User talk:Orangemike/Archive 14

Unreferenced lists of former employees of television stations
Hello Michael, I took note a few minutes ago of an enthusiastic "pass" you made through an article I have on my watch list, Wingham, Ontario, removing those list entries from a section devoted to "notable" locals that have no pre-existing articles in the encyclopedia to substantiate them. In a similar vein; over the past month or so I have been attempting to clean up a fair number of U.S. and Canadian television station list entries containing alleged "notable former employees", that not only have no pre-existing articles to back them up; they have no sourcing associated with them whatsoever. At present, I have approximately eighty such articles on my watch list and have been systematically removing all unreferenced entries that do not have a reference or a pre-existing article. For the most part, other editors have been supportive of my endeavours; notable exceptions include a stable of sock puppets being run by an editor squatting on Chicago area station articles that has been subsequently "dealt with". One more recent occurrence, is centred on a couple of New Orleans area station articles, where; after I had taken the time to reduce the lists to only those entries supported by pre-existing articles; another editor deemed it necessary to restore all the material, without even the benefit of an explanatory edit summary. It's interesting to take note that when they performed that edit; they also simultaneously re-added completely unreferenced material that few would doubt was potentially highly libellous; see "Mike Longman" entry. Could you perhaps have a look at this particular "case" and maybe offer your personal opinion on my attempts to "pare down" these lists of former employees in these station articles in general? Thank you for your time. cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 19:16, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

User 75.139.111.29
I don't know if you read the user talk page of 75.139.111.29. If you have, do you have any opinion as to the warnings given to the user after the Sandbox accident?

P.S. First thought I recived when I viewed your photo was, "I should send this guy a crate of Florida Organges." LOL =D -- ℐℴℯℓ ℳ.   ℂℌAT ✐  21:52, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

TB (talkback, not tuberculosis)
- Dank (push to talk) 14:56, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Kindly take a look at this
Dear OrangeMike, I'll be grateful if you could handle this from here on. Mick Mulvaney is a client of Erin Febel (confirmed via linked twitter feeds), who is editing the page. A warning has been left on her talk page. Similarly, IP 67.197.214.253 belongs to a company (confirmed via WhoIs) which is a large donor to Mick Mulvaney. That IP too has been warned User talk:67.197.214.253. I'd prefer handing this over to you here on. Thanks and kind regards.  ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪    ―Œ  ♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣  06:27, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the message left on my talk page. With respect to the IP, the WhoIs traces it to Comporium Communications, one of the past donors to Mick Mulvaney's campaign. As the news is of two years ago, I did not know how to proceed except leave a warning note on the user's talk page with a note to CoI guideline. In Erinfebel's case, there is also an Erin Febel on twitter whose twitter messages talk about spending time at Mulvany's campaign headquarters, or joining his campaign etc. That is where I left it and came to you as I didn't want to do a wrong jump of conclusions. Warm regards.  ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪    ―Œ  ♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣  17:12, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, NetHope page
Thanks for adding the disclaimer at the top of the NetHope sandbox page. Can you move it to the NetHope page also now? Kris1490 (talk) 17:07, 11 August 2010 (UTC) Kris1490 (talk) 17:08, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again for your help Kris1490 (talk) 18:31, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

false accusation of sockpuppetry
After the false accusation issued] by User:Squash Racket (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Orangemike&diff=373091375&oldid=373080014#Squash_Racket), you placed the sockpuppetry tag on my user page.

I request CheckUser intervention to prove that I am innocent, or otherwise please eliminate that tag.

Thank you in advance!

Daccono —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daccono (talk • contribs) 14:42, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Blocking TSC Public Affairs
Hi. While I understand (and support) WP's prohibition on promotional usernames and conflict-of-interest edits, I wonder whether immediately blocking TSC Public Affairs was the right move. If TSC had merely updated the number of people on the various lists and added proper citations, we might well have seen that as useful and appropriate. Even the notes about political support were a useful, if clearly self-serving, addition. As for the username itself, I see that as welcome transparency, not something to be immediately shut down. Certainly, whoever created "TSC Public Affairs" is free to operate under a different name, one that will give no hint of his or her ties to the government agency. Finally, I suspect TSC Public Affairs is a relative newcomer to WP, if only because a more experienced editor would have known that uncited additions to an article on a controversial subject would draw fire.

I think the right approach here would be not to summarily block TSC Public Affairs, but to offer counsel about WP policy, especially conflict-of-interest and citation guildelines. Further misbehavior can always be tracked and punished. PRRfan (talk) 18:54, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I favor a strict zero tolerance policy on this kind of PR edits, and the spamming in this case was so shamelessly self-serving that I felt no qualms. "Public affairs" offices, by their very nature, tend to be staffed by the kind of people who have trouble comprehending the idea of actual neutral point of view, and treat any indulgence as a license to commit pressagentry and spindoctoring on their masters' behalf. By contrast, for a case where I've been helping the COI editor off-line and she is cleaning up her act, see User talk:Jcsee. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:59, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:WithdrawnVTJS/Idscoveri
Sorry about that - I recreated the article in user space to be improved there, after I deleted it in article space. I obviously failed to keep tabs on it and support dleting it now. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:44, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

the Chemung County Historical Society
the references have now been listed. it is not a conflict of interest, the society exists, it has members and there was not an article pertaining to the society already on Wikipedia, also i am not part of this organization nor am i trying to promote it. it is a non-profit organization, they run the Chemung valley museum and booth library (also non-profit). i just noticed what is and what is not acceptable for sources. the sources i listed are not deemed acceptable by Wikipedia-however these sources are all that exists for information pertaining to the Chemung County Historical Society, prior to reviewing them i could not have produced the article in question-no other sources exist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cchs.1836 (talk • contribs) 15:18, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * If there are no reliable sources, then it can be argued that the Society is simply not notable enough to have an article in this encyclopedia. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:50, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * this is true, however an argument has more than one side. this subject is notable because it has refurbished a building on the national register of historical places, accreditation from the American association for museums and other various awards, and runs an archive that citizens can use for research and a museum that is open to the public.
 * there are other articles on this site that use sources similar to mine (things that they published), i wish to know why there articles have not been moderated---
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhode_Island_Historical_Society
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brunswick_Historical_Society
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Antiquarian_Society
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newport_Historical_Society

if my article is not notable enough for wikipedia, then why does it seem that these are. i know that you are one person and can only review so many articles but these links have been on wikipedia for quite some time-there are four pages, for some reason only two will show up, the two unlisted are the brunswick historical society, and the newport historical society. i am not attempting to suggest the deletion of other articles, i just do not feel that it is right that my article is removed when these articles and articles such as this exist: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silly_Bandz —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cchs.1836 (talk • contribs) 16:03, 17 August 2010 (UTC) — Cchs.1836 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * 1. I did not propose the deletion of that article; some other editor did. Please actually read my contributions to the discussion, which include adding a "rescue" tag to the article itself!
 * 2. It is not your article; it is an article you started and have worked on. Nobody "owns" an article in Wikipedia.
 * 3. "Look at these other articles!" is not an argument for the retention of any particular article, though it may be an argument for the deletion of the other one(s).
 * 4. Silly Bandz are much better known in modern America than this historical society. You and I may not find them notable, but many children, retailers and merchandisers do; thus, you and I must deal with it. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  14:45, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

ok sorry i did not know you didnt post for deletion, im still learning the basic features of this site, i started the article as a project for a museum im working for to get community service hours. i know that i dont own the article, but my comment included multiple articles and i didnt want any confusion by saying -the- article, as for the "Look at these other articles!"  thing, i didnt know that existed, hmmm, not knowing something exists is what started all this, i dont have an account so prior to the article in question, the only thing i have edited are typos. as for the silly bands thing, i just threw that in for a bit of humor, to say- im not mad or anything, but this took me a while to make and i wrote a three page paper on summer vacation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.238.203.201 (talk) 11:30, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Starship Troopers
I agree with your position to keep the segment in, keep up the good work.Wowaconia (talk) 02:25, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Help Please
Hi User:Orangemike,

I was communicating with User:Tnxman307, and he encouraged me to talk to you. I saw that you recently made positive changes to the New Jersey Manufacturers Insurance Company page. I know I have several things that have to be changed as noted in the information box above the article. Do you have any specific suggestions, other than wikify? I am new to the Wikipedia world; and am trying to edit the article as closely as I can within the Wikipedia guidelines. However, I still seem to be having trouble with understanding specifics that needed to be changed. Also, I thought the notability of the company was proven in the provided references. I appreciate your help. Thanks, 12.26.42.10 (talk) 19:34, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Christopher Herrod
Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Christopher Herrod. The community has decided that all new biographies of living persons must contain a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article as per our verifiability policy. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:10, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Christopher Herrod
Without any verification that he was a state senator, there was a question of whether the person is notable.  Active  Banana   (  bananaphone

User:LINKELS Josy
Hey OrangeMike, I was thinking about talking to you about LINKELS Josy‎, looking through his history and Contribs I think this user does not speak English at all and is using something like Google translator to translate everything he contributes, French seems to be his native tongue. I posted on the content board not sure where else to post asking what should be done about most of his contributions since they all seem to be about the same person with no references or not coherent. Is our only option to go to each page and individually undo each of his edits over the past year? - Mcmatter (talk|contrib) 15:07, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * He seems to be self-advertising; so yeah, I'd say we're gonna have to despam every article he's been inserting himself into. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:12, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok sounds good, I didn't want to be too bold over a language barrier, thank you for your quick reply - Mcmatter (talk|contrib) 15:15, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Back in October, he seems to have machine-translated the entire Changing username/Simple page as of that moment into French, and substituted the machine translation for the then-current text! -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:16, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Nice that was obviously caught earlier, he has previous warnings on his talk page he translated but I couldn't recover them when I added the nowikis to his page, to make the newer ones appear properly. Whats the standard practice to deal with a user like this? This is the first time I ran into a non-english delinquent on en.wikipedia. - Mcmatter (talk|contrib) 15:31, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Business Plot
Your edit tag stated "the spelling in here would embarass a clever 11th-grader"; the correct spelling is "embarrass". In the future please aid the project by correcting spelling errors instead of merely adding a clean-up tag while trying to be witty.--76.17.147.126 (talk) 02:17, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The misspelling was a clumsy efffort at humor; the tag was because I didn't have time to fix the whole thing at that point (I've finally gotten my watchlist down below 10,000 articles again). -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  17:21, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Request for assistance
(i am posting this request on your page and on one other admins, i hope thats not forum shopping, as im not asking you to "vote" on the afd) I have noted your work at various locations, you seem like a smart, level headed person. Could you look at Gabriel Cousens, an article with some potentially libelous content which is being disputed for its reliability. article has an afd going, with at least 2 issues: notability of course, and a request from the subject for deletion of the article as a repository for libelous content. I "voted" to keep (based only on my interpretation of my searches), but that was before Mr. Cousens weighed in. I dont know procedure for that request, and subject is not so obviously notable that we cant consider it. I will support consensus, but would also like to know what happens next. I have not edited the article, preferring someone else not so involved to look at it, but my inclination is to immediately remove the controversial content, and delete the record of it-but im not 100% certain this is right.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 16:28, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Brandeis article
Hey Mike, Earlier in the summer as you recall we had this correspondence:

If this is true, please find a reliable source. Amazon is notoriously a venue for spamming, vanity insertions, and general mishegoss. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:47, 13 July 2010 (UTC) We need an impartial third party, such as a book or magazine article; not a Brandeis U. source. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:40, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Here's that third party: http://aldf.org/article.php?id=1441 (see the blurb at the bottom). I don't want this to seem like an editing war... do you want to revert your reversion? Thanks!Goingforthetruth (talk) 22:16, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, it's not an edit war; but that little squib at the bottom of the article is a fairly weak source. I'd think a claim like that ought to be easier to back up. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:11, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I think all these sources, some of them legit, really add up. But that aside, the publication at least deserves mention in the Brandeis entry alongside other student life mentionings.Goingforthetruth (talk) 11:28, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Edit filter false positives
I was wondering, is this a template: "Yet another bogus report by a thwarted and incompetent vandal." I'm not sure if you type that, or if it's a template. Endofskull (talk) 00:02, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Nope, just my own words, cut and pasted. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:14, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, alright. Thanks! Endofskull (talk) 01:00, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Please fix your plagiarism of SignPost article about plagiarism for a law project against plagiarism.
The copied part, written by User:TomasBat, User:HaeB, User:Ottre, User:Amorymeltzer, and User:Tony1 in the 2010-05-19t04:39:46z version in the SignPost article:

"Vargas Aignasse presented a law project to increase sanctions against those who commit plagiarism. But in the project proposal, to define plagiarism, he copied 331 words from the Spanish Wikipedia article on the topic (es:plagio), without any kind of attribution. The copy-pasted text even includes square brackets from the (only partially removed) footnotes in the Wikipedia article.

It wasn't the first time that Aignasse copied text from Wikipedia into law proposals. In a proposal to prohibit barra bravas from travelling to South Africa for the World Cup, he copied 314 words from the corresponding article.

A week later the Deputy admitted in an interview with Clarín that he copied the text from Wikipedia, and that he had done it before. Nevertheless, he argued that he had no obligation to cite the source, which could be considered ironic given the fact that the Deputy's law proposal seeks, precisely, to punish those who don't cite sources.

The incident was"

which you copied to Gerónimo Vargas Aignasse 2 days later on 2010-05-21t15:37:56z:

"Vargas Aignasse presented a law project to increase sanctions against those who commit plagiarism. But in the project proposal, to define plagiarism, he copied 331 words from the Spanish Wikipedia article on the topic (es:plagio), without any kind of attribution. The copy-pasted text even includes square brackets from the (only partially removed) footnotes in the Wikipedia article.

It wasn't the first time that Aignasse copied text from Wikipedia into law proposals. In a proposal to prohibit barra bravas from travelling to South Africa for the World Cup, he copied 314 words from the corresponding article.

A week later the Deputy admitted in an interview with Clarín that he copied the text from Wikipedia, and that he had done it before. Nevertheless, he argued that he had no obligation to cite the source, which could be considered ironic given the fact that the Deputy's law proposal seeks, precisely, to punish those who don't cite sources.

The incident was"

Please see Plagiarism on how to fix it.

