ? I've tried to compress them by using Inkscape, but the compressed image extension became SVGZ and I can't upload it to wikipedia. Hope to hear from you soon ASAP. Thanks. Arteyu ? Blame it on me ! 10:50, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Rizon
An IP is removing content from Rizon again. Can we get a perm semi-prot this time? Tothwolf (talk) 13:41, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I have blocked the IP that removed the material for a longer period, next time they will get a much longer block. As it is only this one IP this time I am reluctant to semi protect it until and unless that situation changes. I will watch it also and let me know if other IPs start the same pattern of vandalism. Mfield (Oi!) 16:33, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
 * We'll see what happens I guess. He uses multiple IPs and has used proxies in the past. This is one of the IPs he has used before. Tothwolf (talk) 22:01, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry
sorry about that incident kind of comment i'm really sorry, it won't happen again, but please i need semi-protection on Talento de Barrio (soundtrack) and La Revolución because that IP adress is using vandalism, see my contributions, i have really help a lot with all the articles related to reggaeton in wikipedia Vercetticarl (talk) 00:51, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

FPC discussion
This page has been started to review, discuss, and propose changes to the current closure process of Wikipedia Featured picture candidates. The need for this discussion has arisen following complaints and suggestions raised at the FPC talk page in May 2009. This time I believe we are getting somewhere and would appreciate your participation. Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:52, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

oversight requested
Can you explain what you mean by "oversight requested"? I thought this was a fairly simple "delete and restore" request. tedder (talk) 23:28, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure, I filed an oversight request at RFO - it is a higher level of removal used for more severe violations. I have deleted the edits in the mean time. Mfield (Oi!) 23:31, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'm surprised (and slightly sheepish) that I've never run across RFO. tedder (talk) 23:43, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

So, here's another one. It gives the first and last name of someone. It isn't as egregious as the BLP issue above. Does that mean it shouldn't go to RFO, but should to to the BLP noticeboard?

I haven't seen a lot of BLP violations, and it seems to be more libel/vandalism/NPA than true BLP, which is why I am asking for guidance. tedder (talk) 01:11, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for bringing this to admin attention. I have removed the offending revision per WP:OUTING which is the policy that covers the non revealing of personal information - especially of minors. Certainly a real name and an attended school is not a good combination. The BLP noticeboard would be the appropriate place for this kind of report too though yes, orAN/I. Mfield (Oi!) 01:19, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm glad you were around to take care of it so fast. Good to know. Cheers, tedder (talk) 01:24, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Suspicious user activities
Hi, I notice that User:Buggadugga appears to be an account with suspicious edits, such as vandalising vandalism warnings onUser:Ndish, creating a subpage that is borderline attack page (User:Buggadugga/Mary Dalrymple) or at least violating policy on biographies. Because these edits aren't outright vandalism, I haven't put any warning templates on User talk:Buggadugga yet. User:Ndish may be a sockpuppet or a borderline meatpuppet, along with other users Buggadugga has edited talk pages of. What is the normal course of action for these cases? Thanks.&mdash;Tetracube (talk) 21:18, 29 May 2009 (UTC)