User talk:Orangemike/Archive 19

John Balcerzak Article
I have recently proposed that the article on Milwaukee police officer John Balcerzak which you have previously been involved with editing should be cleaned up and possibly expanded. Please feel free to read my comments on the article's Talk page and share any thoughts you may have regarding my proposal.--TommyBoy (talk) 21:51, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for responding to my comments and cleaning up the article which looks better although in retrospect, I agree with your comments on the article's Talk page that he is a "marginally notable figure", and would have limited publicly-available information on him beyond his roles in the Dahmer case and as President of the Milwaukee Police Association. For example, I have only heard of Balcerzak through his role in the Dahmer case which occurred when I was living in Milwaukee. --TommyBoy (talk) 01:34, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I gather that you're exiled to some lesser land now? -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  19:13, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, not neccessarily "exiled to some lesser land", but I grew up in Milwaukee and moved down South when my mother remarried. Fortunately, as a child at the time, I was shielded from the more grotesque aspects of the Dahmer case, but do remember Balcerzak and Gabrish getting fired for their role in the case. --TommyBoy (talk) 20:54, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Whereas I moved to Milwaukee from the South in 1977, and have never even contemplated the possiblity of moving back down there. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  20:59, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In Walter Polakowski, you recently added links to the disambiguation pages Saloon and Newsboy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:00, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Heads up
You have a groupie. (diff) I've reverted it, but you'll probably want to keep an eye out for more of this sort of thing.  Horologium  (talk) 01:09, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It's almost cute. I am of course praying for the day when that particular item moves from "In Progress" to "Successful"; but that's ultimately in the hands of the Lord (okay, technically it's in the hands of the voters; but the Lord's will prevails). -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  13:31, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:John of Damascus
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:John of Damascus. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 08:15, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Pohana
Please give me your arguments in ragards of deleting the page. Pohana

What research have you done? Where did you find information about the orga? Why didn't you contact the author of the page before deleting the page?

regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haminiwiki (talk • contribs) 20:01, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * One of the criteria for speedy deletion of an article is when there is no assertion of any kind of notability about the subject organization. On a planet of seven billion people, with literally millions of organizations, mere existence does not qualify an organization for an article in an encyclopedia. Additionally, there was almost no content there except the name of the organization, a URL for its website (not a reliable source, and the fact that it is based in Germany. See WP:CORP, WP:NOBLECAUSE and WP:UPANDCOMING for further guidance. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  20:14, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Probable COI spammer
Mike, would appreciate you looking at User:Mikepabell's contributions. It all looks like one big spamfest to me, but maybe I am getting jaded. This user also has a pretty glaring COI as revealed by a quick Google search. Thanks. – ukexpat (talk) 20:50, 16 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Hello to User:Orangemike;


 * I appreciate your decision today. I also appreciate the coordination and the time of the team that was assembled, at the direction of your decision today, to disassemble and leave parts of the 7-part spam entity I put into your networks' filter over the last few days.


 * I researched your provided guidelines to an extent I felt endless. I felt confident I aligned with your system, so I developed material according to what I perceived to be the guidelines. Looking back, I obviously wasn't prepared. 'Darkside' actually appears in the terminology of Wikipedia guidelines describing the incident I created. I probably won't ever finish learning about your (Wikipedia's) system. I guess it's a lot like the writing itself. The information for new users felt a lot like a jungle. I went to Yahoo to break the logo blockade. I diligently worked around a lot of bots and reviews over the last few days. I hope you guys at least appreciated the formatting efforts. I'm sure you've heard it many times: I didn't realize.


 * I learned a lot of things today. One thing I noticed is that you're also a 'User:', though also an Administrator. That made me realize that we're all Wikipedia users.


 * I'm incredibly curious about the '[Placeholder]' accounts among the list of top users. In fact, the top user, and then several more. It seems like a best practice thing.


 * Mike P. Abell 08:04, 17 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikepabell (talk • contribs)

Don't panic
Replied at User talk:Chriswaterguy. :-) --Chriswaterguy talk 02:27, 17 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Hardcore. Replied there again. --Chriswaterguy talk 12:31, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for redirecting Shao Nian Yang Jia Jiang to The Young Warriors (TV series).--NeoBatfreak (talk) 05:54, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: Change of policy towards Dutch (and other non EN-languages) Wikipedia's
As a Dutch speaker living in the US I would like to thank you for your comments on this rather distasteful discussion. My mothertongue has only 25 mio speakers, maybe 30 mio who could read it. Still there is a million pges at nl.wiki now.

I joined nl.wiki when it only had 400 pages and we had people coming to tell us (in Dutch) that writing in Dutch was totally useless, because English already had 20,000 pages... There simply is a group of Dutch speakers who truly believe that if it is not in English it isn't good enough. I have had pages scrapped because I wrote them in Dutch. If I then first wrote them in English here, I could 'translate' my own page back into Dutch and nobody would object... This problem does not come from the anglophones of this world. It comes from within and yes I (and many others) have been fighting it for a decade at wiki. Thanks for helping us.


 * home nl:wikt:Gebruiker:Jcwf

Jcwf (talk) 20:20, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

self-promoters again
Just a heads-up: I've added a section to User_talk:Janhunt regarding their self-promotion which you've addressed before. (cc-ing MrOllie and Chrislk02 likewise.) Mathglot (talk) 00:10, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 06:15, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

i mad
What the fuck: User:Mega revenge/Colorado Timberline Acadamy

I was drafting a article on my talk page you dickweed. i was going to copyedit that shit.

and why the fuck do you care in the first place you retard.

ITS MY USERPAGE I CAN DO WHATEVER THE HELL I WANT FOR fuks SAKE

yes i mad. restore pl0x. Mega revenge (talk) 08:24, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * "Our mission is to prepare students academically and socially for the challenges they face upon graduation. Through our diverse curriculum and outdoor programs we foster freedom with responsibility, creativity, and respect for self, each other and the environment." That's not an article, that's an ad. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  14:05, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

User:AASstaffJudy
I unblocked this user, who you had blocked for a username violation, to change usernames. I hope this is okay with you; I recognize that there her contributions have been well-intentioned but problematically focused on her own organization, so I'll put her new talk page on my watchlist and check in from time to time. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 18:12, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Already noticed, and I'm good with that. I'd advise her on how to format a proper reference footnote, too. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  18:16, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: Edward Zinn
No problem. Packerfansam (talk) 20:59, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Yukon Green Party
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Yukon Green Party. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 03:15, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Care.com
Dear Orangemike, I just wanted to ask if you would please consider un-protecting the "Care.com" page so that I can enter new text under that title. I realize there were problems with the earlier versions of the page but I've written a completely new, well-sourced article that I believe estabishes the company's importance and notability and meets all other Wikipedia criteria for inclusion as well. My intent is to enter the new text, then post a general request to have it reviewed. I would be happy to send you the new text if you'd like to see it first. Thank you for considering my request!Braedon Farr (talk) 13:05, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * So, create a draft version at User:Braedon Farr/Care.com and we'll work from there. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  14:00, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Dear Orange Mike, I created the draft as you suggested and would be very grateful if you could please look it over and let me know your thoughts. I have not yet assigned it a category - I thought I would first wait to receive your feedback. Thank you very much!Braedon Farr (talk) 16:14, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks fairly solid; see the query I just added. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  16:19, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your input! I made some revisions to address your query. I also added categories but have hidden them for the time being. If it's not too much trouble, could you please look the article over once more and let me know if it's ready for the mainspace? Thank you!Braedon Farr (talk) 21:53, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Dear Orange Mike, I added some additional internal links. Should the wikification tag remain or can it be removed? Also, please let me know if you feel the article can be moved to the mainspace. Thank you very much for all your help!Braedon Farr (talk) 18:36, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Terms like "caregiver" need explanatory wikilinks; not all cultures handle their vulnerable populations the way Americans do. Also: long feel-good passages like "Everyone at the company is assigned to move to a different desk every year at the company. Part of the reason is so that people meet people from different teams and get to know their jobs. The goal is to turn the company into a single large team." read like they were taken from a company advertisement, and may fail our test of neutral point of view. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  19:12, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Good points. I made some revisions to make the tone neutral and added a couple of explanatory wikilinks. I hope this is better. Please let me know what you think. Thanks again!Braedon Farr (talk) 14:59, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Dear Orange Mike, thank you for entering the additional wikilinks. Do you think this article can be moved to the mainspace now?Braedon Farr (talk) 12:32, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