The license used on Wikipedia, Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License, also requires attribution. -- Jeandré, 2010-08-25t17:49z
 * Attribution in edit summary performed; thanks for pointing this out to me. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:16, 25 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't see it in the article's history log. Was it done somewhere else? -- Jeandré, 2010-08-26t05:44z


 * Bump. -- Jeandré, 2010-08-29t14:19z

RE: Chahal Jats
Hi fellow editor, I have done a bit of a hatchet job on Chahal Jats, as most of it was unsubstatiated gibberish. If I had my way, I would remove all these surname related articles on wikipedia. Thanks --Sikh- History 14:55, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Clarion Category
There is a call for deletion for the newly created category Clarion Writers' Workshop. Care to weigh in?Shsilver (talk) 15:53, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for standing up for the Clarion Workshop category
... At this entry on the page. I was beginning to feel a little discouraged. Artemis-Arethusa (talk) 20:17, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I suspect strong prejudice against SF on the part of the original nominator, but then I always suspect strong prejudice against SF in these cases, for historically sound reasons. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  20:20, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

FYI
See this (Bill Thomas (writer). Dabomb87 (talk) 23:24, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Arctic2012
I haven't had any luck getting User:Arctic2012 to contact me or discuss anything. Obvious conflict of interest of some sort. Fred Talk 07:19, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Jeffrey Vinokur
You might want to look at this AFD, the author dug up some sources. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 21:21, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Help With Clean Up
hey orange mike, i have written an article "todd white- artist" and was hoping that i could continue getting some feedback from you. you're the only editor who has provided much advice thus far, so thank you for that. my article was tagged as the author having a personal connection or relationship with the subject which i would like removed. i am simply an art enthusiast and free lance writer. i'm not trying to promote anyone on wikipedia i can assure you. i was well aware before i started the article that kind of writing was cause for deletion. i'm merely trying to provide the details of high points in this artist career- details which are facts which i have backed up with what i hope you'll find to be reliable sources at this point. specifically however, the sentence referencing the limited edition US postage stamps, you clearly weren't a fan of. i think it's a really interesting fact about his work and certainly worth mentioning. that truth was covered in several press releases produced by warner bros. and the stamps can still found on several websites for purchase....although i'm guessing using that as a reference won't help my case for "promoting the artist"! :) can you offer an additional idea.  i would really like to keep this information as part of the article.  i tried to make a few edits this evening i think you'll appreciate.  please keep me posted!  thanks so much. LindsayCervarich (talk) 06:07, 1 September 2010 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by LindsayCervarich (talk • contribs) 06:04, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Help move a page from user space
Hello, can you please take a look at my page and let me know what you think about it, and if i can now move it to published articles space? thanks this is my page: User:Sazarian/EVER_TEAM. --Sazarian (talk) 16:05, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

COI
I marked the talk page of User:Humber Marketing & Communications  as potential COI and his/her only edited article Humber College similarly. Looks a lot more blatant than User:Greenbankliverpool  whom you quite rightly took action against a few minutes ago. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk 14:59, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

On another page, someone removed a contributing editor tag saying more evidence was needed. Okay. Would you think a contributing editor tag listing you might be appropriate in that instance? --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 00:51, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I live in Wisconsin; I read books; I'm a library user; I have GLBT friends and family; I'm a First Amendment advocate. On the other hand, I couldn't find West Bend without a map, and never go near it voluntarily. None of these constitutes a "personal connection" in any way I can think of. Do you disagree? -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  01:04, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Nope. Thanks.  I see no COI there based on the above.  --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 01:50, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Tags
I got your message about signing off on talk pages. Sorry for the error on my part. I also noticed some additional edits to the Todd White- artist page, but there was no response to my request about removing the tags. The original request is below under "help with clean up". Your feedback on the matter would be greatly appreciated. Thanks again- look forward to hearing from you. LindsayCervarich (talk) 18:25, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * 1. PLEASE LEAVE YOUR MESSAGE AT THE BOTTOM, NOT THE TOP, OF THE PAGE!!!!
 * 2. Please, please, please: read WP:CITE and WP:RS; both Art News Today and Art Business News sound like iffy sources. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  22:11, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

User:Amglondon potential spammer
Can you check this users contributions: and see what you think. Thanks. Active Banana   (  bananaphone  13:34, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mike, my name is Paul Slinger and I work for the PR agency Edelman. I am sending this note on behalf of my client, Rashed who works at Mubadala. His IP address has been blocked from posting. Please kindly see the note below.

Many thanks, Paul --

Dear Mike, My name is Rashed Alharmoodi, and I work in the communications department for Mubadala, a large business based in Abu Dhabi which holds interests in companies like GE, Ferrari, and others. Mubadala greatly values Wikipedia and the contributions from editors like you who have created one of the world's most important information sources. We also recognise and appreciate that Wikipedia is a resource shaped by the community, and that there are clear rules against corporate participation, self-interested edits, and conflict-of-interest edits. As you have noticed, I have been attempting to engage with the Wikipedia community openly and transparently to suggest some purely factual changes to the entry about Mubadala, in the spirit on ensuring that it is as accurate as possible. After several months of attempts, I recently resorted to making some of the most pressing edits myself as it did not appear that anyone from the Wikipedia community was particularly engaged with the entry. We did so only after first posting a request to the entry's discussion page and attempting to directly contact the one editor who had been active in the entry in recent months. (You can see it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:NerdyScienceDude) I realise that you have now reverted the changes that I made, and also blocked my username from making any further edits. With all of that in mind, I would very much appreciate it if you could suggest the most appropriate means for connecting with someone in the Wikipedia community and asking them to consider the changes that I have suggested. I would be very grateful for your advice. Sincerely, Rashed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.96.71.137 (talk) 17:15, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

User:Adamwantsanuke
Hi Orangemike, could you explain why this user was blocked as result of their username? I don't quite understand how it could be perceived as offensive; perhaps I'm missing something.  Giftiger Wunsch   [TALK]  13:30, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm especially confused that you told the user that their username is a vulgarism...  Giftiger Wunsch   [TALK]  13:31, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

"Adam Wants A Nookie" or maybe "Wants-a Nookie"? The editor's only edits had been to create an "I rock, dude!" autobiography of a teenager named Adam Peake with no assertion of any kind of notability whatsoever. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  13:35, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It seems more likely that it's simply "Adam wants a nuke", surely? In any case, I don't think this could be called a blatant username policy violation.  Giftiger Wunsch   [TALK]  13:36, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I've been reading so much transcribed Japanese recently that I was pronouncing it in my head like a Japanese-American name: Adam Wantsanuke. Block is to be removed. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  13:42, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Heh, that's definitely the best reason I've heard for blocking a username so far ;) Thanks for taking a second look.  Giftiger Wunsch   [TALK]  13:45, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Re: John Madigan
Hey OrgangeMike. Almost as soon as I'd made an edit, you were asking about it! I'm not aware of the official results you refer to; but you can [|read my reasoning] if you'd like. —Felix the Cassowary 19:33, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I was going by http://www.abc.net.au/elections/federal/2010/guide/svic-results.htm -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  20:13, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

If you have a moment
If you could check out something - there was a PuI listed on August 23 (Possible derivative uploads by User:83d40m) that became very lengthy. I noticed today that the nom had self closed the discussion and re-listed. There is no link from the old discussion to the re-listed discussion, only to a "new" archive of the old discussion as the editor removed the entire discussion - they simply cut and pasted it to the "archive" location. The "archive" discussion also does not include a link to the "re-listed" version. Under today's Pui discussions there is a listing that says ''Relisted from August 23. See the subpage discussion at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/Florida uploads by User:83d40m.'' I am not sure why this was re-listed, it may have to with the nominators Rfa and the Oppose opinion voiced by User:83d40m. The process of self-closing/re-listing/cut and pasting the entire Pui discussion seems out of place, so I am here asking you for your opinion on the matter. Soundvisions1 (talk) 16:12, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Travis Bean
Hi Mike, I noticed you've made a couple of reverts and such with the Travis Bean article. Not sure what you know about the page, but the new models that are being added aren't actually Travis Bean guitars, but a knock off from germany basically using the page for advertising. Do you have any advice on how to deal this this? hellboy (talk) 22:29, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete 'em, with a full explanation in the edit summary. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  12:56, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia Sources
Many thanks for providing the authority as to not using other Wikipedia articles as sources. I guess what I must do, in circumstances where I believe there is complementary information in another article that merits reading along with the current article, is a "see also" reference? It seems to me that points in certain Wikipedia articles merit being read together--such as an article on an album by an arist, where there are related details in the article on the particular artist. Does this seem reasonable--referencing another Wikipedia article as complementary or supplementary, rather than as an authoritative source in itself?

Dreadarthur (talk) 14:51, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * That's what wikilinks are for: to lead the reader to another article on a related topic. I see "See also" sections as a confession that prior editors have failed to properly integrate the related information into an article. If there is useful information in another article, that information has to have come from some cited reliable source. Cite the original reliable source, not the Wikipedia article which relied on that source. If the article on Fred Btflspk says he wrote the lyrics for the album Milwaukee Nights while riding a dromedary through the streets of Ulan Bator, don't reference the Wikipedia article on Fred Btflspk in the Wikipedia article about the album, reference the source which the Wikipedia article on Fred Btflspk cites for that assertion. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:15, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

"gratuitous pseudo-logo"
I wonder if you will be removing File:Wikipedia wordmark.svg from Wikipedia as well? – xeno talk  16:14, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Jefferson Prep
I have seen that you work a lot with new spammy corporate articles and I trust your expertise. Can you take a look at this one and see what you think? Thanks!Active Banana   (  bananaphone  17:51, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Tang Sou Dao
Hi, you deleted a page I created for the British Martial Art, Tang Sou Dao. Please check out these links and see if you agree if these refernces are sufficient to show it meets the notability requirement: [] [] [] Or just google "Tang Sou Dao". Cheers, The Yowser (talk) 14:06, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * 1. I didn't delete it.
 * 2. Nope. You've got a) a commercial website; b) an article (from that well-regarded center of sterling journalism, The Sun) about another subject altogether, in which a guy who teaches TSD says good things about it; and c) another commercial website. No hint of notability. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  14:14, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

RealBigSwede apoligize
I'm truly sorry I was naeeve and dumb I did not understand how the wiki was working I*t will never happen again.... -- RealBigSwede (talk) 14:08, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Dennis Nackord

 * Hi, as the Webmaster involved has followed a reasonable process via OTRS of addressing copyright, I suggest the article is userfied for them to resolve and seek advice on the G11 issues. Re-deleting without giving opportunity for improvement appears rather harsh (similar note raised on the undeletions page). Fæ (talk) 11:02, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * As long as the spam is not retained in article space. Frankly, I saw nothing salvageable there. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  17:29, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * As long as the spam is not retained in article space. Frankly, I saw nothing salvageable there. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  17:29, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Miscellany for deletion/Secret pages 2
Because you participated in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Some Person/The Real Secret Page and Secret Barnstar, you may be interested in Miscellany for deletion/Secret pages 2. Cunard (talk) 06:27, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

New Clarion pages
I've started the following list pages, on the idea that the various Clarion workshop pages were getting too cluttered with names and should probably be pared down to a prominent few. I'm not sure I'll have the time, or sufficient knowledge of who should be kept on the main pages. Since you've had an interest in the Clarion workshop pages, I thought I'd let you know: Artemis-Arethusa (talk) 17:37, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * List of Clarion Writers Workshop Alumni
 * List of Clarion Writers Workshop Instructors
 * List of Clarion West Writers Workshop Instructors
 * List of Clarion West Writers Workshop Alumni
 * List of Clarion South Writers Workshop Instructors
 * List of Clarion South Writers Workshop Alumni

Re: Why would I be "crypto-"?
Oy gevalt. Happy to help. -- Rrburke (talk) 21:44, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Clerk elections
Hi, this is just to inform you that elections for Clerkship at WP:UAA have started on the talk page. You have been sent this message because you were recently active in handling submissions or discussions. Discussion is ongoing and you are encouraged to voice your opinion on the candidates.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Fridae'sDoom (talk) at 06:46, 14 September 2010 (UTC).

SEO 2.0 Resubmission
BrendaBooker (talk) 22:05, 14 September 2010 (UTC)BrendaBooker Please see User:BrendaBooker/SEO 2.0 for recreation of article with no ulterior motives.

User talk:Xxxxxcanmanxxxxx
This is out of hand. The user in question added two inappropriate links, one to Beverage can at 17:51 on 14 September and one to Scooby-Doo at 17:54 on 14 September. Both were reverted and I warned the user at 18:03. (uw-spam1)

With no further edits by the user, warning #2 was given at 21:19 14 September by Orange Mike, warning #3 at 21:19 14 September by Orange Mike and a final warning at 8:04 15 September by TeleComNasSprVen.

I am reverting warnings 2, 3 and 4. If either of you are unhappy with my action, feel free. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:44, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Globus family of brands
You posted a message on My Talk regarding the Globus family of brands article I submitted, confirming (I think) the article's speedy deletion citing a "conflict of interest." Please note that every bit of information in the article was sourced by reputable third-party editorial resources (as indicated by the sourcing throughout the piece). I encourage you to click through on each source to see that all information provided is done so in an unbiased manner.

Given this, I have requested that the article be restored (I'm asking you and I have asked JamesBWatson and Yousou). Please assist with this in any way you deem fit. And, if you have further suggestions for making the article more neutral (again, after clicking through the resources provided), I would be interested to hear your thoughts.

It would also be helpful to get your insight on how this article differs from other travel companies on Wikipedia: Hilton Hotels, The Travel Corporation, Starwood, Carnival Cruise Lines, Uniworld, Etc.)

Thank you for your time, consideration and suggestions. (Melaniegravdal (talk) 15:58, 15 September 2010 (UTC)) — Melaniegravdal (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * 1. I notice you don't address the question of your blatant conflict of interest, which is all over the internet anyway. Your editing history shows no effort to do anything in Wikipedia but publicize Globus and Avalon.
 * 2. Lines like "setting a new standard in small ship cruising" do not make it easy to pretend that you are not trying to write an advertisement here. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:06, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

RE:COI board Globus
Due to my watchlist, I already saw it. Thanks for the notification anyway.

