User talk:Michael Essmeyer

Welcome to Wikipedia
 RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive' 03:43, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

May 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article.  « l | Promethean ™ | l »   (talk) 04:56, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. --ElKevbo (talk) 15:56, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Please do not add unsourced or original content. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ElKevbo (talk) 22:02, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Why the redundancy?
Yes, i know contract killing is murder. But, the difference between contract killing and murder is you when kill someone without monetary or financial gain that is murder. You kill someone because whatever your reason is. Contract killing, is different because you are hiring a professional assassin or a hit man to kill someone because it usually involved organized crime, political involved, and or gang related activity. Sometimes, the person doesn't want to get their own hands dirty. So, they try and hired someone. By, the way contract killing is a federal crime and murder is not unless it involved a murder of a federal government official, the murder crosses state lines, it happens on federal government property, and or it involved a federal crime.


 * A contract killing still requires a murder. You can't have a contract killing without a murder. The only difference will be in terms of burden of proof or sentencing. They are not seperate issues. Also, you keep listing what are considered lesser included crimes, like attempts or conspiracy. Listing robbery, then bank robbery and carjacking are redundant. All of them are a form of robbery: ie, taking of property by force or threat of force. Those info boxes are supposed to be quick, capsule views, not full paragraphs listing every possible criminal act. In reality, they should be things they are noted for (a signature crime if you will) or something very significant. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:05, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * BTW, most contract killings don't involve a professional and a significant number don't involve any organized crime organization. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:06, 6 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Let me ask you a better question: What federal crime is "contract killing"? Title 18, Part 1, Ch. 51 is Homicide. Underneath it (which means it falls under that purview) is s.1111- Murder,, s. 1112 Manslaughter, s. 1113- attempted murder, s.1117- conspiracy to commit murder etc. Where is "contract killing" listed as a completely seperate offense? Niteshift36 (talk) 15:20, 6 May 2010 (UTC)



There is my proof.
 * That does not list it as a seperate federal crime. That outlines the times that a MURDER can fall under federal jurisdiction. When they get to court, they're charged with murder, attempted murder, conspiracy to commit murder etc. There isn't a charge of "contract killing". Niteshift36 (talk) 15:25, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

 Any act of bribery, counterfeiting, theft, embezzlement, fraud, dealing in obscene matter, obstruction of justice, slavery, racketeering, gambling, money laundering, commission of murder-for-hire, and several other offenses covered under the Federal criminal code (Title 18); I am a democrat
 * Read what you quoted.......that is a predicate for RICO, not that it is a seperate crime. The contract goes to the predicate that there is conspiracy involved, making the RICO apply. It does NOT show it as a seperate crime.

Just for your edification, Danton was convicted of conspiracy to commit MURDER, not conspiracy to commit "contract killing". Niteshift36 (talk) 15:32, 6 May 2010 (UTC) "Danton is charged with conspiring and using a telephone across state lines to set up a murder. If convicted, faces up to 10 years in prison and fines up to $250,000 US on each of the two counts."  "former NHLer Mike Danton into their lineup after he served a five-year prison sentence for conspiracy to commit murder". 
 * "He and Wolfmeyer face federal criminal charges of conspiring and communicating across state lines for the purpose of plotting a murder."

Category of Organized crime
You have been tagging articles with Category:Organized crime, but the items or topics you have tagged are often used in unorganized crime, and in a legal manner. For instance, the Thompson submachine gun was used by police and military units much more often than by organized criminals. Tagging it as related to organized criminals seems to me to put the wrong twist on it. Binksternet (talk) 02:10, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Domestic terrorists in the United States
Category:Domestic terrorists in the United States, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Pichpich (talk) 00:00, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Outlaws Motorcycle Club
Please don't add lists of criminal accusations to the motorcycle club articles without citing a source. Thanks! --Dbratland (talk) 19:37, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:High School dropouts
A tag has been placed on Category:High School dropouts, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate,. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Nymf hideliho! 19:02, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:College dropouts
A tag has been placed on Category:College dropouts, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate,. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Nymf hideliho! 19:03, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

July 2010
Please do not add or change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to United Nations (gang). Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. &oelig; &trade; 19:53, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Categories and navigation templates
Hi, please don't add high level categories that have already applied via a more specific subcategory. Also, please don't add categories, navigation templates or edit templates for topics in witchcraft, magic and the occult as it appears you're unfamiliar with the more nuanced and/or sophisticated treatments of these subjects reflected in Wikipedia. By way of example, I'll offer that adding The Lord of the Rings to Template:Witchcraft is very nonconstructive. On the other hand, adding Category:Pseudoscience to Ghost Hunters might arguably be appropriate, in so far as the TV show portrays the activity (?), but the TV show per se is not a pseudoscience, one can't really characterize all ghost hunters as advocates of pseudoscience and... the two subjects can be a bit touchy in conjunction here on WP. I leave categorization to the old–timers myself; for what it's worth, that's what I'd advise in regard to witchcraft, magic and the occult. Thanks—Machine Elf 1735 (talk) 15:09, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

The Nine World War template
Hi Michael, I've removed this template from the World War II article again as it doesn't appear to be a particularly notable classification of World War II - from what I can tell it's limited to a single school textbook (which appears to be United States-specific). Rather than simply keep re-adding the template without explanation in an edit summary or elsewhere, can you please discuss this on the article's talk page? Thanks Nick-D (talk) 22:45, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I've also removed it from the World War I article for the same reasons. Nick-D (talk) 22:47, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Federal law enforcement agencies in Italy
A tag has been placed on Category:Federal law enforcement agencies in Italy requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for four days or more and it is not presently under discussion at Categories for discussion, or at disambiguation categories.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. --Enok (talk) 07:11, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:National law enforcement agencies of the Afghanistan
Category:National law enforcement agencies of the Afghanistan, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Pichpich (talk) 15:54, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:22, 24 November 2015 (UTC)