JessicaZaluzecCM
Please see this diff. Please offer me some guidance. Is her username within Wikipedia rules, or is the "CM" in her name, combined with her edits to Classical Movements, a violation of username policy? Thanks! Ebikeguy (talk) 22:52, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for your input! Ebikeguy (talk) 16:03, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:1953 Iranian coup d'état
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:1953 Iranian coup d'état. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 01:15, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Max Galasinski (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Public school and Night school


 * Frank Kubatzki (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Night school

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

University at Buffalo CAS
Hi, can you please review the article, University at Buffalo College of Arts & Sciences, and post on the discussion board on whether it should be deleted or not deleted. Please look at the article itself and the discussion posts that follow. Thanks SO much :) Davidhar (talk) 18:17, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:1953 Iranian coup d'état
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:1953 Iranian coup d'état. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 23:15, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Model United Nations resolution
On Talk:Model United Nations resolution, User:AsyaMariaIgmen asked for help. Please re-read your reply there, and consider how you might provide some. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:19, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:.ss
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:.ss. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 20:15, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Christmas Eve
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Christmas Eve. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 18:15, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Anstey Nomads F.C.
Why the revert? The edits by User:Leicestershire.co seemed a distinct improvement to me.--Michig (talk) 21:31, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * "Our first season 2009/2010 in the East Midlands Counties League saw us finish last but our good reputation helped us to not get relegated and we were to compete in the East Midlands Counties League for the 2010-11 season. Andy Miller joined us and brought new players with him and in his first season finished a respectable 12th position.... This season Andy has registered all of his players from last season and Nomads are in the F.A Cup for the first time in their history." Clear NPOV violation. I regret the possibility that I removed some good stuff in that edit; footy is completely alien to me, and I was mostly concerned with getting rid of the first-person fanboy rah-rah. Thanks for raising the issue. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  13:43, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Geoffrey Keezer
Need an Admin! I noticed a biography here about Geoffrey Keezer, but it had no infobox, which I added. I noticed it had WP:COI issues from it's inception and POV problems, too. Today when I had a look at it, I checked out the subject's website, and found every single word in the text verbatim. Given that this article was begun by Geoffrey Keezer, and stands as a sore copyright violation, I'm hoping you can resolve the problem. Thanks. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 02:01, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Your block of Petertriplett
I'd like you to at a look at thread and to consider the wisdom of your block of Petertriplett, on the very dubious ground of "legal threats". If you are going to act when people make such outbursts, you need to carefully investigate the reasons for the threat, ensure that any libels are removed, make sure the user knows we treat defamation really seriously, and feels free to communicate any further concerns. You also need to ensure that the user properly understands that the block is not a punishment for threats, or an attempt to gag them, but necessary if they genuinely want to pursue the matter legally off-wiki. Our priority has to be to act on any well-founded concerns about slander, not least because to do so reduces the risk of legal issues.--Scott Mac 16:22, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I've attempted to address your concerns with my post at User talk:Petertriplett. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  18:10, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Peaking Lights
Hi-You may want to look at the new Peaking Lights article. Also I expanded the article about Tamara Grigsby about her career before she was elected to the Wisconsin Assembly. Thank you-RFD (talk) 17:46, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Re
This was not about myself. Its an article about about a fiction writer.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Buckinkb (talk • contribs) 01:41, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:University of Pristina
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:University of Pristina. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 15:15, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Scdnr
Hi Orangemike. I've looked over the situation regarding this user. There were obviously numerous problems with their additions, but I think this is a good faith editor who has simply never been informed of our policies. Yes, there's a potential COI here, but I really don't think they're here for promotional purposes (and let's face it, as long as they can edit within our policies, that article is in severe need of someone willing to improve it). Anyway, would you have any objection to me unblocking them so that I can work with them (explain how things here work, what is and isn't allowed, help them pursue DR if need be, keep an eye on them, etc.)? Thanks,  Swarm  X 21:49, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * They've been warned since September, and seem to have a severe WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT problem. From the spamusername to their attitude as shown in their edit summaries, I'm reluctant as all get-out to support an unblock without some serious evidence that they get it and will comply with our COI rules. It's not like there's a language problem: I'm a native speaker of Bubba my own self! -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  21:54, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * They've contacted the unblock mailing list, to express concern that the article is "utterly incorrect" and that they were blocked rather than helpfully critiqued (they don't actually request an unblock). I happen to agree that no one made a meaningful attempt to communicate what exactly was wrong with their edits, and that is probably the main cause of their problematic editing rather than IDHT (templated warnings are utterly useless for new users). They're clearly an employee with the SCDNR, but bottom line, I don't find their edits intentionally promotional, I believe they're here in good faith, and I'm willing to mentor them, keep an eye on their edits, and reblock if they prove unable to appropriately. I hope this assurance is enough for you&mdash; worst case, it's a WP:ROPE scenario.  Swarm  X 22:17, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * That's good enough for this former employee of the Tennessee Department of Employment Security (which doesn't even exist any more). -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  22:27, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

MegMaker
Hi Mike, is asking for the block you imposed on her to be lifted. Her explanation looks reasonable to me. Would you mind if I lifted the block? Regards, Nick-D (talk) 06:23, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

User talk:MegMaker
Hi, I've unblocked her - it's her real name and she was just updating links to her personal site added by someone else. Since you weren't online, I didn't ask you first - hope it's not a problem because her explanations made everything pretty clear. Max Semenik (talk) 06:25, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Oops, looks like I've beat Nick-D to unblocking and posting on her page, but he beat me here:P Max Semenik (talk) 07:24, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I have no complaints. I had not caught on that "Maker" was an actual name; I thought it was more a title, like "Wordsmith" or the like. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  13:47, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

thanks
That IP170 seems a tad clueless -- see also his "edits" at Talk:Boris Berezovsky (businessman) recently as well. Cheers. Collect (talk) 22:40, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Hockey stick controversy
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Hockey stick controversy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 12:15, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Legal threat block of Petertriplett
I'm late to the party, but please see my comment at User talk:Petertriplett (and especially my request that you unblock the account). Thanks, AGK   [• ]  02:52, 31 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Mike. I've looked at the comment that Petertriplett made, and I can see how you feel "I have reported this to the police" is a legal threat. However, given the circumstances - that the user was removing unpleasant WP:BLP material, that the user was directly related to the subject, that the user had twice asked for help, and had revealed that there was a history of harassment - a block may not be the best way of handling this. Our policy is that "Rather than blocking immediately, administrators should seek to clarify the user's meaning and make sure that a mere misunderstanding is not involved." It is quite possible that the comment "I have reported this to the police" is a rephrasing of the earlier comment "We do gave [sic] a problem with someone harassing Paula and it has been reported to the police in London." Given that it is possible that the user was referring to a police report that has nothing to do with Wikipedia or any of our users, a discussion with the user to clarify the matter, and to allow refactoring of the statement for clarity, would be more in line with our normal procedures. I am leaving a copy of this on Petertriplett's talkpage.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  09:45, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Unblocked based on this discussion and an effort to be fair to all. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  21:39, 31 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  09:28, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Unblock
Hi Orangemike, I've unblocked User:Jmuenzing as they claim to understand the reason why they were blocked and have made an undertaking to not make promotional edits again. —Tom Morris (talk) 14:54, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Bit of help needed.
Hi Orangemike, I was interested in reading and perhaps editing Thomas L. Rhodes article. He is on the board (was on the board?) of Mlwaukee's Bradley Foundation. The article has a block on it from July 2011 that I have never seen before. It requires some sort of admin attention. Could you take a look? Also, go packers! Capitalismojo (talk) 17:13, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, apparently the previous version of this article consisted of multiple copyright violations, taking swaths of material from copyrighted sources such as his biography at the National Review. We need a new bio that takes information from more reliable sources, and of course respects copyrights. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  14:10, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Fan (person) article problems
Hi OrangeMike (Love that shirt!)