Many Regards, Yousou (talk) 16:19, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi OM, can I request a userified copy of that article? I will modify my "user-friendly" explanation and leave it for the COI user, which should explain exactly what the problems are with the Globus articles. Not being able to see the deleted ones, I can't cut/paste some of the more obvious promo language. Thanks! Arakunem Talk 16:43, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Elevator photography
I am not advertising anything! It is a real hobby that more than 300 people in the US ALONE do. I don't know why you call it advertising. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Airplanegod (talk • contribs) 20:20, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * In other words, approximately one of every million Americans does it. Take a look at the wording, then read WP:UPANDCOMING and WP:CRYSTAL. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  21:07, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Ok, Fine. So, when is it going to get deleted? Airplanegod (talk) 23:17, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Controversy Section on Jeffrey Hyland's page
Hi there OrangeMike. I'm not really sure how I'm going to start getting this section resolved. There's a part in this article section that I thought does not seem to have a NPOV. The first sentence that says "In April of 2006 Hyland sold a 16-acre estate in Malibu to Teodoro Nguema Obiang Mangue, a highly controversial political leader and the quasi-prince of Equatorial Guinea. There's a reference article but reading through it, I've found some points in contrary to what the section editor tried to put out. There's a part in the article that said ""the malibu city or organization didn't know who was the buyer either", so if the city didn't know about it, then that only means Jeff knew less, or no clue at all. How do I go about this? 'just wanna do it right. I'd truly appreciate your inputs. Thanks very much. Jxc5 (talk) 16:25, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Talk:20** in Afghanistan
Hi Orangemike,

I've re-added the deleted talk pages Talk:2010 in Afghanistan and Talk:2009 in Afghanistan without contacting the deleting admin. I fully admit that this was mistakes on my part; what's more, I should know better.

This message popped up when I began to edit Talk:2008 in Afghanistan: A page with this title has previously been deleted. If you are creating a new page with different content, please continue. If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the deleting administrator using the information provided below. 22:24, 1 December 2009 Orangemike (talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:2008 in Afghanistan" ‎ (G8: Talk page of a deleted page) So, now I'm doing the right thing. 2008 in Afghanistan has a page. I'm contacting the admin that deleted the talk page. Is it OK with you if I re-start Talk:2008 in Afghanistan?--Shirt58 (talk) 13:28, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, of course; the prior version was the talkpage of a non-article; now there's an article. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  13:40, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Heaven On Earth (jazz band) mess
With that page creator scattering duplicate pages across the wiki, I thought it would be easier to find all the dupes and clean up the mess by redirecting them to a single page. I hope that made it easier than harder, but I stand to be corrected. Best regards,  T RANSPORTER M AN  ( TALK ) 14:16, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * There was a single spammer, so I just followed his/her edits. It's all good, man.

User names, Japanese, Vulgarisms
Hi OrangeM

This prolific and highly respected editor's username is mild vulgarism in very slangy Japanese, as he himself admits. I see no problem at all there, tho. --Shirt58 (talk) 12:44, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Mourant Ozannes article
Hi Orangemike, I declined the speedy deletion request for the above article as its claim that it is "the world's third largest offshore law firm and the largest in the Channel Islands" would be a claim to significance/importance.

However, I have PROD'd it, as I can't find evidence that they meet the notability guidelines.

Regards, --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 14:45, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Heaven on Earth jazz band back
Through new account User_talk:Heavenonearthindonesia to avoid your block, new article Heaven On Earth Jazz Band and already deleted Heaven on earth indonesia. Regards,  T RANSPORTER M AN  ( TALK ) 18:38, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Relapse board game
Thank you for deleting Relapse board game. I thought myself it should be deleted, but decided to put a "proposed for deletion" tag on it instead of deleting it outright just on the chance the article might have some hope (although I fully expected it to get deleted in the end). I guess it was all the better it was deleted so soon. J I P &#124; Talk 15:47, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Just a question re. the revertion of my edit
Hi, just wanted to have it clarified (to know for again) in what way it was not constructive - I had edited my own comment. (ref. to discussion about illustrations on cum shot). 62.254.133.139 (talk) 18:00, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No, you edited a comment by a totally different IP, 82.18.164.15. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:07, 22 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry I don't know why that is happening, I'll leave it as it is. But I am the same user. It is allocating me two different IPs. one beginning with 62. and one beginning with 82. 62.254.133.139 (talk) 18:39, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Bruce "Grim" Rhodes
Can you please un-delete the page so I can add references to Billboard, and other sites that will verify for you that this man really did produce these albums and sold over 1.9 million copies? Thanks.

Elitefirm (talk) 18:33, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Draft articles should be created in a sandbox like User:Elitefirm/GrimRhodes. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:35, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Harrison Nash
Hello Orangemike. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Harrison Nash, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article claims coverage in reliable sources. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 22:45, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Harrison Nash
Twinkle didn't finish the nomination. Fixed for you. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 00:16, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Marie Rutkoski
Hello Orangemike. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Marie Rutkoski, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''PROF is enough for A7. Take to AfD if required.''' Thank you. Ged UK  09:36, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Tau Epsilon Phi
Essentially you banned me the actual employee of Tau Epsilon Phi. The individual that should have been banned was Nate3k and Teps4justice. They have no affiliation with the organization. Please assist.

To Whom it May Concern,

My name is Clinton Hasenberg and I am the Director of Communications for Tau Epsilon Phi Fraternity, Inc. I am writing to you as an official representative of Tau Epsilon Phi National Fraternity, Inc. regarding the entry in Wikipedia located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tau_Epsilon_Phi.

The information that is being listed on the site is lacking in accuracy and legitimacy. I recently established an account TEPNational with Wikipedia to address the issues at hand and remove the inaccurate statements. Each time that the statements are removed by me they are placed back on the entry.

Tau Epsilon Phi is a non-profit fraternal organization. The information about our organization is constantly changing. The citations referenced on several of the Wikipedia headings are from over three years ago. As a matter of fact, the individual(s) posting this information represent themselves with the login as TEPs4justice and Nate3K. The individual currently posting this information is currently under litigation for Trademark infringement and other charges such as posting defamatory statements about Tau Epsilon Phi as well as its board of directors.

The individual(s) posting this slanted information is using Wikipedia a division of Wikimedia as a forum for misrepresentation and posting incomplete and erroneous information.

Please examine, the heading Broughty v Hassenberg. Usage of such heresay statements as “determine its fate”, “is being charged” and “will decide the fate of TEP” are not statements of fact but rather statements of opinion. The entire heading itself is self-serving to the poster and not factual in nature.

The heading Grand Chapter is also completely erroneous and inaccurate. The information regarding our internal corporate bylaws is not public information. It is not posted anywhere and not subject to interepatation by someone posting such information that may or may not even be a member of our organization. This heading needs to be completely removed.

The Grand Council and NCCM headings are also outdated and inaccurate and need to be removed. The reference to www.archive.org is only a small snapshot in time in this instance 2005 and 2007 respectively. The paragraph under the heading was written in the present tense as though everything “is” the way it is described. This makes the entire heading false and without merit.

As the official Director of Communications for Tau Epsilon Phi National Fraternity, Inc. I humbly ask Wikimedia to please delete those headings I have referred to as well as place an edit freeze on the Tau Epsilon Phi Wikipedia entry located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tau_Epsilon_Phi.

This will allow our organization to read through the current content and publish factual information about our alive organization and trademarked name Tau Epsilon Phi Fraternity Inc.

The Wikimedia vision statement states Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment.

The Wikipedia entry defines knowledge as expertise, and skills acquired by a person through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject; (ii) what is known in a particular field or in total; facts and information; or (iii) awareness or familiarity gained by experience of a fact or situation.

Please observe the desire for Wikipedia to freely share in knowledge. Knowledge is factual in nature based on expertise or skills acquired by a person through experience or education. With that being said statements of opinion such as those I described above by individual(s) who may or may not be members, are damaging to our 100 year organizational reputation.

I look forward to your assistance in this matter.

Sincerely,

Clinton Hasenberg Director of Communications Tau Epsilon Phi National Fraternity, Inc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.45.145.18 (talk) 15:06, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Information.svg|25px]] Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Tau Epsilon Phi, you may have a conflict of interest.  In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:


 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:10, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Exclaimer


Hey, this user has appealed their block on unblock-en-l. I have explained the corpname issue, but after looking at the draft article she was working on, I am not satisfied that it meets G11. COI issues aside, can you elaborate on exactly what problems you had with the article content? Thanks, --Chris (talk) 18:28, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Aside from the obvious promotional intent as indicated by the user's name and identity, I was particularly unimpressed by the line "received awards for Microsoft compatibility, including "Works with Windows Server 2008 R2"." Calling something like that an "award" is a pretty telling sign. The "article" in general is mostly a product line listing, and the "sources" primarily press releases. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  14:06, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the information. If I ever get a reply from the user I will raise those issues.  --Chris (talk) 19:00, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Alastair Galpin
Hi again! I loved your reply at this AFD and was wondering if you had further witticisms or insights since the article rescue attempt. JJB 06:52, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism- please help or get out of the way
I have not ever written any other editor with such anger or even expressed it before and this is personal. If someone else has "vandalized" IMO the Ron Holloway talk page, it was the person who had very negative things to say in a very public manner. Being unwilling to contact the other offender, since half the time, when they use the IP address it's a waste of time, I chose to blank out the offensive and sexist comments about myself. NOW I strongly suspect it is you but again-- you are a waste of time. I, on the other hand, do know Ron Holloway. I have known him for 30 years but we are not buddies. When I saw his first mistakes on his own Wikipedia page, I contacted him, and adopted him as a new editor, but his travels with various bands have led to little contact and after a discussion with him online today, I offered to help again, and saw the blasphemy on his talk page. SHAME on you for calling yourself a "Senior Editor", seeing a needy article like that and instead of rolling up your sleeves, leaving filth on a talk page. I am not a novice and I spend my time doing my best to assist this encylopedia rather than defame it. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 21:45, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The filth was put on that page by some anonymous vandal, not by me. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  19:58, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * So do you think it was appropriate to give Leah a vandalism warning? Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 23:45, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No. I hereby deeply apologize, Leah. I did not notice that the material you'd deleted from the talk page was grossly inappropriate and vilely sexist; I only saw the deletion of language from a talk page, a perennial problem in an article that draws controversy. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:30, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Sonja Blue
Hello again, … FYI, Articles for deletion/Sonja Blue … I noticed that you tried to Prod it. Happy Editing! &mdash;  03:35, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you
I appreciate the apology- it was a real surprise to see that crap on a talk page, in part, because I really don't interact with more than a dozen editors on a regular basis, preferring cleanup work on musician's biographical pages while I plod along on a handful of other articles I edit and add photographs and the like. I can't imagine how I could have pissed anybody off.. and I know it wasn't Ron Holloway. Which brings me to ask: what to do about his article? When I first noticed his edits I was too new to adopt anyone, although I got permission from User:Aleta at the time, who was an Admin. He clearly has a wealth of references that can be inserted into a well-written article, but he hasn't been good at learning simple things like inline referencing and his "armchair discussion" approach to "his story" is contrary to an encyclopedia. He kept promising finally to contact me in person just because he freaks out at the POV tags all over the thing. I've been trying to prune it a bit, but something must give-- and he is a notable musician with a BLP! --Leahtwosaints (talk) 18:44, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Hey
-- HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   01:25, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Q
Should Twistermister be denied access to their own talk page? It seems to me that editing it is merely an excuse to drop obscenities in edit summaries. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 04:19, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Re: Inception
Adding an unreferenced tag to a plot section isn't unheard of, but it is unusual. What's the problem and how can I help solve it? Viriditas (talk) 06:47, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * See the interminable discussion at Talk:Regulate (song). -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:36, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Chandra Lee Schwartz
Please revert your speedy deletion of this article. Since when was coverage in the Houston Chronicle not an indication of importance/significance, along with the many other readily available sources? Phil Bridger (talk) 21:32, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Those articles are about Wicked not about the actress. Why not create something more substantive in a sandbox before recreating this semi-unsourced BLP? -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  22:25, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Why not restore an article that doesn't qualify for speedy deletion and let our normal collaborative editing processes work? I have no interest in writing an article about this subject, but do have an interest in building this encyclopedia, rather than in disrupting such building. And did you really check that all of those 128 sources are about Wicked rather than the actress? If so I have to commend you on your record-breaking speed-reading ability. Phil Bridger (talk) 22:47, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm unconvinced, but you're a good, solid editor, so I've restored it at your request, Phil. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  03:00, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

See
this. I hope this was not your intention. I don't have anything else to add except that you may wish to revise your comment further. Regards, Ncmvocalist (talk) 06:05, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Within the context, I feel that the characterization was not out of line, but a description of his behavior. I will accept your criticism. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:10, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:User pages
You previously participated in an RfC about vandalism spaces. There is an RfC about them at Wikipedia talk:User pages. Cunard (talk) 19:22, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Alexandra Powers Photos
A photo of Alexandra Powers is needed on her wikipedia page. Would any of this pictures be acceptable?: http://www.aveleyman.com/ActorCredit.aspx?ActorID=14027 http://www.tvspielfilm.de/stars/star/alexandra-powers,1571496,ApplicationGallery.html?page=5 http://www.flixster.com/actor/alexandra-powers Please let me know if any of these photos are acceptable for her wikipedia page. Thanks! Neptunekh2 (talk) 00:46, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * All of those are copyrighted. You would have to find us a non-copyrighted photograph, or one whose creator is willing to license under a suitable Creative Commons license. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  13:35, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Saul Hertz comment
Hi Orangemike,

I'm interested in your concerns regarding the Saul Hertz article. Can you share them with me so I can work on addressing them? Thanks Jabrody24 (talk) 13:54, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * For the footnotes, see Wikipedia:CITE; you also need more of them, preferably written by somebody other than the subject's widow (see WP:RS). As to wikifying: many of the key concepts in the article don't have wikilinks; the list of honors is ill-formatted; etc. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  14:04, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Imagineering_Academy
You have tagged several issues with the Imagineering Academy article. However, you have not elucidated those issues on the talk page, so I can't go ahead and address them. Could you please do so? Thank you!