Please cast a critical eye over the article Fan (person). In many of its numerous sections it has few citations, and reads like original research or a personal essay. (Own emotional response: The worst aspect of an article like this, I feel, is that it seems so plausible. Part of its plausibility lies in that it's grammatical English, correctly spelled - normally Good Things.)

Since I have no expertise whatever on fandom, and no access to suitable references, unfortunately I wouldn't know how to begin improving it. Is there a suitable template I could place at the top of the article to request more in-line citations?

Thanks — for reading this! yoyo (talk) 06:28, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * At WP:TEMP you will find an exhaustive list of our template messages for improvement. For your current purposes, I particularly recommend the section to be found at Template messages/Sources of articles. Please go through those carefully, though, to pick the most specific and precise criticism of the current content. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  14:17, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Gandzasar monastery
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Gandzasar monastery. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 10:15, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Cracker Barrel again
Hi there, Mike. I noticed that you've re-tagged the Cracker Barrel article, although nothing has changed since it was agreed that there was consensus to remove it. Of course the article is "prettier" than it was before—but it was also quite ugly prior to my involvement. If you have content changes to suggest, that's one thing, but I thought this issue was previously resolved. I hope you'll reconsider it. WWB Too (talk) 20:05, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
 * As long as the Tom DeLay stuff remains censored, I want it made clear who is to blame for it, and what your motivation was. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  20:08, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:History of Azerbaijan
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:History of Azerbaijan. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 08:15, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Article Feedback Tool 5
Hey, Orangemike! We'll be holding an IRC office hours session on Friday for AFT5 in which we'll discuss (amongst other things) the work we're putting into predicting and dealing with issues like defamation and BLP problems. If you could attend and provide feedback, I'd be very grateful; it's from 19:00 UTC until 23:00 UTC in #wikimedia-office. If you can't attend, I'll be posting the logs and summarising what we discussed so other people can contribute ideas :). Thanks! Ironholds (talk) 16:36, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Gotcha; okay, I'll drop you an update when we have some concrete results, and you can comment as to whether the ideas are good, bad or need working on and I just noticed I'd been posting from my personal account. Whoops. Ironholds (talk) 16:45, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

"not the good one"?
An English officer and foe of the Fenians is "the good one"? We clearly have different worldviews. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  20:22, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but WTF ?
 * If you're talking about this diff, yes, the link was linking to John Michel, when the text is talking about a member of a science-fiction club. So, yes, the link was bad, and I changed it. To link to the right person: John B. Michel. So, yes, John Michel was "not the good one".
 * Try and think next time.
 * Pleclown (talk) 20:55, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, you meant the link was bad; not that the left-wing fan Michel was less good than the Englishman. Sorry I misunderstood you. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  20:58, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Thinking of doing something potentially monumentally stupid.
Hi, I was hoping you could provide some advice on something that I’m toying with. Quite a while ago I was looking at the Babylon 5 article and noticed it was rather long while, a little surprisingly, at the same time didn’t really include any information on various production elements such as the costume, music, special effects etc. But did include a fascinating piece on what accents the actors used. ; ) I also noticed that at one point it was proposed as a possible featured article!? I spend quite a bit of time on the computer due to work, but there’s also periods when I’m sitting playing Tetris waiting for print jobs to finish.  So a while back I started looking at essentially rewriting the article from the bottom up.

I’m no editor and can’t write for toffee (obviously), I also don’t have access to any of the print publications which could provide useful information. Could you take a look at the Costume and Music sections that I’ve typed up in this sandbox. There rough (and incomplete) but should give an idea of the direction I’m taking

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Minsk59/sandbox

Ignore everything else. ; ) the other content is more for giving me an idea of formatting and a place to hold some rough notes, bits of information and ideas. Basically, am I going off on a tangent, and the content is not suitable for a wiki article. If so that’s fine, and I’ll start playing Solitaire as I’m getting sick of Tetris.  If the general idea is sound then I have no problems in spending a bit more time attempting to put more content together,  with the hope that more experienced editors will then duly rip it apart in order to bring it up to Wikipedia standards, and perhaps add further information, before even considering the remote possibility of replacing the existing article.  Basically I’m not so arrogant as to attempt this alone. ; )

BTW. I realise interest in the B5 article is low, for various reasons. I’ve approached yourself (and two others) as I noticed you’ve edited the thing a number of times over the last year or so, and appear to know what the hell your doing. ; ) But if I’m barking up the wrong barge poll,  please let me know.  If you know of anyone else who may be interested in passing an eye over what is being put together, or who may have access to printed reference material, that would be most appreciated as well.  Cheers.Minsk59 (talk) 01:48, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction
Good to know the quote is from Bloch. Sadly, if you type in your Google main page "heart small boy", Google's first suggested completion is "Stephen King". I should have looked further.--WickerGuy (talk) 18:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

The quote was also attributed to Stephen King in a New York Times crossword puzzle just this past spring.--WickerGuy (talk) 18:20, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Vicki Breazeale
I don't understand why you deleted my Wikipedia page. I am a scientist and a science educator. I was the first person to describe the key regulatory (allosteric) enzyme in the Calvin Cycle for my MS work at UC Berkeley: Sedoheptulose 1,7 Bisphosphatase.

I am one of the founders of Great Wilderness, a nonprofit, that is devoted to saving rainforests in Ecuador. I wrote an article for a law school in Washington DC on the future of Biodiversity on Earth. They found me on the Internet and asked me to write the article.

A colleague at Cornell wants me to help develop at curriculum for a solar village project in Ethiopia.

Please re-install my page for the future of biodiversity on Earth.

Regards,

Vicki Breazeale — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vicki breazeale (talk • contribs) 20:04, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Replied on your talk page, which is yours (mostly), unlike any pages in Wikipedia about you, which are Wikipedia's. Also: please note that Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  20:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Inspiration
Your comments on Jimmy Wales' talk page the other day, which I just notice, inspired me.. Cheers, ScottyBerg (talk) 21:25, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Burning of Washington
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Burning of Washington. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 06:15, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Relocated user message from your Userpage
apologies orange mike, but i have no idea about how to use wiki or how it's run. the offensive material has been removed for the page now so i'm very happy. have a wonderful and prosperous 2012! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danieldb13 (talk • contribs) 18:21, 6 January 2012

Please comment on Talk:Taliban
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Taliban. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 04:15, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Article Feedback Tool
Hey, Orangemike. We've opened up Wikipedia_talk:Article_Feedback_Tool/Version_5 which, amongst other things, deals with who should have access to the hide tool; should we give it to rollbackers to expand the pool, or should we leave admins as the only people with access? As someone concerned about BLP issues with this tool, I thought you'd be interested in participating :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 10:21, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Care.com article
Dear Orange Mike, when you have a chance can you please look over my Care.com article and let me know if it's ready for the mainspace? By the way, thank you very much for helping me develop and improve it.Braedon Farr (talk) 13:01, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry to bother you, but if this article looks okay to you now, can you please un-protect it? I will then move it to the mainspace. Thanks!Braedon Farr (talk) 16:33, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Done and moved. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  17:10, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/24 October 2011/Battle of Tali-Ihantala
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/24 October 2011/Battle of Tali-Ihantala. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 02:15, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Removal External links
Hi there, I am editing the Clignett article, and was removing most of the links, can't you just give a person a chance to change it them selves? But you did remove some links that where allowed to use! You need to read this: Official links

Shortcut: WP:ELOFFICIAL

An official link is a link to a website or other Internet service that meets both of the following: 1.The linked content is controlled by the subject (organization or individual person) of the Wikipedia article. 2.The linked content primarily covers the area for which the subject of the article is notable. Official links (if any) are provided to give the reader the opportunity to see what the subject says about itself. These links are exempt from the links normally to be avoided, but they are not exempt from the restrictions on linking. For example, although links to websites that require readers to register or pay to view content are normally not acceptable in the External links section, such a link may be included when it is an official website for the subject. Official links are still subject to standard formatting requirements, such as rich media labeling and not placing links in the text of the article. When an official website is used as a source to verify a self-published statement in the article text, it should be formatted like any other reference used in the article.[5] Official websites may be included in some infoboxes, and by convention are listed first in the External links section. Use of the template is optional. No official link exists for many articles. "Fansites", including everything from websites run by fans of a musician to a charitable organization supporting patients with a disease, even if they are endorsed or authorized by the subject, are not considered official websites because the subject of the article is unable to control the information being presented. Links to websites that are not considered official websites may still be justifiable under other sections of this guideline, e.g., Links to consider #4.
 * I'm fully aware of that passage. None of the removed links was to an "official link", since this family/lineage does not have such a thing as an "official link" or "official website". -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  19:16, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, some notable people who were listed do have their own official wegsite and you did remove those, sir. The Clignett article is not done yet. I'm in the progress to make an article on some of the notable people who were on the list, and why did you have to remove the part of the coat of arms. The other admins did not remove that, it is suitable for the article. That's is part of the familyname. There was also a ref you deleted that was considered valid. --Clignett73 (talk) 16:51, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * 1. The "official site" exemption is for an official site of the subject matter, which is a name and a family. There is no official site for a name or a family.
 * 2. If and when there are articles about these people, they can be added to the article (if it survives the current AfD discussion).
 * 3. The coat of arms did not have any kind of reliable source.
 * 4. If there is a reference that you feel qualifies as both reliable and relevant to the article, then re-introduce that specific individual source; don't dump in links to every Google Books result for every book in their database that mentions somebody named Clignett. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  17:16, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

First of all, i didn't start this article. I didn't put all the external links in there, but the person who started this article. At the time you apparently deleted the whole section, i was looking at the links that could be of any use.
 * 1. But for example, Robine Clignett [], who was listed under notable people has her own website, you did delete that. There also is an article on wiki with her name listed Windward Passages under personnel, which you deleted.
 * 2. Well, you didn't even give it a chance to be sorted.
 * 3. In the Netherlands, EVERYTHING pictures, data, etc. (of deceased familymembers) even the coat of arms. That is stored/ archived at Genealogy Centers, museums, any data base I am free to use, because it concerns my familyname, but i do have to publish the source which i have . (And i even have that in writing) The picture of the coat of arms didn't need any other source than myself, because it didn't come out of a book. I asked the employee of the Genealogy Center (CBG) in The Hague yesterday if i need to add a source to that picture and she said no, because i took it myself of the original which has been in my family for a decades.
 * 4. I will, but i have a 2 year old that also needs my attention. Now, it will only take longer to finish the article, because you took most of the usable stuff out, and i have to re-introduce it again. Please, give me time to re-do what i had planned to add in the first place and then judge what ever isn't suitable. Thank you --Clignett73 (talk) 18:38, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

feedback on draft article requested & full disclosure of affiliation
I have posted a draft of an article here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ELH7897/ELH7897/sandbox.

I have a professional affiliation with this organization, however I hope and believe that this article can stand on its own merits.

I'm posting this on Orangemike's user talk page because he deleted a page someone else created on this organization. I want to be perfectly clear that this is a different article and I'm a different person, however both the previous author and I were/are affiliated with the organization.

I understand that Orangemike is in high demand and that others help field inquiries posted on this talk page. I would be very grateful for any feedback or advice on this draft. Thank you!

ELH7897 (talk) 16:33, 10 January 2012 (UTC)ELH7897
 * I will take a look and make some changes per WP:MOS. – ukexpat (talk) 18:31, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ and I will leave some additional comments on your talk page. – ukexpat (talk) 18:38, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

See my Reply to You on my Talk Page
Petersontinam (talk) 19:11, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Additionally, I don't think the word "popular" (describing his Youtube Channel) that you edited out of the Ben Breedlove article is a "Peacock" word. Under that Policy, Peacock words seem to be of a an intense nature such as-
 * "legendary, great, eminent, visionary, outstanding, leading, celebrated, cutting-edge, extraordinary, brilliant, famous, renowned, remarkable, prestigious, world-class, respected, notable, virtuoso ...". If you wondered if it was appropriate, it could have been sourced in a second instead of the word edited out. The number of subscribers or video uploads confirm popularity. I think you are being very picky. Petersontinam (talk) 19:41, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * ? Really? Seems to me that "popular" fits in that category very nicely. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  19:43, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Wow, what a surprise that we have a difference of opinion again. I feel like you are baiting me and I just don't have the time for that right now. I put forth my thoughts, you put forth yours...ne'r the twain shall meet, agree to disagree, and all that good stuff. Time to move on for both of us. Petersontinam (talk) 19:57, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Previous block
You were involved with a block on a user some time ago, who was making their own top 40 list and promoting it to article space. The user's talk was still on my watch list, and I noticed today that they are editing their talk page with a "userfied" version of the list again. I have warned them not to promote it to article space again, but wanted to check with you regarding the previous block etc. Their user page talk page is here User_talk:Mezniecibassupertop40 Gaijin42 (talk) 21:16, 11 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh, I guess they were just blocked from article space, but can continue to edit their talk page. Gaijin42 (talk) 21:17, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * That's not why we allow them access to edit their talk page: they are supposed to use that ability to request unblocking or otherwise discuss their problematic behavior; instead, they were abusing the privilege, and have had it revoked. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  21:21, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * thanks for the followup and clarification. Gaijin42 (talk) 21:25, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

QNET Wiki
Qnet is massively growing direct selling arm of Qi Group of Companies. I would request the editor's of this page to understand the correctness, knowledge of 'right and wrong' before perform undo activity. I kindly request those who disagree with the content to have an healthy discussion in order to avoid any mutual conflicts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Junaidramzan (talk • contribs) 22:01, 11 January 2012 (UTC) — Junaidramzan (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Wikipedia is not for advertising language and spam. You ignored the multiple warnings you were given, and have been blocked. See your own talk page for further information. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  22:07, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Susan B. Anthony List
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Susan B. Anthony List. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 23:15, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Re: Cheesehead Barnstar
Thank you! Packerfansam (talk) 00:42, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Joey Hood
Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Joey Hood. 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) 00:11, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * For the record (I know the above is a bot message), User:Pichpich had my back and has already added three references to the stub. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  15:53, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the Revert on Process Media's Page
Hi there. I saw that you recently reverted all of the book titles that I added to Process's page as well as other information that was not added by myself for the reason of "disruptive editing." I understand the importance of a neutral point of view when editing a page's information and appreciate the feedback as a new wikipedia editor. However, I don't understand how posting titles of books that a Publisher has published on said publisher's own page is disruptive or biased in the least. If I were to comment on the quality of Process titles or if I were encouraging people to read them then that would make sense, but this is simply addressing their existence. Honestly, it seems like if the page had been edited by anyone else, it wouldn't have been changed. The deletion of wiki content seems like a knee-jerk reaction to the fact that I work for the company without really considering the actual content itself first.