--Kim Bruning (talk) 14:24, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comments so far. --Kim Bruning (talk) 15:12, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Dunamispower
This user is requesting unblock, claiming his/her name is not promotional. That seems entirely likely to me (see Dunamis, btw). If you're around soon, could you consider an unblock? Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:39, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comment there, but I'm still confused. The user has only written about Koku Adomdza - and the website you linked to is about a Ronda Brown - but this user hasn't mentioned Brown, as far as I can see by looking at both the current edits, the deleted edits and there are no oversighted edits either. Unless there's something I'm missing, I see no evidence that this editor has any connection to the few websites about "Dunamis Power" that I could find! Your further thoughts would be most welcome --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 14:14, 28 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Regarding the comment on my talk page, I told the user the same thing here and here. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 16:39, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I've unblocked the user as having an appropriate username, as the username doesn't seem to be a problem. However, I've also left a note for the user on recommended reading for first article creation and recommended WP:AFC. I hope I didn't act too soon; get back to me if it's an especially big issue. Thanks. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:42, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Madison House
Hi, as a routine matter of creating disambiguation pages of format "Lastname House" where there are many places of that name, i went to start Madison House at the redlink and am directed to deletion review, where i am directed to find administrator who set protection. I see you were administrator deleting an apparently COI / commercial version most recently, and I presume are the admin setting protection to prevent recurrence. There was previously Articles for deletion/Madison House also, leading to a previous deletion. Statements there were the article or disambiguation could be recreated easily, which I would now like to do.

Items for possible mention in the disambiguation page, potentially as main entries or in "see also" capacity, include the following wikipedia-notable NRHP-listed places: It would also be appropriate to link to homes of U.S. president James Madison and to add other items such as to see also: Madison Hotel (disambiguation). Could you unprotect and notify me, or just create the article? I will watchlist the redlink now so will see if u do. I will then develop the dab. Thanks. --doncram (talk) 17:48, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Madison House (Watsonville, California)
 * Allen-Madison House, North Kingstown, Rhode Island
 * Eutaw-Madison Apartment House Historic District, Baltimore, Maryland
 * Madison Barracks, Sackets Harbor, New York
 * Madison County Sheriff's House and Jail, Edwardsville, Illinois
 * Madison Farm Historic and Archeological District, Elliston, Virginia
 * Madison Gas and Electric Company Powerhouse, Madison, Wisconsin
 * Madison Ranch, Rapid City, South Dakota
 * Madison Seminary and Home, Madison, Ohio
 * Pap Madison Cabin, Rapid City, South Dakota
 * Reduced to partial protection; but I'm not sure all those redlinked items you list will qualify for articles of their own. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:26, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks. Right you don't need to be sure about those, and in fact they are not yet adequately supported by supporting bluelinks as required by MOS:DABRL.  How and whether they are to be included or not is a matter for further separate discussion if needed, at Talk:Madison House, after i finish with the dab.  Thanks! --doncram (talk) 19:04, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Re: WikiProject Screencast
Mike, it was a pleasure meeting and working with you this past weekend. Perhaps we will work together again in the future--until then, best wishes! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 18:57, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Request for help ignored
I posted this request for help No_original_research/Noticeboard And it has been ignored. Just like this previous one. Why are these posting being ignored? LoveMonkey (talk) 20:30, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I find the whole thing so incomprehensible that I am unable to contribute anything to the discussion. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  20:49, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * How could I simplify the context? So that I might minimize the obfuscation of it? LoveMonkey (talk) 12:43, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

FYI re: User:HJ Mitchell
I believe that HJM has afforded other users a much wider latitude on their user page, encouraging good-faith changes (see User:HJ Mitchell/Editnotice). – xeno talk  13:31, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

V.E.S
For info, article has been recreated. Paste Let’s have a chat. 15:50, 29 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Tagged for speedy deletion per G11. – ukexpat (talk) 16:04, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Barbara Thompson
Hi-I hope you are doing well. I started an article on Barbara Thompson (Wisconsin politician). She was Wisconsin Superintendent of Public Instruction for 8 years. Please let myself know what you think-her obituary just appear. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 16:01, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Dana Award FYI
Talk:Dana Award. But nothing has changed as a result of the blocks...trying to edit anything they've added or want to add is just as useless as before. I could sure use some advice. Flowanda | Talk 07:16, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * ???? None of the "Keep" advocates in that discussion are blocked sockpuppets! -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  13:41, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Oops...maybe this discussion will help clarify that there were more sockpuppets found on Wikipedia, or am I still wrong? And double oops...I just saw DGG's comment. Flowanda | Talk 20:33, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks anyway. Flowanda | Talk 07:54, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Since you're around...
This bot here is editing logged out and I see that its block log indicates that an admin has blocked it before for doing the very same thing it's doing now. Just a heads up. — Duncan What I Do / What I Say 00:32, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Put this to sleep?
This has been lurking since August 31, and it was "relisted" on September 8 with no further comments. Possibly unfree files/2010 September 8. I think it needs to be put down as it's a dead horse being dragged through the murky swamp now. Soundvisions1 (talk) 01:57, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

For your information and action if required
User talk:Tonyblairproj. Sincere regards.  Wifione    .......  Leave a message  05:13, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

User preference tweaks
Hi. I made that tutorial! Located at User:Quiddity/User style customization tutorial. Most of the examples have a screenshot, to demonstrate the output. It's still a bit more complicated, at a glance, than I would like; but I'm not sure what could be trimmed or simplified. (It needs a screencast!)

See if anything in there interests you, and let me know if it's useful, or if anything is still too obtuse. Ta. :) -- Quiddity (talk) 01:56, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

To Mike Orange: Thanks for helping me get started
Thanks for pointing me in the right direction concerning my desire to create a Wikipedia article about Pariyatti, the nonprofit publishing house & bookstore where I have been working & volunteering for the past five years. I still have the feeling that Pariyatti is a borderline case - - I've found a few brief references to it in Wikipedia articles about the Buddhist Publication Society (BPS), S. N. Goenka, and Godwin Samaratne. I will continue to search the Web for other, more lengthy references to establish sufficient Notability to warrant an article about Pariyatti.

Would it be appropriate to link the reference to Pariyatti in Wikipedia's article about BPS to www.pariyatti.org ? In addition to publishing Pariyatti editions of some BPS books, Pariyatti has distribution rights for all BPS books in North America.

Pariyatti also has distribution rights for books published by the Pali Text Society (PTS) throughout North and South America and the Caribbean. Would it be appropriate to add a mention of that fact to the Wikipedia article about PTS? And could that mention be linked to www.pariyatti.org ?

A few bookstores are mentioned by name, with a brief description, in the Wikipedia article "Independent Bookstore". I hope to get Pariyatti included in that article. I'm still researching the best way to make that happen.

Thanks again for helping me get started.

By the way, I was a writer/editor for 25 years, and am confident of my ability to write in a neutral tone.

Starting in 1996 and for the next five years I was responsible for creating and maintaining www.ibm.com/storage. That's ancient history now, but I think I still have the ability to write for the Web. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carljs27 (talk • contribs) 18:41, 4 October 2010 (UTC)


 * You really need to read WP:CORP closely. Dozens of passing mentions, links to books published by the PTS, etc., do not add up to the substantial coverage of Pariyatti in and of itself. Remember, notability is not contagious: one does not become notable by publishing notable works or notable authors, or selling to notable clients, or working for notable employers. (And no, putting in the links you suggest would not be acceptable; it would be spamlinking, a form of promotion we strictly forbid.) -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:58, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

What is Wrong with Linking to Images open to the public online?
What is objectionable about posting a link to an image file that is pertinent to a wikipedia article? Wikipedia articles contain hundreds of thousands of links to various source materials containing both words and pictures. The reader can see for himself or herself the owner of the picture inasmuch as the link directs the reader to the owner's posting that the owner chooses to make available to the public. The picture is not being moved or copied to wikipedia. The reader is just informed as to where to see it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeff Jeff Yo (talk • contribs) 20:53, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * We need actual illustrations in the article, not links which may or may not break down the next day. Our manual of style clearly states that illustrations added to articles should be actual images made available in Wikipedia or the Wikimedia Commons, not links to images stored outside of Wikimedia projects. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  20:57, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Three things I need to discuss
1. Britney_Stevens is the sister of Whitney_Stevens. It's listed on Whitney_Stevens that she is listed under the categories Panamanian_Jews and Panamanian_pornographic_film_actors. Since Britney_Stevens is she her sister and a pornstar; should she be listed under those 2 categories as well?

2. Qumunity is an article I want to create. It fits under the category LGBT_culture_in_Vancouver becuase Qmunity is Vancouver's centre for gay, lesbian, transgendered, and bisexual people. I think there should be article for it. Here's the link: http://www.qmunity.ca/

3. Naturally Autistic is another article I want to create because it fits under Autism_related_organizations and It's been around since 1995 and it is run a couple in Gibsons,_British_Columbia and I have a link for it: http://www.naturallyautistic.com/founders/297/

Please let me know about doing these articles. Thanks! Neptunekh2 (talk) 04:28, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Misclick?
Hey Orange Mike. I just discovered at the help desk that a post of mine from yesterday was not only removed by you but rolled back. May I assume this was a misclick you didn't notice?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:57, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Vandal
Hey, I was hoping you could block IP 164.100.153.254, as you can tell from their history its filled with many vandalism events over the last year. Thanks Passionless (talk) 07:31, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Talk Page, Hartlepool
I have undone your 'cancellation' or 'reversal' of an 'update' by myself a day ago in the form of the removal of what is now completely irrlevant material originally provided by myself some time ago on this Talk Page. You tell me this should have been done by 'striking out' ('strikeout'). To 'strike out' is what I thought I had done by removing it in the only way of which I am aware, other than complete removal. I make this clear in my editing explanation and ask you to provide an explanation, please, of what you mean by 'strikeout'. Thank you in advance. Peter Judge —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.17.7.94 (talk) 09:16, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * That would be WP:Strikethrough ... and I have done it properly on your behalf. It's the same as any Word Processor: text to be struck will become text to be struck  ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 10:07, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Run it as you wish. I have added my own explanation which I hope you will leave in place. Peter Judge —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.26.42.162 (talk) 16:56, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Ron Holloway notice
Please read my last comment on the discussion you began about the Ron Holloway article. Looking at the original stub, which Holloway claimed was an innacurate one begun by fans, I found User:T. Anthony. I was trying to find other editors who'd be willing to help with it, and he was the only one. Holloway was mad that I agreed your assessment was correct, and so took it personally, writing an email re: spelling mistakes I made. I was pissed & told him so. I continued editing in good faith though, but suddenly they were all suspect. Glad the first editor reviewed my edits, and found no POV. I apologized for being offended, let it go, and left a section to explain refs on the talk page. Today, there's a newer section placed above it, entitled, "In My Defense"! Something should be done there, but not by me. I want my life back. Thanks.--Leahtwosaints (talk) 23:51, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Mike, if an editor has actually contacted the subject of an article (who also is editing Wikipedia, then we may have issues of off-Wiki harassment. The moment any editor takes that step outside of Wikipedia's boundaries, they stir up a gigantic hornet's nest.  I don't think we have the block in the right place here ... ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 10:01, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Bwilkins notified me of this because I declined Lonsax's unblock request. The WP:NLT block appears valid, as Lonsax writes that he contacted the police about Leahtwosaints's alleged emails to him. Apart from that, I am not sure that we can do anything about any offwiki issues these two users might have. But in view of the apparent personal and possible legal conflict between Leahtwosaints and the article's subject I strongly suggest that Leahtwosaints stop editing the article per WP:COI, enforced by block if necessary. Lonsax can continue to signal any BLP concerns about the article through the WP:OTRS system via the "Contact Wikipedia" link.  Sandstein   14:35, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * See my corresponding request at User talk:Leahtwosaints.  Sandstein   14:42, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think that's unreasonable at all - The key issue as it relates to the block is the conflict between Ronsax and Leahtwosaints. If they both back away, I think the situation can be defused. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 15:16, 8 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't have any desire to edit Holloway's article as things stand, if this is given a little time and there's an absolute end to the raving to every editor who might listen from User:Ronsax. I haven't commented on all the various issues (many untrue) that Holloway is now making about me. I will say this: my questions to User:Wasted Time R were to find the most accurate way to represent Holloway's presence in what he calls Dizzy Gillespie's final quintet. That isn't disputed, but the original text appeared to sound like all the performers were on equal level, whereas I had not seen any reference billing "The Gillespie Quintet", for example. I was trying to ascertain the difference between whether he was a band member or a sideman. I was trying to be as factual as possible, in case the subject was exaggerating his importance in the ensemble, which I asked Holloway about. Frankly, I think it's unwise for the subject of the article to be the primary editor- or to exert pressure and influence upon wording, references, etc. With WP:COI and WP:OWN issues, how can the next Wikipedian who attempts to edit the article be sure their edits will not be considered as personal attacks? I don't think the article could advance given the POV of the subject. It's a veritable hornet's nest. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 17:04, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I think that Ronsax has the full right to call the police due to off-wiki harassment - and multiple e-mails, phone calls, etc are harassment. He's not threatening to call a lawyer due to something that happened on-Wiki, or take any form of legal action - he called the cops due to continued contact, pointe finale.  We admins call the cops in certain situations of harassment (i.e. violence) too.  Honestly, it's clearly Leah who should be blocked in this case ... ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 21:03, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I also feel User:Ronsax has full right if he receives any harrassment, but I responded to his email. I was not agressive, I did not use foul language. I was annoyed -- 2 years of work and seriously coaching him over 2 years, on the phone, in Wikipedia, and emails uncounted. He wrote me an email, that was very critical email. I responded the same way as I did earlier to Orange Mike when he sent me a note for wiping clean a foul comment (from some vandal) on the Ron Holloway talk page. I didn't consider myself to be harrassing him. I told Ron if he wanted to file charges, it was fine. I have nothing to hide in my email. He never left a note on my talk page to say he felt harrassed! Just because I'm not contacting every editor who notices all of this, doesn't mean I'm guilty of harrassment. I want nothing more to do with him. If he wants to edit his page, it's up to you. But I live 15 minutes away from him! Were his allegations true, I'm sure the police would have arrived days ago. What could I have gained? The email is available to anyone in the proper forum to check out. I've edited here peaceably for over 3 years, and not the slightest problem with others until Ron Holloway re-appeared in my life a couple weeks ago. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 04:36, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

This is not an admin review of any sort, but I have started a discussion at WP:ANI ( talk→  BWilkins   ←track ) 09:50, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I would appreciate your input at the above mentioned discussion. It appears that because I didn't want to splatter things all over the Wikipedia, that I am the scrutinized one here. I am without words to describe my shock. Is there any way I can forward the email I sent to anyone? This is insane, now. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 18:56, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Lewis Advertising deletion
Hi Orange Mike,

You deleted my post yesterday. Is there anyway to place that content in my sandbox for editing? I didn't really figure that with a deletion I wouldn't be able to get back to the original user space build of it.