I am new, however, and could be misunderstanding where you're coming from. Is this the case? Thanks for the feedback!

(The edit I'm referring to is found on my user page's talk section: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Davidw9) Davidw9 (talk) 18:04, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * 1. Wikipedia is not a venue for you to be posting your publisher's catalog. That is advertising. If you want to do that, put your catalog on your website and in the Publishers Trade List Annual (is that even being published any more?}; don't try to put it into Wikipedia.
 * 2. This leads to the other problem: you are editing articles about your boss and his companies, in violation of our strictures against conflict-of-interest editing. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  18:19, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough, I can see how posting too many titles could be viewed as forming a sort of catalog and, thus, advertising. Could making a short list (say, five or ten) of successful titles or books that have played a large part in the company's history or are a good representation of the sorts of things the company releases be considered historically important and worthy of encyclopedic record? That's all the original goal of the wiki edit was: to give people who visit the page an example of the sorts of books that the publisher is known for or could possibly release in the future.

How about a list of authors? I see that Tor Fantasy lists their authors, Viz Media lists both their authors and various series they publish, and Harper Collins lists titles, authors, AND notable publications. That's just a few popular publishing companies that I searched randomly.

Basically, I'm wondering if we'll be able to come to a compromise here because, based on the content of other publishing companies and based on what is outlined in Wikipedia's own user guidelines, the information I wish to add could very well be considered Encyclopedic.

Or am I just wasting my breath since I'm affiliated with the company?

Davidw9 (talk) 19:24, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Tor doesn't list their authors: the article about Tor lists some of their authors. Ditto the others you mention. (I know some of the Tor folks who do edit here, and they are scrupulous about not messing with the article about their firm, articles about their authors, etc.) If somebody finds impartial, reliable third-party sources not affiliated with the subject which discuss particularly notable works from that publisher, then that information could be added to the article by somebody else, or suggested on the talk page of the article by somebody with a conflict of interest who is careful to disclose their COI. If you had actually been blocked, these are the standard questions you would be offered as part of one of our templated messages before we would consider unblocking you:
 * Here are a few key questions:


 * Do you understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not a business directory?
 * Do you understand conflict of interest?
 * Do you understand that to be considered for an encyclopedia article, the subject must be notable?

You are currently blocked because your username appears directly related to a company, group or product that you have been promoting, contrary to the username policy. Changing the username will not allow you to violate the 3 important principles above.
 * Don't get me wrong: you have not been blocked, and at this rate will probably not be; but the questions and the live links they contain are good guidance in and of themselves to our rules and expectations here for somebody in your situation. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  20:13, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Okay, that makes sense. Thanks for your help.

Davidw9 (talk) 22:00, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

IP blocks
Hey Mike, happy new year! I just noticed a couple of IPs that you had indefinitely blocked, and jut thought I'd remind you that we're not supposed to indef them because the damn things change so often and this guy can obviously hop from one to another with little effort so there's a risk that an innocent editor might get caught in a block intended for someone else. Hope you're well, HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  21:06, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I think they're stable IPs; but you're right. I hope you reversed me? -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  22:28, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I took them down to a week. We can give them more time off after that if necessary, but I expect he'll have gone through another half a dozen IPs by then anyway! The down-side to "anyone can edit" I suppose. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  00:11, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ulster Defence Regiment
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ulster Defence Regiment. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 21:15, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Allan Jones (businessman)
Hi, I notice that you expressed some concern regarding possible promotional usage of Allan Jones (businessman). at Commons might interest you. I'll try to keep an eye out for any new articles relating to his companies etc. - Sitush (talk) 20:17, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Flag of Western Sahara
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Flag of Western Sahara. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 18:15, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Peer review
Hi Orangemike. The Hobbit is currently listed for peer review and since I have addressed a list of issues that had been identified, I'd now appreciate another look at it and another opinion. Please see the review discussion. Regards, De728631 (talk) 21:33, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Petersontinam (talk) 03:40, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

January 2012 Newsletter for WikiProject United States and supported projects
--Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 18:26, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Confederate government of Kentucky
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Confederate government of Kentucky. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 15:15, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Cracker Barrel Old Country Store peer review
Hi Orangemike, I've just peer reviewed the Cracker Barrel article and we'd like to get some more input from interested editors. If you're interested, please weigh in. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 22:09, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Periyar (river)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Periyar (river). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 13:15, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

April Masini Wikipedia Page Deletion
The deletion of April Masini's page is unfortunate but I will go through the appropriate channels. The notes are appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gmhayes4 (talk • contribs) 17:11, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

You are invited to join Stanford's WikiProject!
ralphamale (talk) 22:09, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

You've got mail!
SarahStierch (talk) 22:18, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Human rights in Estonia
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Human rights in Estonia. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 10:15, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, stalker!
Thanks for your input! matt (talk) 22:34, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:East Germany
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:East Germany. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 08:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

User:Ultmetal
Would you mind restoring the edit rights of User:Ultmetal? He was new to Wikipedia and made some errors in judgment. I'm a member of the Christian Metal wikiproject and have spoken with him offline. He now understands the problems created by his editing behavior. I don't believe he will cause problems in the future. Thank you! 5minutes (talk) 17:37, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Possibly free image speedily deleted
Hello, your attention is required at. Thank you. CharlieEchoTango ( contact ) 00:06, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Schiavone
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Schiavone. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 06:15, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Found Art, what makes an artist notable
Hi Orangemike

I had worked on a page about an artist, Marina DeBris, and you and a bot, I guess, put on notices of notability and verifiability. I added a bunch of verifiable sources, but the notice of verifiability is still there. I posted a note on the editorial assistance page to ask if anyone could review my edits, not sure if anyone has.

But also, I also asked a question about what makes an artist notable. In particular, a bunch of artists on the Found art page, like these, Gustavo Aguerre,Tolleck Winner have only one reference and very short bios, and these artists Guillaume Bijl, Tom Friedman, Rodney McMillian, Joe Rush, Tomoko Takahashi have no references and also short bios. There hadn't been notices of notability on many of their pages when I had asked, but now there are.

I also asked this on the editorial assistance page and one person said the editors just hadn't looked at the other artists, and indicated that I could add my own questions of notability on their pages. But I'd rather see them remain notable, but also have Marina DeBris be notable too.

I guess I'd like a little more info on what makes an artist notable, and whether Marina DeBris may be considered notable, since I added more info and references. Thanks for any clarity on this issue. Socialresearch (talk) 05:23, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * That often happens when somebody says, "Why isn't Y notable? What about the article on X?": we look and say, well maybe X isn't notable either. The general guidelines on notability are at WP:N; the artist-specific ones are at WP:ARTIST. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  13:26, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

86.160.51.116
FYI,, who you recently blocked, is almost certainly the former , who was blocked years ago (and is still blocked) for making legal threats - something of a signature, I'm afraid. Please also note that the IP editor recently used a different IP, which suggests that it's a dynamic IP address. He's evidently aware of this as he has said "If this IP address is blocked, we shall move to another IP address". You might want to bear this in mind - I'm sure it's not the last we've seen of this individual. Prioryman (talk) 18:00, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I only blocked the IP for a week, for that very reason. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  18:02, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, glad you're aware of the background. If the IP editor reappears from a different address what should be done? Prioryman (talk) 18:28, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Eventually we may need to contact their ISP; but for the moment, we're playing whack-a-mole here. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  18:35, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Swiftboating
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Swiftboating. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 03:15, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Talkback.
The user is quoting you in unblock request just for information.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 14:21, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Re: Your suggestions at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)
Hi,

Sorry i don't want wikipedia become a social network, only proposals, you can discuss it.

Many people want to improve wikipedia, we are here for this. --Tegra3 (talk) 16:05, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Orangemike Collectible
Why Sideshow Collectibles does not deserve a page in Wikipedia? They didn't like Orangemike as a comiquette?

Regards. CMalagrino (talk) 20:29, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The most recent attempt to create an article about that company was deleted last year by some other admin, as a brief article about a company with no indication that it was notable in any way. The previous version had been deleted by me about a month before that because it was a shameless advertisement and completely unsalvageable for use as an article. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  21:02, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Vantagepartners
I'm inclined to unblock this editor based on the they've left on their user talk page, but I wanted to make sure you didn't have any further concerns before I did so. Your initial block was definitely a good one, I wanted to see if this editor could have another chance if they followed through with their promises. --  At am a  頭 22:40, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem on my end. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  01:16, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --  At am a  頭 01:26, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Luciano Laurana
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Luciano Laurana. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 01:15, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

RfC needs closing
I see that you've been active in the past on the RfC request board, so I thought you might take a look at this. The RFC bot removed the expired RFC template at Talk:Susan B. Anthony List. I asked User:SarekOfVulcan‎ if he could close it, but he declined as involved since he !voted. Could you possibly take care of it? Thanks. Mojoworker (talk) 17:31, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Santorum controversy regarding homosexuality
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Santorum controversy regarding homosexuality. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 22:15, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Ralph Chaplin again
OK, I finally (four years after our exchange on this topic!) ran across a reference in print that Chaplin "converted to Roman Catholicism," in John R. Salter, Jr., "Chaplin, Ralph H. (1887-1961)," Encyclopedia of the American Left (New York: Garland Publishing, 1990), p. 127. Dwalls (talk) 18:43, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Caroline Cox, Baroness Cox
As this article is on my watchlist, i note that CharlesBenadie has redone the edit you undid a couple of days ago as vandalism. I have no opinion on the edit itself, i haven't edited the article in years, i think, but i wonder if you mightn't rethink whether the user has a point about the info he removed? Reading it, i find that the information that Gary Cartwright has links with David Irving is rather dragged in, and seems quite likely to be done in order to tar Cox with that most awful of brushes, Holocaust-denier. Maybe it's true, but not everything that's true is put into BLPs, is it? Cheers, LindsayHello 20:44, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Just for the sake of complete honesty, i just took a look and see that, in fact, i made an edit thirteen months ago, but that doesn't alter the meaning of my message above. Cheers, LindsayHello 20:47, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

I have a problem
and I have come up with a non-standard way of dealing with it. I am going to pitch my solution to half a dozen long term editors whom I respect and get some feedback. I am picking you of my watchlist, not why some of you are there. I am confused, sober and looking for answers and honesty. It all starts with the Ignore all rules postulate.

Over the years I have amassed a lot of documentary materials. My great-grandfather lived in China, my grandfather was born there. Both took pictures. My grandfather took pictures as a doctor in both WWI and WWII. I have become the family archivist and I call the collection the Carpchives. In an earlier wikipedia incarnation this collection was referred to as the eekives. It was involved in a quite heated discussion here - Disputed Image  section and eventually the picture was removed. By me, as I recall. The picture in question was of my father-in-law in the US Merchant Marines during WWII. Another picture taken during the Boxer rebellion has since been removed. It was a bit funky, for sure.

There are a number of signatures that I've added to articles, some from my family archives, some I've had signed, other turn up in used books. Some of this stuff that is already in wikipedia is here:

I'm pretty sure there is more.

I also have a great collection of Corrado Parducci stuff, his "Job Book" written by him, copies of hundreds of photographs of his works in the plaster stage in his studio, a copy of his scrap book and more. I once had a project going to try and identify 75 sculptors in a photograph that was published in LIFE Magazine in 1949, located several of the artists still alive and corresponded with many children and grandchildren. Unfortunately much of that was lost in one of several dramatic computer and other failures in my life, but much remains. Then there is what I call the "my father (or grandfather) was a famous sculptor and..." syndrome. Through that I've collected a great CD filled with Rene Paul Chambellan's scrap books, as well as letter, papers, photographs and all sorts of that sort of things from a variety of other folks.

I always share. Well, almost always. So, I'd like to set up, on wikipedia, a Charpchives article or perhaps, a subpage of my user page or something, where these things could be referenced to and anyone who wanted to check up on something could contact me there.

Or is this all just some mutation of perversion of original research? Or even hubris? The thing about this material is that little of it in mine, although some of that does appear too. this is not my blog. Or should I just put it all on my blog and forget using it on wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carptrash (talk • contribs)
 * Well, as you've long since figured out, most of this stuff fails the reliable sources test, since it's not been published in an edited journal or the like. I'd say that your best bet is to put on your own website, but post a notice on your userpage that you have this material, and post notices on the talk pages of relevant articles saying, "I've got this stuff on my website; any way we can make it useful to the Wikipedia articles?" -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  17:28, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Americasstudies
Since this is a personal website, the user has history of positive contributions and promises not to add links to it to mainspace, I'm inclined to unblock without requesting a rename. Is this fine with you? Max Semenik (talk) 16:28, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm a little reluctant because of the advertising issue; is she really that eager to retain the long handle? -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  17:28, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Taliban
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Taliban. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 20:15, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Peace Palace Library links
I agree the username needed blocking, but I've replaced the 3 links you reverted as they look like the sort of links we should have. I note that on the 4th article Acroterion reverted then replaced it. Hope you don't mind. We should have these links (I mean the rest that were going to be added) I think, so what what do we do? Dougweller (talk) 16:10, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd like to remove the autoblock/ACB so they can register an account if you don't mind.  Acroterion   (talk)   16:27, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm changing it to a causeblock, and throwing the COI question template at 'em. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  16:41, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, we don't want links spammed all over the place, but I think there's room for judicious application, and this could fit in with the GLAM program (which has a lot of advice on COI).  Acroterion   (talk)   16:44, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Doh, that's what I was trying to remember. I emailed Sue Gardner, but maybe we should contact someone else as well? Dougweller (talk) 17:33, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Folks are falling all over themselves to offer them help. I think they'll be good (Fæ, for example, has given them some Netherlands-specific contacts). -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  17:36, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of James Swan (farmer)


The article James Swan (farmer) has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article. &#32; The nominator also raised the following concern:
 * All biographies of living people created after March 18, 2010, must have references.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. GiantSnowman 12:20, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Palestine
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Palestine. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 17:15, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

How to get a "notable" company listed.
HI OrangeMike: Thank you for your comments. I believe the Martin Agency is notable in the fact that it created the iconic "Virginia is for Lovers" campaign, was AdAge Agency of the year in 2010 and has created the characters of the Geico gecko/cavemen that have garnered numerous accolade. Is that information considered notable and if so, will I be able to submit this information in the approved format with citations? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tracifl (talk • contribs) — Tracifl (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Part of the problem lies in the fact that ad agencies are never as notable among those of us not in the industry as they think they deserve to be; and in particular, that the thousands of awards that ad agencies hand out to each other on what feels like a monthly basis do not add up to corporate notability as we understand it in Wikipedia. Further problems lie in what seems to be a conflict of interest on your part, as I am guessing that you work for them in some capacity. I'd suggest you start with a draft article in your userspace, say at User:Tracifl/martin; and that you fully disclose on the talk page of the draft what your relationship to the agency is. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  00:45, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying Orange Mike. I understand what you are saying and I will be sure to follow your advice. My immediate problem lies in the fact that there are at least 13,302 links to the Martin Agency wiki page listed via the wikipedia search page. Is there any way to restore the original page as it stood this morning, prior to my editing? It looks really bad to have over 13k broken links. Please advise and I appreciate your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tracifl (talk • contribs) 01:14, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't know where you got that misinformation from, but there are exactly 113 links to that article, many of them from talk pages of editors and administrators (I just counted them by hand). -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;  Talk  01:28, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