Also, could you please explain to me why any of the other 400 advertising agencies listed here are more notable than the one I submitted? In doing a quick review of their inclusions there doesn't appear to be anything different from the post I made.

Thanks in advance. Loyd

--Lwsellersjr (talk) 13:05, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * As to deletion: done; see User:Lwsellersjr/Lewis. As to the rest: see WP:CORP and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. As an aside: advertising agencies, based on my experience here, have an industry-specific problem, in that they labor under the delusion that they are notable to the broader world, if they are known within the industry to their peers and competitors (at least in their region or market niche). The idea that the rest of the planet neither knows nor cares about who has the media buying account for Fred's Hamburgers in the Upper Midwestern U.S. region is apparently entirely alien to them. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  13:17, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

I have reviewed the two wikilinks you provided. I would like to reference WP:CORP with 'When evaluating the notability of organizations, please consider whether it has had any significant or demonstrable effects on culture, society, entertainment, athletics, economies, history, literature, science, or education. Large organizations are likely to have more readily available verifiable information from reliable sources that provide evidence of notability; however, smaller organizations can be notable, just as individuals can be notable, and arbitrary standards should not be used to create a bias favoring larger organizations.' Demonstrable effects on culture, society and economies is the business that advertising agencies are in. That's pretty much all they do, for the good or bad of it. Building notability for their clients is paramount to their own as their notability is held within the industry in the form of accolades and awards. Which have been cited.

While the general public may not have an interest in advertising agencies, successful agencies certainly are notable within their industry, to the clients that are considering hiring them, to the employees that work there, and to prospective employees. The standard being applied to Lewis Advertising seems to be a bit subjective, as this agency has a similar record of awards and success to others that are being listed.

--Lwsellersjr (talk) 16:33, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * "successful agencies certainly are notable within their industry, to the clients that are considering hiring them, to the employees that work there, and to prospective employees" - that's utterly irrelevant to Wikipedia; see WP:USEFUL and WP:NOT. As to the other, I refer you again to WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS; out of the 3.5 million articles in Wikipedia, a lot of them are about non-notable topics, but nobody's gotten around to purging them yet - that does not justify the addition of yet another non-notable topic. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  17:15, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The presence of 400 advertising agencies on Wikipedia has more to do with the persistence of ad agencies doing what they do well: advertise. Unfortunately, few would survive an articles for deletion debate, and many were written by editors with a conflict of interest, which you clearly share. Having reviewed the draft, I see no evidence that the firm meets either the general notability standard or wp:corp. In general, notability demands at least two or three articles written in independent media of at least regional (as in several states) or national standing, focusing on the subject. This is an objective way of judging inclusion, as opposed to the argument you've made above, which is entirely subjective. This is not a slight to the company, it is just a simple way to determine whether a worldwide encyclopedia should have an article on the subject.  Acroterion  (talk)  17:35, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

OK, so I can see this is an exercise in futility, as is resistance... I will leave you folks to it. I rest assured that I will always have a reference online to look up things much more notable than a company that has been toiling in the landscape of American business for over 40 years. You know, like a featured item today, a list of Star Trek the Next Generation episodes. I am sure if this were a time capsule that would offer more detailed narrative of our endeavors as humans. I see there is a movement to reduce the relevance of the site as a reference tool for the masses, well except in the case of second-rate sci-fi, publicly held Behemoths and the nearest Medieval Times.

--Lwsellersjr (talk) 20:29, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The fact is that in the broader scheme of things, ST:TNG episodes are seen by more people and make much more impact on human life than an obscure local advertising firm. I'm not saying that this is a good thing; but it's reality. Acroterion has already explained, quite eloquently, the reasoning employed in this discussion. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  12:49, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

improper deletion of uploaded image
Hello Orangemike. You have deleted one of my uploaded images improperly. This is my first article for wikipedia, and I understand that I have several days to comply with the non-free fair use rationale guidelines, which I did not understand. I am attempting to rectify this now, but I do not wish to have to re-upload my images, as this is very time consuming. Please desist. I am working on it. Regards, E. S. V. Leigh (talk) 20:54, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: main discussion at User talk:Acather96. Even if images are deleted, they can easily be undeleted when appropriate permissions have been submitted and approved per the process at WP:IOWN. – ukexpat (talk) 20:57, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

IP block
I saw that you indef. blocked a shared IP, for the first time. I think that it is an error (V.o.A). Tb hotch Ta lk C. 03:27, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry I remembered all except the IP . Here is Tb hotch Ta lk C. 03:49, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Mike Cooper (voiceover artist)
Hello Orangemike, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Mike Cooper (voiceover artist), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Theleftorium (talk) 20:24, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Did you really need to template a fellow admin about a declined speedy asking them to review the speedy criteria?! – ukexpat (talk) 20:43, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes? I'm far too lazy to write a personal message. Theleftorium (talk) 21:36, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for stepping in on the article Algernon Capell, 2nd Earl of Essex. I appreciate your help. Meg E. McGath (talk) 02:44, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Handle this?
Not sure with this one. User:RobertHillier1972 - a mainspace article in userspace using the newpage tag so it won't be deleted. Tag even states in bold "This template is not for User namespace articles." Seem to be a duplicate of Abu Dhabi Police, which was created by the same user at a later date. It's your call. Soundvisions1 (talk) 03:50, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Aakhri Chunauti
LOL. I love your idea of "a bit".--Bbb23 (talk) 20:04, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I hate to generalize, but a lot of articles on Indian TV shows have this "mammoth plot dump" problem. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  22:30, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/List of books about risk
It seems that you attempted to nominate List of books about risk for deletion. You transcluded it onto the log for the 11th but never tagged the article or created the AFD page. Might this have been a script glitch? --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:45, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yup. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  12:40, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Thomas Ross Holmes
Hi Mike,

You have flagged the Thomas Ross Holmes article for deletion. I have been working on editing the article with some of the other administrators and hope to bring it up to standard. You mentioned that the references were not about Mr Holmes, but the external links (which I hope prove notability) are about him. I have been advised, and plan to edit today, that these external links should be references to actual copy in the body of the article. All the amendments I intend to make are on the talk page of the article. If there is anything else that you can advise I do, please let me know.

Thanks

Bensomersethow (talk) 11:26, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

deleading L.A. Galerie - Lothar Albrecht
Dear Mr. "Orangemike", you deleaded my article about L.A. Galerie - Lothar Albrecht, saying that is advertising. Well, there are many dozends article of big US or UK galleries. So this is no promotion? The true notes about a well respected contemporary art gallery in Germany is to be delated, the big money galleries from your country are fine. Double standard I would call that. Sincerly Lothar Albrecht —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.177.162.251 (talk) 09:04, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd advise you to read our guidelines on writing about yourself, on conflicts of interest and about notability of businesses. These are the standards I go by. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  12:42, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

I did and the decission of "in" or "out" are in not in ballance. But I don't mind. I looks in your self statement that you very much love your power Mr. Orangemike. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.177.212.195 (talk) 15:43, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Then you can't read English even as poorly as you write it (not that I pretend to be able to read or write Deutsch well). -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:09, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Right2bet
Right2bet is an organisation comprising consumers from across the European Union who believe in a citizen's right to choose.

Right2bet's mission is to ensure that the principles of economic freedom in the European Union are applied as fairly to betting and gaming as they are to any other sector. It aims to ensure all EU citizens are able to bet with whichever EU-licensed betting operator they wish.

It is a successful campaign which has attracted thousands of signatures and the backing of large, notable, sponsors. Could you please restore the page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1234betting (talk • contribs) 15:26, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:NOBLECAUSE and WP:UPANDCOMING. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:10, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

C.I.D. (TV series)
Hi, I went to WP:RFUP due the article C.I.D. (TV series) was indef protected. I thought that it had PC protection before, but Dabomb made me notice that you added it after the protection. If it was an error, would you remove one of the two? Thanks. Tb hotch Ta lk C. 04:46, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Afd
Just to remind you that since you speedy deleted Clicky Media, the AfD needs to be closed as such as well. You've sort-of closed it in spirit but not archived the discussion yet.  Giftiger Wunsch   [BODY DOUBLE]  17:32, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank You
Thanks for your participation in the RfC on the Eckhart Tolle talk page. A duplicate discussion, regarding the same quote by Eckhart Tolle is now taking place on The Power of Now (book by Tolle) talk page in case you would like to comment further. -- — Keithbob • Talk  • 20:00, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

pls Undelete the 2 articles on my new page
This is Jack Armstrong II. Two articles carefully worked on, disappeared overnight when I asked for help in placing footnotes. Pls help. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jack Armstrong II (talk • contribs) 21:02, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Those were both pieces of original research, which has no place in Wikipedia. We are not your webhost. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  00:53, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

C.I.D. (TV series) – Advice?
Hello Mike. I noticed that you removed some content per WP:PLOT. The information was soon again added by Suriyanarayana. Following your lead I decided to removed the content again. Sadly an IP user with a single edit to their name came through and reverted my edit. So again I've had to take out all of the unnecessary information. It's getting very annoying. The people making the reverts are simply ignoring the edit histories which mention WP:PLOT and the talk page messages. What can be done? Can you offer any advise? — Fly by Night  ( talk )  13:03, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I've set it for review to revisions; that's about as drastic a protection as I feel comfortable imposing at this point. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  14:59, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but what does that mean? It was already on the pending changes list. — Fly by Night  ( talk )  15:31, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yup, that's what I meant; pending changes. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  17:08, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, okay. Do you have any advise as to what I should do. If there are two or three users that keep adding pointless chitter-chatter, that undo our removals, then what do I do?
 * How does WP:3RR work in terms of WP:PLOT violations?
 * Are there any user warnings that can be issued to them?
 * Where would I report them if they ignored my pleas are carried on?
 * Sorry to bother you, but I hope you can help me. — Fly by Night  ( talk )  17:48, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

It may be time to take this to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  21:07, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Undeletion of Reverse financial instrument
Please respond to [the allegiations here —Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by Juxo (talk • contribs) 13:25, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Unblock on hold at User talk:TNRD
I think we have reached the limit of what hypothetical conversation can accomplish with this blocked user. They have agreed to a name change and have agreed not to attempt to recreate the article on their namesake themselves. I'm thinking it is time to hand them the WP:ROPE and see what they do with it. Checking with you as blocking admin. Beeblebrox (talk) 02:21, 23 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Okay by me. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  12:38, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Freeze request
Because of the sudden surge in the past couple of days in deletes/redirects - with or without discussions but all without merges - I've requested a FREEZE on this (please read it) until after the election. Please check articles you're aware of, as they still display with a 'blue'link'. The deletes are being done by people I don't recognize being involved in any actual article work. (I think you've been involved in election articles in the past, which is why I'm telling you this.) Flatterworld (talk) 15:22, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your clean-up work. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 18:19, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

FlippingBook Page
Dear Orangemike

I was adding a new version of the article about FlippingBook and it was deleted in a few seconds. I was going to add information that was put previously and update it step by step by giving the reference from the reputable sources as 'King of Hearts' had requested for our previous article. What do I need to do? We need to place information on Wikipedia because we had a lot of people from schools and universities of US that use our software and they request to put the information about us on Wikipedia. Please let me know about the steps what do we need to do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ishanoval (talk • contribs) 01:53, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Who exactly is "we"? -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  02:39, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * To Ishanoval: Wikipedia is not intended for promotional purposes, which precisely what you are framing. Sorry.    Thorncrag  04:22, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

News
I read about you in the news,. I didnt know if you knew you where in the article. Spongie555 (talk) 04:09, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It was news to me. I will say that Olga Diaz is the most reasonable person I've ever had to deal with in these matters. If I lived in Escondido, I'd probably be one of her biggest fans. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  13:06, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Page redirect
Dear Orangemike,

I have noticed that Thaksin's wealth Concealment has been redirected to Thaksin Shinawatra. Even though Thaksin Shinawatra's page mentioned about wealth concealment. However, it does not describe in specific detail of what really happened. Also, I think it would be better off putting it on a seperate page as Thaksin Shinawatra's page is already too long. Therefore, I believe that the article should not be redirected to Thaksin Shinawatra's page. Or any suggestions? thank you nogia123 (talk) 10:35, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The article itself (aside from issues like formatting and neutral-point-of-view violations) was a classic example of what we call a "content fork". This kind of information belongs in the main article, where it is examined by the greatest number of editors and subject to the highest level of scrutiny, criticism and improvement. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  13:14, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Sigma Partners undeletion requests
Since this was deleted via PROD and you didn't use the ❌ tag, I'm going to assume that you were simply stating your opinion and didn't actually decline the request. Therefore, I've restored the article and sent it to AFD. If your intent was to decline the prod then I apologize.

Also, I noticed a few other requests for undeletion that admins have apparently declined even though they are contested prods so I started a discussion on the issue at WT:REFUND. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 12:59, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Rima das 25
Good call. Toddst1 (talk) 13:53, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Good edit on Racial realism
I just saw your edit on Racial realism on my watchlist. I'm glad to see that an experienced editor (and I see you are an administrator too) is checking sources to make sure that they are reliable sources by Wikipedia content guidelines. Keep up the good work. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 18:01, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Promotional usernames
Could you perhaps start checking to see if users have filed a CHU request prior to (instead of) blocking them? It would save some time unblocking after the requests are processed. Thanks, – xeno talk  20:32, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Intelli-Diet
Intelli-Diet • ( talk | logs | links | watch ) • [revisions] This is an informative article about a notable application and is not advertising. it is no different in tone and content than then 100+ iOS game pages on Wikipedia -98.228.226.40 (talk) 14:26, 26 October 2010 (UTC) 98.228.226.40 (talk) 14:26, 26 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Not done - it is possible that an impartial article could be written about this obscure iPhone app ("over 500 copies sold!"); but what was deleted was a blatant advertisement, which has no place here. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:03, 26 October 2010 (UTC)"

What was deleted was the same content, tone, and language that is used in the hundreds of other apps in the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:IPhone_OS_software - Did you delete it because it didn't pass the 'obscurity' text? Is there a certain threshold? When you say there was blatant advertising, then the pages in the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:IPhone_OS_software category is blatant advertising as well. The pages contain the same structure, content, tone, and language. 98.228.226.40 (talk) 02:44, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
 * See WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS and our standards of notability. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  12:54, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Lizzie Cundy article
Lamest edit wars? :-p Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 14:32, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Not compared to the war over Orange (colour), which I still have to fix now and then. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:15, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

changing username
"Please put this request in at Wikipedia:Changing username as soon as possible to avoid re-blocking."