I appreciate your response. I'm not trying to pull anything over on you. I went to the wikipedia home page and typed "The Martin Agency" in the search box and it listed 13,302. This is all very new to me and I am trying to resolve the editing mistake I made this afternoon. I just want the original page restored, as it had been there for quite some time and had obviously been vetted. I made a mistake by trying to edit this page and am just trying to make amends and have it return to the original approved page. Your help is greatly appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tracifl (talk • contribs) 01:51, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. The second result in that search, if you'd looked closer, was List of Municipal Delegations and Agencies of San Martin de Hidalgo; that's what they call a false positive! Lots of those "matches" were of that sort. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  02:31, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok, that makes sense, again, I have to stress that this is all very new to me. I apologize for sounding so daft. Is there any way to restore the old page as it was as of this am? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tracifl (talk • contribs) 02:36, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * See User:Tracifl/martin. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  02:45, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for restoring that information to my user page for editing. Is there any way the original page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Martin_Agency can be restored with this information as it was prior to my edits yesterday? I will then do any rewriting on the user page provided and be sure to submit to wiki editors prior to any updating on the actual page. It is important to me to not have my mistakes affect a page that was already in place and approved (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Martin_Agency). I made a mistake by trying to add more notable information to this page and now see the error in my ways. I'd appreciate if could restore this page and I will go through the proper protocols in the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.248.6.144 (talk) 13:25, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for the barrage of talk Orange Mike. I am resubmitting the last talk topic in the proper format (with Tracifl (talk) 14:19, 4 February 2012 (UTC)) to show you that I am trying to learn and evolve here. Thank you for restoring that information to my user page for editing. Is there any way the original page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Martin_Agency can be restored with this information as it was prior to my edits yesterday? I will then do any rewriting on the user page provided and be sure to submit to wiki editors prior to any updating on the actual page. It is important to me to not have my mistakes affect a page that was already in place and approved (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Martin_Agency). I made a mistake by trying to add more notable information to this page and now see the error in my ways. I'd appreciate if could restore this page and I will go through the proper protocols in the future. Thank you. Tracifl (talk) 14:19, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I already restored basically everything prior to a long series of trash-talking edits and reversions thereof. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  19:09, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Editing feedback
Hi OrangeMike: I hope this is the last time I have to bug you, however I took your and NAWLINWiki's advice and worked on the page User:Tracifl/martin to make The Martin Agency page unbiased and non-promotional. I have also referenced notable sources, including: Barron's, The Wall Street Journal, Time Magazine, New York Times and others. NawlinWiki said it was much better and I'd like to have your permission to put it back at the page en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Martin_Agency  Please advise. Thanks. Tracifl (talk) 14:19, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:9/11 conspiracy theories
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:9/11 conspiracy theories. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 15:15, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Template:Symbolism
Would you care to comment at Templates for discussion/Log/2012 February 7? Best regards &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:53, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:9/11 conspiracy theories
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:9/11 conspiracy theories. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 13:15, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Sonorous Entertainment Inc.
Orangmike, I recently re-edited the Sonorous Entertainment Inc. page as drmies had noted G11 previously. I do not see how this is unambiguous advertising. I did not just throw this together. I researched other record labels independent and non independent on this website and followed the layout from an already approved article. I would appreciate it if you could please tell me exactly how this article is unambigous advertising. I would appreciate a little more detail on the statement "possible subject is notable, but no evidence presented to that effect". Thank you72.38.8.134 (talk) 15:55, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Layout was never the problem. The problem lies in language like "Dwayne... had the vision to develop Sonorous as a label that would benefit and influence all people, no matter their perspective" "began to gain ground" "some of the greatest Gospel music worldwide" and "Gospel Icons"; and the fact that the "sources" used were press releases and other blather straight from the company's own website. If this label is genuinely notable, then there could have been information from reliable third-party sources with a neutral point of view towards the label; and the whole article could have been written without sounding like a press release written by the label's PR staff. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  16:12, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Orangemike for the feedback and the clarity.72.38.8.134 (talk) 16:29, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Worldwide Happy Media
Orange Mike - thank you so much for making my terrible day even worse. I found out that a page (Jungle Ultra Marathon) I contributed nearly two years ago was deleted from Wiki this morning (not by you) and was busily in the process of trying to get the deletion sorted when you decided to delete my account from Wiki completely! After some research I do understand why this was done - but surely it would have been far easier (and polite) for you to have talked to me before doing this to find out if we could change the name or whether I was in the middle of something rather important... I would have happily obliged and asked the people I was dealing with to contact me under the new name/account. I do not use Wiki a great deal and therefore everything is pretty alien to me. There is absolutely no reason to circumnavigate common courtesy just because someone is volunteering for Wiki Wikiddy Guy (talk) 17:39, 7 February 2012 (UTC)Wikiddy GuyWikiddy Guy (talk) 17:39, 7 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Take a look at Articles for deletion/Jungle Ultra Marathon and the messages posted on User talk:Worldwide Happy Media - you had notice of the discussion and the opportunity to contribute. As for the user name, please take a look at WP:CORPNAME. – ukexpat (talk) 18:00, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

As I explained in my post Orange Mike, I researched and now understand the rules with regards to account names, no need for further clarification. As for the Articles for deletion section - your suggestion is all well and good if you spend every living minute on Wiki - which of course I do not. I'm not looking for your help or clarification, I contacted you in the hope that in future you show other users of Wiki a greater degree of consideration and courtesy than you showed me. I'm not a Wiki expert and I'm not an organisation so to close: as a volunteer I feel the following is extremely apt "No one cares what you know, unless they know that you care." - which you very obviously do not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiddy Guy (talk • contribs) 18:16, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * ?? You're responding to comments by ukexpat as if I wrote them. Why are you abusing me for something someone else wrote? -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  18:20, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry Mike! Sincerely. I had no idea it was someone else - that of course makes more sense now as well with the repeating of points that I made. Seriously - please accept my apologies. Would you care to comment on my original post if you have time?Wikiddy Guy (talk) 18:52, 7 February 2012 (UTC)Wikiddy GuyWikiddy Guy (talk) 18:52, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * No big. Right now, you've got the problem that you've set up a second account in order to evade the initial block, something we call a "sockpuppet" and take rather seriously. What you should have done, and what I facilitated you doing, was request a change of username for the blocked account, which is a routine process and would have been taken care of fairly quickly (the kind of block I used on your account was what we call a "softerblock", intended for this kind of purpose). Now we've got the complicating factor of your sockpuppet account. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  19:34, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * However, given that you're not trying to conceal your prior account, I'd say it's not a biggy. The problem basically was that these are seen as advertisements for non-notable events, and you're not having a lot of luck finding folks who agree with you on this. (Oh, and the use of the pronoun "we" in some of your posts can be read easily as indicating that the old account was used by more than one person, or represented some group/club/society/company.) -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  20:11, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Lee Carroll
I'm not quite sure if your removals of references are justified enough. I don't think any legit publisher would provide fake information about the volume of publications. Moreover the conference, which is an independent event organized by third party. Also, for most independent authors the publishers are the primary source for the volume of published books. I can't really imagine any totally independent organization gathering that kind of information on thousands of particular authors. I'm not as experienced in Wiki Policies as you seem to be, but I'd appreciate you taking the issue to the talk page, if it's not quite clear to the remaining participants. Thanks. -- Nazar (talk) 22:02, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Publishers have a vested interest in making their authors seem as important as possible, and in exaggerating sales numbers; that's why bestseller lists (however flawed) compiled by third parties are so valuable. Likewise, conferences such as the one referenced are inclined to republish information about their speakers provided to them by the speakers or their publicists, if it makes the speakers look more important. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;  Talk  22:08, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * True, but I don't think it's enough to fully discard a reference. Article should provide information available from various sources, and legit publishers do seem to qualify, as well as the conference. We are not speaking about establishing a world record of book sales, or entry into a country-wide official best-seller list. -- Nazar (talk) 22:12, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Not so. We exclude material not from reliable sources, especially in biographies of living persons. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  22:21, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Taken to the talk page. I contest your application of reliable sources definition. -- Nazar (talk) 22:24, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

clnatinfront UserName Block and COI
Dear Orange Mike

Firstly, many thanks for your continued support and guidance in relation to the Infront Sports & Media article that I am trying to edit / update.