Does that involve just writing out a request, or do I need to use a special tag or something? Also, I'm guessing that means to post it to the discussion page there - is that correct? Thanks! ProfessorLoesch (talk) 16:22, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Oh...scratch that last part. ProfessorLoesch (talk) 16:25, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Just click the link and follow the instructions there. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:27, 28 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Yeah I eventually found it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Changing_username/Simple#ProfessorLoesch_.E2.86.92_DoctorLecter. I'm confused though, because when I search in the list of usernames, I don't see "DoctorLecter," but some bot says the name exists and has made edits. There's a "DoctorLector," but no "DoctorLecter." ProfessorLoesch (talk) 16:35, 28 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Username List Search for DoctorLecter ProfessorLoesch (talk) 16:36, 28 October 2010 (UTC)


 * The software sometimes rejects new names too close to existing ones; you may have to pick a different name.


 * Oh. Hmm.  I also checked out DoctorLector's profile though, and it doesn't look like he's made any edits, or at least he has no userpage, no talk page, and nothing is listed under his contributions.  I'll see if I can come up with something else I suppose.  ProfessorLoesch (talk) 16:43, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
 * He's a new account (January of this year); too soon to contemplate usurpation. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:51, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Well I wasn't contemplating usurping him, I was just noting that the bot must not have been referring to "DoctorLector." Anyway, if I created a second account while I was blocked, but didn't make any edits with it, can I simply boost the name off my other accout?  To do that would I want WP:CHU/U or would I be trying to do something more like "unified login?" ProfessorLoesch (talk) 16:59, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
 * That would fall under evasion of a block. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  17:03, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh...oops. Well I did it because this block in particular was due to the fact that my username itself was problematic (rather than my actions, as I understand it), so I just got another one.  I didn't make any edits with it, so the idea wasn't to be able to get around a block to make edits - and certainly not to create artificial consensus or anything like that.  Will I still be able to merge the accounts or usurp it or whatever?/ ProfessorLoesch (talk) 17:07, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
 * File it at WP:USURP and then log in with the second account to certify the request and they can be swapped around. – xeno talk  17:15, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Me, I'd advise you to abandon the second account and concentrate on renaming this one with a name that isn't blocked or blockworthy. There's no User:FavaBeans&ANiceChianti, for example. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  17:18, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
 * My suggestion assumed he would abandon the second account, but if it's got a username he wants to use, then he'll need to certify ownership so I can flip the account with edits to the new username. – xeno talk  17:20, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Changing_username/Usurpations#ProfessorLoesch_.E2.86.92_DoctorFuManchu ProfessorLoesch (talk) 17:47, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Improper Edit Warning
You have suspended the editing of Almeda University for one year. Please release this hold. A single item dispute on a such a content-rich subject does not warrant such a harsh move. I am certain a warning would have been much more appropriate. Striker8840 (talk) 19:34, 28 October 2010 (UTC)Striker8840Striker8840 (talk) 19:34, 28 October 2010 (UTC) — Striker8840 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Kostleden
Looks like you deleted it just as I tagged it for deletion and somehow that recreated it. E. Fokker (talk) 21:02, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Unblock request of Tiffanynewcomb
Hello Orangemike. , whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards,  Sandstein   22:12, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

User:SedgwickCounty
Do you mind if I unblock this user? S/he requests a username change (the desired username isn't a problem) and says that (1) s/he didn't realise that his/her actions were prohibited, and (2) will be happy to undo the improper edits. Nyttend (talk) 22:14, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
 * As the third concurring admin, I have unblocked with all due respect to your correct intial block. I'll add my eyes to those keeping watch on things going forward.  Best regards --Stephen 00:03, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Not a coincidence?
Isn't it interesting that the the defenders of these "misunderstood" academic institutions so often have a poor command of English? --Orlady (talk) 04:26, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm more appalled by their enthusiastic defense of what they do as some kind of blow against the educational establishment, and by their portrayal of us as on some kind of vendetta against experimental forms of learning. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  12:46, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

KevinDonahoe
I wonder if you know that had already been indef'd by the time you posted your message? :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:25, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yup. Indefinite is not the same as permanent. He might be unblocked, if he withdraws his legal threat; in which case, he can't say we didn't warn him about the OR/synthesis problem. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  19:31, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, I see your rationale. The indef might disappear and your warning will remain (until he deletes it). Meanwhile, his rant about "freedom of speech" (complete with self-promoting spam) is a classic. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:36, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I was "especially amused" by his "obsessive-compulsive" and "rather disconcerting overuse" of "quotation marks" on various "important topics"! -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  19:39, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think even "Perry Mason" would do "that". :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:59, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Parade High School All-Americans
OM, can you join us for a discussion at admin JamesBWatson's talk page? Thanks for your help. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 21:06, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Mike, please disregard my previous request for further discussion and assistance. With some help from others, we have figured out the quickest manner to resolve this mess.  Thanks again.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:43, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

James Lewis
Hi-An excellent job on the James Lewis article. I took the liberty of quickly adding a citation from the Wisconsin Historical Society in case someone was going to mark the article for deletion as a BLP article since intially it had no citations. I hope you did not mind. Here is an article about Alexander Botkin that I started. Many thanks for what you are doing-RFD (talk) 21:10, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK article needs expansion
Hello! Your submission of James R. Lewis (legislator) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! M AN d ARAX •  XAЯA b ИA M  05:34, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Accents
I saw you moved Dreißiger to Dreissiger. No problem. It is written both ways in German and the "ß" would look strange to most readers. But I assume it is correct to use accents, e.g. Hochwächter rather than Hochwachter. Sometimes a word has different meanings with or without the accent. See this recent letter to the Economist (last one): "SIR – An errant accent in your article on Britain’s nuclear deterrent (“Gunning for Trident”, October 2nd) all but reversed the meaning of the French “force de frappe” or “strike force”. Or is there something about Parisian coffee we should know?" Wikipedia may be incorrect in redirecting Frappe to Frappé. Is there a guideline somewhere? Aymatth2 (talk) 13:27, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The problem is that English-speakers don't understand diacritical marks, much less special characters not used in the English-language alphabet of 26 characters. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  13:30, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed, but I still don't know what the right convention should be. I see no need to use "ß", since it is just a shorthand for "ss". But often, with languages other then English, the accent can completely change the meaning. In Spanish, Cañada is a ravine and a state in Oaxaca. Canada is a country. Different pronunciations and meanings. The occasional accent presumably does no harm, and presumably should be used if it affects the meaning. English speakers will just ignore it anyway. Littering an article with accents can make it hard to read, e.g. Isedo, Nigeria. There must be a guideline somewhere. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:13, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:DIACRITICS is what you're looking for. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  14:29, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * O.k. - thanks - those are pragmatic rules. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:40, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Ĉar mi parolas kaj skribas Esperanton, mi devas scii ion ajn pri tiaj aferoj. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:48, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Mi havas sufiĉ malfacileco kun La angla. Aymatth2 (talk) 19:35, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Frank E. Panzer
There is an existing article about Frank E. Panzer-I started it. Thanks-RFD (talk) 20:32, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Hope what I did there was satisfactory. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  21:11, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Excellent! Many thanks-RFD (talk) 21:22, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I added a citation from the Wisconsin Blue Book, 1970, pg. 25-it had the day of his death-dying in office-it was in the original article I started-Thanks-RFD (talk) 21:44, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

CorenSearchBot
Orangemike, I just got a notice from this bot about a new page I just created, Deena_Brush_Mapple. I think it's because I borrowed a list of Mapple's accomplishments for her lede from the Waterski HOF website. I changed up the wording etc. to avoid a copywrite issue (was I not supposed to do that?), but obviously the actual data is simply factual and can't really be altered to avoid copywrite issues. Is this a problem here, and is there anything I'm supposed to do or should't have done in response to the bot warning? DoctorFuManchu (talk) 00:18, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * You didn't substantially alter the language you borrowed (which was inappropriately promotional for an encyclopedia article anyway; Hall of Fame entries tend to the breathlessly hagiographic). You need to state the same information without borrowing any of the language, adopting a much more flat and matter-of-fact tone. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:45, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * How about now? I think that's about as matter-of-fact as I can make it.  She is just about the best female skier in history though :).  Also, does the tag have to be removed by an admin or is there someone special that's supposed to stop by and "review it shortly" as the tag says (or can I do it myself)? DoctorFuManchu (talk) 15:58, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note that simply modified or rephrased text is still an infringement—to remove the copyrighted contents you will need to completely remove them and then write totally new text to replace it. We also don't take kindly to "I'll fill this in later" sections or section headers. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:18, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Well for one thing I don't completely understand the copywrite situation. It does say copywrited at the bottom of the HOF page though (which I suppose probably applies to everything on the website), but as I recall the citation rules (from college and HS), it's ok to paraphrase as long as I'm citing it right?  DoctorFuManchu (talk) 16:28, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * No, copyright can still be infringed by a close paraphrase. Look at articles about other athletes such as Jim Thorpe or Too Tall Jones, and try to recast the article using them as models, as if you'd never seen the language in the Hall of Fame Induction Profile which is the problem. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:31, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Studio-407 wikipedia page deletion
I have sent an email to you ( as the page recommended that I also alert you on your personal talk page).Edgarallennevermore (talk) 01:42, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Edgarallennevermore (talk) 01:42, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Page deletion Roger Davenport
This comes as an apology. I don't know WHAT I thought I was doing. Rogerhdavenport (talk) 08:28, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Hey Sir Mike hope all is well
Could you please when you get time (if you can of course) look at the filioque article and make some suggestions for it's improvement? Thanks LoveMonkey (talk) 14:37, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I wish I could help; but I come from a non-credal background, and all this tangle of appeals to "Fathers of the Church" and Councils and the like leaves me cold and puzzled. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:30, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Its OK, I just figured I'd ask. LoveMonkey (talk) 17:06, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

timesite - deleted page
Hi, in Jul 09 a page titled Timesite was deleted by yourself, When looking for timesheet applications in "Comparison of time tracking software" we note that Timesite is not listed. It should be, how can the Page for Timesite be constructed to allow it to exist and be included in the comparison list? Thanks Simon —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theunitaustralia (talk • contribs) 23:05, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * 1. You'll have to provide some evidence of notability. 2. You'll have to avoid the kind of shameless pimping that killed the prior version (TimeSite continues to innovate utilising the latest in web technologies and blather about solutions). 3. You'll have to respect our rules about conflict of interest and advertising. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  23:11, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Patrick Murray (politician)
I have renominated this article for deletion 6 hours after it was closed as kept. Racepacket (talk) 09:21, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Phytec
Hi, could you comment on that person's unblock request? Thanks,  Sandstein   21:14, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Mike - I gave them the standard COIQ... let's see how they answer.  7  09:00, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Keith W. Schuller
Hi! I started an articles about the State Treasurer of Wisconsin-elect Kurt W. Schuller. Please let myself know what you think-Thanks-RFD (talk) 21:16, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Damn! I didn't realize that moron had won. Not gonna touch this one; NPOV is hard when you've know Dawn Marie for years. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  02:26, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Indef blocked IP addresses
Hi Mike. Can you not indef-block IP addresses for making threats. IP addresses change hands, and users change IP addresses. It's against policy, and only generates more work for other admins who have to go around cleaning up after you. Thanks. -- zzuuzz (talk) 16:57, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll take your word for it; but have you got a cite? I don't pretend to have every policy memorized myself. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:59, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * That virtually every IP gets reassigned? WP:IPB is probably the most useful, an adjunct to WP:BP. Thanks. -- zzuuzz (talk) 17:06, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Mike: vis-a-vis that legal threat, please take a look at and. THF (talk) 18:10, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

AN discussion
I have raised a matter which involves you on the WP:AN --Scott Mac 03:33, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for James R. Lewis (legislator)
-- Cirt (talk) 12:06, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Please critique my NPOV edit
Dear Orangemike, I'm a new editor who wants to learn how to use Wikipedia. I saw a page that was recently created (Nuru International) that you flagged for conflict of interest, not being wikified, and having few links to external articles. I thought that I would make it my first contribution. Could you look at it and let me know what you think? Has a NPOV been established? Is it sufficiently wikified? How can I still make it better? Thank you. (Also, I don't know if I'm posting correctly on this talk page). D761812 (talk) 20:36, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Rabbi Pinto
Thank you. The page has been edited recently by 1 person who has done nothing else on wiki but this. Its still an absurd article. please help further ? Here pinto called for a death curse on someone: http://www.vosizneias.com/58354/2010/06/21/new-york-claim-israeli-rabbi-put-death-curse-on-obstfeld/ Here you can see questions raised: http://www.forward.com/articles/128944/ He was paid by lebron as you can see here. http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ball_dont_lie/post/LeBron-James-hires-rabbi-to-consult-on-business-?urn=nba-261513 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.112.21.194 (talk) 17:26, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Appreciate your mention & discussion. Concur ?

List of most expensive Video games
You have proded the article List of most expensive Video games because of Non-encyclopedic topic, sourced to basically only two websites of arguable reliability but i can surely say that it is an encyclopedic topic as there are many more article like this egList of most expensive films  Rahul Text me  08:21, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * See WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  08:24, 7 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I have read that but there is one more thing WP:ALLORNOTHING Rahul Text me 08:30, 7 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Your point being? Both of those articles indicate that your argument for retention is without merit. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  08:33, 7 November 2010 (UTC)


 * ahh my mistake got confused but come on why can we have an article on video games if there is on films,paintings,Music,Photograph etc Rahul Text me  08:41, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Boris Willis
Hello, you've tagged Boris Willis for AFD and added it to the log, but there's no AFD yet. The article's creator (a new editor) is getting antsy and removing the AFD tag with the broken link. I'm finding a lot of cites for him in the Wash Post and Kennedy Center, and have added a few already: any chance you might reconsider the AFD? Thanks very much, Top Jim (talk) 08:26, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Article's creator has now gone ahead and created the AFD discussion page, by the way. Top Jim (talk) 08:34, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Let's keep it there, then. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  08:36, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * But don't you need to actually create the nomination on the discussion page, with reasons for deletion etc? All that's there at the moment is a "don't delete" comment from the article's creator. I thought a nomination was required per WP:AFD. Thanks, Top Jim (talk) 09:12, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

History of Tiruchirappalli
I had started the article only in order to imnplement Manual of Style (summary style) which is of course one of the requirements for a WP:FAC. It is not my intention to disrupt Wikipedia or interfere with its working. Regards.- The Enforcer Office of the secret service 08:49, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Lebron hired Pinto
Pinto was paid by Lebron - That should be amended. http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ball_dont_lie/post/LeBron-James-hires-rabbi-to-consult-on-business-?urn=nba-261513

09:34, 7 November 2010 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.112.21.194 (talk • contribs)

Death Curse Obstfeld
The concept of Pinto death curse & possible involvement in Obstfeld death is worthy of Mention here. Do others agree ? http://www.vosizneias.com/58354/2010/06/21/new-york-claim-israeli-rabbi-put-death-curse-on-obstfeld/ http://www.forward.com/articles/128944/

09:34, 7 November 2010 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.112.21.194 (talk • contribs)

Natalia Wörner
OK with me that you're a deletionist, myself being an inclusionist: we can surely reach an agreement or a middle ground on when to keep and delete an article. I would, though, appreciate that you marked articles for deletion before actually deleting them. Thank you very much. Ictlogist (talk) 10:48, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Tom Gliatto
Hello. Today you deleted Tom Gliatto based on "No explanation of the subject's significance (real person, animal, organization, or web content)". The discussion page clearly stated that this author had several dozen articles linked to him from other articles and the "What links here" for Tom Gliatto gives evidence of his significance even as a stub.

If you could, please "undelete" this page and its talk page and if you would like to contest its validity, please do so with the appropriate method of tagging it and having it up for discussion. Thanks! - Team4Technologies (talk) 11:55, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The article gave us nothing to indicate that the subject is notable in any way. The discussion page did nothing to indicate that he is notable; all it said is that articles of his have been cited in Wikipedia. Being a footnote does not make the author of the cited article notable; notability is not contagious; writing about a notable topic does not thereby make the writer notable. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  20:58, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

HEdSTART
The HEdSTART page created last night was deleted within hours of creation despite the following text on the Speedy Deletion page:

'Contributors sometimes create pages over several edits, so administrators should avoid deleting a page that appears incomplete too soon after its creation.'

Coming back to add to it this morning I see it gone. Obviously I'm obliged to leave a message here and would like the page restored so that I can add to it. In addition I think the following needs to be questioned - as the idea that I'm writing about is a developing programme, the amount that can be written on it will change in time and continue to develop, therefore there is only a limit to what the article can contain at this time. So, would that also be deleted? If so, doesn't that counter the very nature of the internet and it's immediacy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmorrismjm (talk • contribs) 13:00, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The entire article consisted of "HEdSTART is an innovative approach to Teaching and Learning at Post 16" at a school. This is meaningless and pointless, impossible to decipher for the reader. "innovative"? "approach to Teaching and Learning"? "Post 16"? the language you quote is not meant to say that we can accept a promisory note in lieu of an article. Also: if this is a "developing programme", that seems to indicate that this is not presently notable in any way, and thus does not have a place in Wikipedia. Despite your theory that immediacy is the heart of the internet, it is not the heart of Wikipedia. Our goal is to gather together the best available information about topics already notable, topics already taken note of by the rest of humanity in reliable sources and thus notable enough to be described in an encyclopedia. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  20:54, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Step in to this please
I am tired of reverting changes to Criteria for speedy deletion being made by an admin (Now two admin) without any real consensus as to wording. There is a very long discussion that starts here and has ended up at this point: F9 and F7 proposals. (See also talk page dif that relates) At this point I am asking for your opinion *and* see if you feel there is any sort of consensus about changes as made as you are someone who has been uninvolved in the discussion. Much appreciated. Soundvisions1 (talk) 18:02, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

65.112.21.194 is biased
If you review this person's edits on Rabbi Pinto's page, you would see that he has completely overhauled what was once a very neutral account. He included biases and even offered offensive comments in the edit history section (e.g., "Let Pinto lecture to Lebron not Jews"). To make this person happy, only negative elements would be included in the entry. I chose to edit the page so that it more accurately reflected a NPOV and was inline with Wiki's guidelines. 65.112.21.194 only wants to publish contentious and harmful gossip. - Beobjectiveplease —Preceding undated comment added 20:34, 8 November 2010 (UTC).
 * This person vandalized Rabbi Pinto's Wiki page last night. Also added libelous material that he was then warned for (he then re-added it this morning). Just wanted to highlight this. He has also made offensive remarks about Jewish faith. Biases are apparent. Beobjectiveplease (talk) 16:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Hearing Aid - Buyahearingaid.com
Dear Orangemike,

Thank you for your message on mytalk. I would like to discuss our buyahearingaid.com link being deleted from the hearing aid page. Our website was created to help the consumer researching hearing loss and hearing aids. We have unique high quality content written by people that work in the hearing aid industry for years. We have the biggest and most comprehensive database of hearing aid models and manufacturers. We have no annoying advertising. I can see sites which are in the external list that I am not pointing to whose sole idea is to make adsense and marketing profit. Therefore I find quite unfair to delete my link which provides unbiased and easy to understand information with high quality design compared to cluttered websites full of ads. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phdimov (talk • contribs) 16:49, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * If you see spamlinks in other article, please feel encouraged to remove them. You are openly admitting that you are connected to this website. Wikipedia is not here to promote your website or anybody else's. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:52, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I do not wish to remove any websites from the list. I want to understand what it takes to have our site listed there because it is credible and viable resource of information and we belong there.(talk • contribs)


 * See WP:EL - pretty clear on this point. – ukexpat (talk) 20:25, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Droll
There a thread at the WP:BLPN here a user claiming to be the subject disputing some claims, you are more likely to be better able to deal with it, thanks. You seem to have replaced one part that he disputes that he has left anything and is still president and seems to be correct and verified here http://www.capmin.org/ Off2riorob (talk) 17:58, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Britain and the World
I disagree with your speedy of this article. It had a prod tag on it, and it may have been deletable by that method. However, "Publishing with Edinburgh University Press from 2011, Britain and the World: Historical Journal of the British Scholar Society is a journal of 'British world' history. Formerly, British Scholar, the journal is published biannually and includes original research articles, book reviews and review essays on Britain's global history in the modern era. For more information and to browse journal content, visit: http://www.euppublishing.com/journal/brw." does not seem unambiguously promotional. Can you explain why you deleted it as such? Nikkimaria (talk) 23:26, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * 1. The article was created by a spammer account for the journal's publisher. 2. "For more information, visit..." is definitive advertising language. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  01:02, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Neither of those make it unambiguously promotional. In fact, if you remove the final sentence it doesn't really seem promotional at all. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:56, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Not ready for mainspace
I've moved Tour Egypt to an AFC subpage because it does not meet our quality guidelines. For additional information as to why I performed this action, please see my comments at this section.  Ⓢ ock   01:36, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Ethiopian Global Initiative
Hi, Mike. It looks like this organization used to be called the Ethiopian American Youth Initiative, and their website URL, http://www.ethusa.org/, matches the username of the creator of the article. Judging by http://www.ethusa.org/home, it appears the organization was rebranded the Ethiopian Global Initiative or was folded into the larger organization. Your call, but this looks like spam to me. I agree it wasn't a candidate for A7 since it made a plausible claim to notability. The username also violates WP:U. Bonus points: the editor reposted the article with the SD tag included. -- Rrburke (talk) 14:44, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Right2bet on the 18th of October
Hello Mike,

I believe it was you who deleted an article I posted last month entitled 'Right2bet' - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Right2bet&action=edit&redlink=1

I am a long time reader of Wikipedia, but this is the first time I have ever tried to write an article. I am genuinely prepared to try my best to comply with Wikipedia's standards, but obviously I failed in my first attempt. I know you are an advocate for quality articles on the site, as am I, so I am planning to do a complete rewrite of the entry in order to make it acceptable.

Before I do so, I would greatly appreciate your guidance on the specific elements of the article that were unacceptable, so that I can target them. Generic feedback such as "It's written like an advert", although entirely relevant, is hard for me to make practical use of simply because I'm so inexperienced at contributing to Wikipedia at this stage. I know this kind of response is more of a hassle, but if you can spare 5 minutes it would make a huge difference to my attempt to write a quality, admissible first article.

As far as relevance is concerned, the association to which the article refers is the non-profit consumer freedoms organisation within the European gaming sector. It has received press coverage, has thousands of supporters, including major industry organisations, and falls into very much the same catagory as other consumer groups such as CAMRA, the Center for Consumer Freedom, Fathers4Justice, and the Poker Players Alliance (our nearest US equivalent). All of these have articles on Wikipedia, so I believe it would be entirely consistent for Right2bet to be included on the same basis. This would also add to the completeness of Wikipedia as a resource, as coverage of gaming regulation from a European angle is currently quite limited within the encyclopedia.

Thank you for taking the time to advise on this, I do appreciate it, especially as a new contributor.

1234betting (talk) 15:09, 10 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually, it was JamesBWatson who deleted it as an advertisement. That said, I'll try to answer your questions. Let's start with your username. While nobody has yet chosen to block you, it implies that you are here to argue "for betting" (i.e., as an advocate for expanded gambling). Such a username creates a suspicion of lack of the mandatory neutral point of view. Then look at the language: the deleted article takes everything this organization says for granted, from its claim to be a consumer organization rather than what Americans call astroturfing (i.e., artificial imitation grassroots) funded by the gambling industry; to the simple recounting of the organization's position on the applicability of human rights statutes to gambling without mentioning the challenges to that position. There is nothing of substance in the deleted article to indicate that the group has been criticized by anybody on the planet other than nameless and eviallll government forces. Here are some itemized problems in the deleted version:
 * "consumer campaign" (actually, funded by the gambling industry [Betfair, Ladbrokes and Bet365], or so I've read)
 * "which champions" that's a pretty non-neutral verb
 * "the right of European citizens to bet with any online gaming provider, regardless of their country of origin" just simply assumes that such a right exists, with no hint that some consider this a bogus claim with no discernible origin in the Universal Declaration or anywhere else
 * "Cause" again, non-neutral word
 * "consumer freedom groups" non-neutral wording
 * "Arguments" - entire section taken verbatim from the subject's own website, with no hint of the idea that they may be wrong
 * "they refute claims" - non-neutral language; and do they actually refute the opposition, or just disagree with it?
 * Hope I've clarified things for you. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:38, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the precise feedback, Mike, that is what I was looking for, and it will be helpful. I will take your advice and try again.--1234betting (talk) 11:13, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Greetings from the Contribution Team
Greetings! Please excuse this intrusion on your talk page, and allow me to invite you to participate on the newly-formed Wikipedia Contribution Team, or WP:CONTRIB for short! The goal of the team is to attract more and better contributions specifically to the English Wikipedia, as well as to help support the fundraising team in our financial and editing contribution goals. We have lots of stuff to work on, from minor and major page building, to wikiproject outreach, article improvement, donor contacting, and more -- in fact, part of our mission is to empower team members to make their own projects to support our mission. Some of our projects only take a few minutes to work on, while others can be large, multi-person tasks -- whatever your interest level, we're glad to have you. If this sounds of interest to you, please visit WP:CONTRIB and sign onto the team. Even if there does not appear to be anything that really speaks out as being work you'd like to do, I'd encourage you to join and follow the project anyway, as the type of work we'll be doing will certainly evolve and change over time. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me, or ask on the Contribution talk page. Regards, &rArr;   Dan Rosenthal    Wikipedia Contribution Team  19:55, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

hello from the Noreen Crayton
I noticed that you would like the article that I wrote regarding my father, Spurgeon E. Crayton. Please understand, in no way, am I trying to promote myself using this page. Just as you are seeking to respect the integrity of Wikipedia, I want to do the same for him. I created the page because I thought that he deserved recognition for his contributions particularly in the town of Amityville in creating the halfway house and trying to clean up an extremely rough neighborhood. I have not even added anything about myself on there because it is not about me but about him. Now if you feel that he doesn't deserve, than fine. Ask for it to be deleted. The reason is most definitely not because I want to promote myself or my music.

delete away! we'll find a way to get his work out another way

Many thanks, Noreen Crayton

Noreencrayton (talk) 21:43, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * For the record, I notice that the first version of the article, the one you initially created, referred to you and your musical career by name. As to the rest: I take no delight in seeing articles deleted; but I do insist that they meet our standards of notability, impartiality, and verifiability. Note, as always, that Wikipedia is not here to promote anybody's noble cause or good name. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  22:26, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I was copying and pasting portions from my website which was promoting his street naming ceremony however, once I remembered it was there, I removed it. I take issue with the fact that you posted for all the world to see that I was trying to do that on the article that was actually published and if one read the article they would see that nothing about was no where on it. That's actually potentially libel behavior on your part towards me. Also, it seemed as though you did not read the article, you just saw the back end which is very unfortunate. Further, it wasn't just anybody's noble cause, he was one of the organizers of the Alba-Neck Halfway House which was for drug addicted patients, a noble cause which he didn't invent. That halfway house was the forerunner to Apple Inc. a very large rehabilitation foundation. But no worries, you've done your job rooted out the riff raff. I blanked the page and had it deleted rather than go back and forth as to whether the subject was worth it or not. Awesome work on your part! God bless! Noreencrayton (talk) 23:33, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I resent that remark; I am the riffraff, a resident of the inner city one generation out of the Tennessee cotton fields! But as an administrator, one of my duties is to hold folks with whom I sympathize and identify to the same standards that I do the folks I dislike; and vice versa. I'm sorry if this hurts your feelings; it's the kind of thing that leads us to so strongly discourage folks from writing about the things they love the most. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  00:40, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

lol, no, you didn't hurt my feelings but angered me with your assumption and extremely public post that I was trying to promote myself through my father's life. That was a blatant attack on me and the integrity and intent on why I created the article in the first place. You could have merely posted that the subject was not notable enough to warrant a page and recommend deletion. I would have respected that and not fought it. You went for the jugular (my jugular), come on, admit it:) Believe me, if I didn't think he warranted an article, I would have never thought to create it, however, when the town named a street after him, my thought was, 'one day someone is going to want to read about the person this street is named after and why it is so.'  THAT was why I created the page.  What better place to put his achievements than on Wikipedia?  Lastly, it is not clear to me as to how you are implying that I called you riff raff.  I was being sarcastic and felt as though how you went about recommending deletion was treating the article as riff raff.  This is what I know: it seemed to me as though you never read the latest version of the article but just researched how it was created.  If you had read it the latest version, you would have seen that I provided references, the subjects complete bibliography with isbn numbers and communicated the rest of the bio clearly along the guidelines Wikipedia requested. By your own admission, you read an early version created on my username page and made a decision based on that. Then, you posted your inaccurate conclusion for all the world to see. That's what you did. Now, I sincerely apologize for hurting your feelings with the 'riff raff' comment. However (and there is no sarcastic intent behind this), in the big scheme of things, it's not as intense as it seems. It was an article on someone who did a few huge things and had a street named after him...... so all the best to you:) Noreencrayton (talk) 01:42, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I've got a couple of friends and mentors here in Milwaukee who've had streets named after them. Even though they were not kin, I've not tried to create articles about them. I do hope you will contribute to articles in other parts of Wikipedia. There's more to Amityville, I know, than bad occult books and worse movies! -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  01:46, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

False reporting by Edit Filter
Hi! I see that you are often dealing with False reports by Edit Filters.

Could you please take a look here:

Edit_filter/False_positives/Reports

I'm trying to add a section about New Zealad, but it has been repeatedly stopped by the Filter. I have submitted several reports of False Positive, but I've got no response.

Thanks. 188.25.174.118 (talk) 22:48, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Filters are software, dumb programs; the filter interprets your posting as an accusation of these actions! Somebody else is working on this with the filter folks. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  00:35, 11 November 2010 (UTC)


 * OK. Thanks a lot. 188.25.175.226 (talk) 10:51, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Rabbi Pinto 2
Hello Orangemike. I mentioned your name and Diannaa's when closing this 3RR case: WP:AN3. EdJohnston (talk) 23:01, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Architects' Alliance of Ireland
Hi orangemike,

You have proposed my article about Architects' Alliance of Ireland for speedy deletion, why?

I have considered attentively all the wikipedia "notability standards" prior to create the article.

Architects' Alliance of Ireland is a "Nationally famous local organizations". All Irish Architects are aware of the association and its actions. It complies with Wikipedia notability criteria for non-commercial organizations. It also complies with Primary criteria for notability. Architects' Alliance of Ireland actions were covered by Irish Media such as The Irish Times, The Irish Independent, RTE. The article includes links to National Newspapers articles and to a web site of the Irish Government where minutes of a public meeting between members of the Irish Government, representatives of Architects' Alliance and Directors of the RIAI exchanged their views on the system and legislation related to the registration of architects in Ireland.

You are accusing my article of being biased. I have tried my best to write this article in a neutral way. I have compared the article with the RIAI article; the RIAI is the direct competitor of Architects' Alliance on the issue of registration in the Republic of Ireland. Can you explain why you considered that the article is biased?

You are accusing my article of being written like advertising. However, the article only informs on Architects' Alliance of Ireland. Nothing in the content support the cause of the association, nothing promotes the association or appeal for the reader to join the association. The content of the article is only descriptive.

I am not sure if it is that you have not read and considered the subject attentively or if it is that you are opposed to Architects' Alliance of Ireland line of actions and what it represents. We can discuss the subject, but the article is not biased, or if it is, please tell me which part is biased. Or do you mean that it is biased to create an article on this association? I will be waiting for you at the article discussion page. I am sorry, but I feel that your proposal for speedy deletion is out of order and I am curious to know your reasons for making such request. --Christophe Krief (talk) 13:55, 11 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Orangemike, I though that anyone with good intentions would have started the dialogue before proposing to delete the article.

I was a member of the association; I am not anymore due to divergence of ideas. I am still sharing similar interests with the group. However, I think that anyone with an interest in Architects’ Alliance of Ireland, would either be opposed or in agreement with their position, it is difficult to be in-between.

I think that no-one uninterested with the registration of architects in Ireland is aware of Architects’ Alliance, but everyone with such interest know who they are and what they stand for.

I am trying to explain that people who do not have an interest in the matter of architects’ registration in Ireland, do not know the Association. The opponents and those who disagree with Architects’ Alliance will not create an article on the association. The creation of an article about a group which has a political agenda is in itself an engagement, but it does not make the article biased.

The idea of this article was to make public the existing conflict between academically qualified architects and the so-called self-trained / self-taught architects. It happens that Architects’ Alliance represents the self-taught and that they did not have a page in Wikipedia despite being compatible with Wiki standards for notability.

The fact is that the direct opponent of Architects’ Alliance has its page on Wikipedia. If you consider the article on the Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland (RIAI), it was surely created by members of the Institute if not some of their employees. The RIAI page does not stipulate that the RIAI has misled the public when advertising on national radio. It does not stipulate that the RIAI has campaigned for years to gain a monopoly in the Republic of Ireland. It does not inform on misleading information issued by the Institute regarding compliance with EU Law. The RIAI article does not explain that the RIAI has created the most expensive examination for the purpose of registering self-taught architects. The Irish examination for self-taught architects is 3 times mor expensive than its US / Canada equivalent and 4 times the cost of its Dutch equivalent.

I think that, if there is still a problem of neutrality with the Architects’ Alliance article after the latest revision that I carried out, then there is the same problem with the RIAI article which does not give details on the strong opposition against the institute having been appointed as the registration body. A survey of approximately 500 persons interested in the subject show that about 60% would have preferred a new body to be created rather than the RIAI to carry out this task. Only approx. 26% support the RIAI as the registration body for architects. If you do not remove the neutrality banner on this article, then you should also ad one on the RIAI page.

I hope to hear from you again on this matter

Regards --Christophe Krief (talk) 16:28, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Patrick Murray reference removals
Thanks for the AGF on the new sources. While I always feel it is patently obvious that a major party candidate for federal office is notable, I do understand where others do not. I had never come across the blacklist problem with the examiner(dot)com site before, and did not realize it was unacceptable as a resource. Lesson learned. I do, however, disagree with the "blog" removal. All newspapers that I am aware of excercise the same level of editorial control over their columnists blogs that they use on their printed articles. I have not yet seen any evidence to the contrary, and the source is still the same publisher as the printed resource. Unless you have evidence that the Weekly Standard excercises different editorial and fact checking controls over its online blog postings than it does from its printed news pieces, I would request that you restore the ROTC comment and the reference, as well as note such in the AfD. AFAIK, there is no reason to doubt the credibility of the publisher, and no reason to distinguish between their online and print stories.  Jim Miller  See me 22:31, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The Weekly Standard piece is not a reliable source, either; the blogginess, I concede, is not the issue here, but rather the shameless lack of neutrality of the post you cited, from the partisan headline to the biased language. That wasn't news reportage, it was a go-for-the-crotch attack on Moran. If this is a genuine incident, it should have been covered in the actual press (conservative or liberal), not just in the conservative equivalent of the old Daily Worker. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  00:03, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
~  Nerdy Science  Dude  00:13, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Notification of afd discussion
Hi, a page you speedily deleted on Wednesday has been recreated and speedy deletion on it declined. I have started a deletion discussion at afd about this page and wondered if you had an opinion on whether the new version of the page should remain on Wikipedia. The deletion discussion can be found at Articles for deletion/Yousuf Miah. --  role player 02:36, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Funk Page Thank-You
Hi Orangemike,

Thanks much for the help with the "T. Markus Funk" entry - they ran Chicago ABC News profile on him today, which motivated me to get this entry done. I am new to this, so, again, thanks for helping me/us out! (And any future suggestion on this or other entries is much appreciated!!!).

Petersong1968 (talk) 04:42, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of article Mirza Faizan
'''Amazing!!!, Its amazing that administrators of wikipedia take decisions on assumptions for which they themselves are NOT sure!! Just because it "SOUNDS LIKES" something, they are taking decisions to keep or delete an article...lol!! Dude, this single sentence itself is the notability of this guy, who is doing something for the first time in a country and for global aerospace industry. Have a look at these global news:. Moreover, a businessman contribution to global economy itself is his notability, otherwise tell me what is the notability of Bill Gates without mentioning Microsoft?? It appears that you guys are acting under biased judgement and personal prejudice while taking decision to keep or delete an article and you people don't have an answer to my questions. This is the reason why Mr. Tnxman307 has no reply and now are acting on his behalf. However, the world knows Wikipedia is an international community and belongs to everyone, we will keep in posting articles. Good Luck!!'''

13:02, 12 November 2010 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sameer1022 (talk • contribs)

Steampunk Tree House and COI
Hi Mike, I see that you reverted an addition to Steampunk on the grounds of COI. Would you have any objection to me re-adding this / re-adding this if I add some other non-COI refs? It clearly is COI (assuming of course that the editor name is real), but at the same time, this group did get a steam engine running in the middle of a desert and also the steampunk tree house is fairly well-known on the scene. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:09, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd be delighted! Thanks for volunteering. Of course we need better sourcing than the subjects' own websites. (But then, you already know that.) -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  19:49, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Imam hakim
There was plenty of context in this article to identify the subject, such as the link to muhaddith and the dates. Please restore the article allow the wiki process to be used to improve it. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:31, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
 * There was no need for "improvement", since "Imam Hakim" was another name for Hakim al-Nishaburi. However, at your suggestion (thanks) I restored the deleted name and converted it to a redirect. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  20:41, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Good work! Phil Bridger (talk) 20:51, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

King Alfred Plan
The page talk:King Alfred Plan was edited today, for the first time since 2008. Since you're the admin who protected the article, I wanted to make sure you know in case it isn't on your watchlist or it got bumped down by other things. I've no opinions on the content of the edit or whether it is the sort you were trying to keep out.  — Soap  —  22:31, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

User:Soulidium
Hi there, I saw that you blocked the User mentioned above and deleted one of his uploads I tagged at WP:PUF, I was wondering about the rest of his uploads that were tagged, mostly found at Possibly unfree files/2010 November 12, should they be deleted immediatley as well?-- Shadowed   Soul  23:12, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Notability
I can understand your sentiment concerning Eggs Aldo (Alter ego of...?). Peppered with quaint turns of phrase and idioms, the language has the floral verbosity of Indian English - with which I am very familiar - but I may be mistaking it for a West Indian variety with which I am not familiar. The article is spiced with more than a touch  of COI, but  the main  ingredients, notability and sources, are absent. Totally tasteless. --Kudpung (talk) 18:45, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

JustNeem deletion
Could you please tell me what is expected to make a new article acceptable? I'm very new at this and thought I was following all of the posted guidelines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Martynreynes (talk • contribs) 01:37, 16 November 2010 (UTC) — Martynreynes (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Read WP:CORP. There is nothing to indicate this company is notable in any way; and the article reads like you work for them. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  01:39, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I was editing Azadirachta indica and noticed that an Indian company was listed (Margo soap) and thought it might be helpful to add an American company as well. I do not work for JustNeem, I just like their soap.

Martynreynes (talk) 01:41, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * That falls under the WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument. I've nominated Margo (soap) for deletion as non-notable. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  01:46, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. If it comes off as a sales pitch, I apologize. I guess I'm just not understanding the concept as well as you - I was just trying to share information.

Martynreynes (talk) 01:54, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Lawrencewarwick
I have posted at COIN. Racepacket (talk) 12:45, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Kickstarter NPOV complaint
Curious, why does Kickstarter not seem neutral to you? It seemed OK to me to drop the notice after some article cleanup in September --Jamiew (talk) 23:28, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It's the cutesie-poo pull quote from something called the Miami New Times that most rang my alarms. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  02:25, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The quote is a joke Mike, as I think you know. If you check out the sources, you'll see there isn't a lot of bad to be said about it. Anyway, if you really think it needs work, please add some suggestions on the talk page if you're going to bring up issues of NPOV or notability. Steven Walling 16:57, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

User:Arab League
User Arab League wants to change his username but does not know and wants you to help him About Changing Name Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 07:32, 13 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Orangemike, can you explain to me the reasoning behind blocking a user who had been editing for over 4 years and made over 5000 edits without warning? I must be missing something. – xeno talk  16:40, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I thought under our standards for usernames this one was just plain not acceptable, any more than a username like User:AFL-CIO or User:Apple Inc.; it's not like I was happy about having to do it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Orangemike (talk • contribs) 16:47, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * For established users (that may have registered when such rules did not exist), there are other options than jumping straight to a block (especially one that suggests they register a new username), such as requesting they request a name change, or filing an RFC/N. – xeno talk  16:49, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll definitely keep that in mind for the future. By the way, thanks for unblocking AL. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:57, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

User:Texasmusicgirl block
It appears that this user that you blocked has created a new user (User:Rocknrollforever) to avoid your block. Rocknrollforever admits to being the same publicist in their latest edit of George Ducas (singer) diff -- &#124;  Uncle Milty  &#124;  talk  &#124;  23:27, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for playing Wikipedia Editor Groupmind this evening! Y'all can both go to Sockpuppet investigations/Texasmusicgirl now. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  14:10, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Quack
User:Texasmusicgirl is evading her block with the account User:Rocknrollforever. If it's not her, it's most definitely a meatpuppet as their first and only edit was to immediately nominate the George Ducas (singer) article for speedy deletion. -- Jezebel's  Ponyo bons mots 00:26, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Ponyo and I, on the other hand, have absolutely no off-site communication. ^_^ -- &#124;  Uncle Milty  &#124;  talk  &#124;  00:36, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Aha! That's what I get for hitting 'new section' to edit, I completely missed the post above. Nice mind-melding with you Uncle Milty! -- Jezebel's  Ponyo bons mots 00:55, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for playing Wikipedia Editor Groupmind this evening! Y'all can both go to Sockpuppet investigations/Texasmusicgirl now. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  14:10, 17 November 2010 (UTC)