I have requested an unblock of my UserName on the talk page where you placed a note about COI - another editor blocked me yesterday following your suggestion to review COI rules etc User_talk:Clnatinfront.

I wonder if it would be possible for you to make the updates for me - with this situation in mind I've read the notes you suggested on COI and think that perhaps this is the best route forward to making sure the article is up to date and correct? I'd really appreciate your guidance in relation to this matter and look forward to hearing from you there. Many thanks. HablasESport!121 (talk) 12:28, 8 February 2012 (UTC) 8 February 2012
 * Discussions about the article should take place on the article talkpage, and you STILL must adhere to WP:COI and WP:PROMO. The subject matter is of such massive indifference to me that I would not be a good editor for the article. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  13:24, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Gopalanand Swami
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Gopalanand Swami. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 11:15, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Maplight
Maplight has information about each Wisconsin legislator. You might want to add that to their articles. 75.59.206.144 (talk) 19:02, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

champion city comics deletion
I am sorry if you viewed my editing as disruptive. I guess you have no tolerance for new users who dont know the ropes. I was supporting wikipedia against coingress's new bills-but no more. Your can take your nazi-like policies and shove em fat mike Bob toben (talk) 23:35, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * You did not "edit": you tried to advertise your business here, in blatant violation of our rules. I was fairly gentle with you, since you admitted you were new here. As to the abusive use of the term "Nazi" in your post: try explaining to a Holocaust survivor how "they didn't let me spam on their website" is the same as what they endured. Worst Bullshit Ever! -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  00:11, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

apology
sorry-that was immature. I lash out when I am frustrated. you are 100% correct. please accept my apology

Bob Bob toben (talk) 00:33, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Well-spoken, and cheerfully accepted. Let's put it behind us both!
 * Now, as to the substantive matters: I've done some looking into the subject, and I just don't see how a case can be made for Champion City as notable. You're a small webcomics operation, and your website hasn't been updated in a long time. Where is the notability requisite for an encyclopedia article? -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  00:37, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

updates
Hmmm... I dont know if you have an old link or something-we update daily and have been doing so for the past year: http://www.championcitycomics.com/ We have two printed comics and a staff of 25. I myself draw 6 pages a week and spend 8+ hours a day on this, and have for two years. We get 1-2000 hits a day and are growing like crazy. We also offer comic and movie reviews, tips for artists and several other features. I also do a weekly column at Comic Related http://comicrelated.com/news/15024/kavs-tips I think that makes us notable!

Bob (A Kaviraj) Bob Toben is one of my pen names Bob toben (talk) 02:04, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, you're right about the updates; my eyes must be tireder than I thought. But look at WP:WEB for guidelines on what makes a notable website. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  02:08, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

thanks
thanks for bearing with me. so if I write a blurb which describes our company in an encyclopedic manner, focussing on the founding and creation as well as the accomplishments it just may pass the threshold? Otherwise do you advise me to wait for the inevitable time at which we become notable enough for some third party to submit us? Can you tell me how the other webcomic companies such as Beta Three have met the threshold?

Bob Bob toben (talk) 02:30, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * No, no, no, no! You're the worst possible candidate to do that, due to your obvious conflict of interest and your human inability to maintain the requisite neutral point of view. Frankly, I'm not persuaded that Beta Three (for example) actually meets the threshold; but that's the invalid "What about Article X?" argument. Your best bet is to wait; or if you really can't abide the wait, to request the creation of an article, offering the evidence you've gathered from reliable third-party sources (not from your own records and websites and stuff) and fully disclosing your COI. The place for that is:
 * Articles for creation. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  02:39, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

final thanks
ok I can wait. Its only a matter of time. If you build it they will come! thanks and have a great one

Bob Bob toben (talk) 02:44, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Need your help
I've got a situation here at WP that I need to extricate myself from. I now work for a newspaper in Gardendale (north of Birmingham), and there's a controversy going on in neighboring Fultondale regarding a sports bar that was heavily damaged by the April 27 tornado. The city of Fultondale is giving the owners a hard time in their effort to rebuild, and so the owners are mountain a campaign through social media and such to get their side out. In doing so, they edited the Fultondale, Alabama article, adding content which essentially promotes their cause. Since I work for a newspaper that covers this ongoing issue, I can't let my efforts to keep this Wikipedia article compliant with NPOV interfere with my day job. I don;t cover this story regularly, but I may be called on to do so by my editor, so I want to stay completely unbiased. Moreover, I don;t spend nearly as much time actively working on Wikipedia as I used to; I simply don't have the time. Therefore, I would like you to put the city's article on your watchlist and keep an eye on things from a distant, objective perspective. Can you do this? Thanks! - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 06:25, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * See what I can do. (Did I mention my daddy was once a reporter/photographer for the Anniston Star?) -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  17:28, 1 February 2012 (UTC)


 * User:Markpackuk had a similar problem on the public relations article. I told him COI guidelines don't prohibit subject experts from cleaning up an entry where there isn't a specific conflict. Did I give him bad advice? I wrote much of the PR article myself and just had a related discussion with Shift Communications, who mentioned PR pros being bannned from even editing the article on PR in a 2008 blog post. That doesn't seem right. Unless of course they're link spamming and such. King4057 (talk) 21:17, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia policies and procedures are not governed by blog posts!!!! Most of our problems are caused by edits which violate our specific rules; so if for example PR professionals were seen as whitewashing the sins of their trade, a thundering denunciation or two might have been penned (maybe even by me; I've never hesitated over the use of such terms as "tawdry and meretricious") - but the actual problem would be in the violation of our NPOV guidelines. Physicists edit articles about physics, writers about writing, chemists about chemistry: but the problem would lie in situations where (say) chemists were editing articles to say that chemistry is the noblest of sciences, and that bans on chemicals in the environment are the work of obscurantists and Luddites. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  21:33, 10 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks Orange. Sounds like my advice is ok then. I didn't even think of whitewashing as another possibility. King4057 (talk) 22:28, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Orangemike, you deleted something I wrote
Hi Orange Mike, my name is Sebastián David Gauna, from Buenos Aires Argentina.

I suffered Musicians' Focal Dystonia for 9 years but, contrary to medical science says, I was able to get a full recovery.

You probalby don't know what to suffer this condition means for a musician.

I did a mini-documentary on youtube about my case and edited the article on "Focal Dystonia" to add the information about a scientific book about musician's focal dystonia where it was already explained in year 2000 by the authors that recovery from this condition was possible.

I also added my case to "Notable Cases" because I think my case is, indeed, notable together with the case of Jon Berry. Why? because there are not many information about people that recovered from Musicians Focal Dystonia.

Why did you deleted that text? That is not spam, it's all absolutely and verifiable true as is, let's say, the case of David Leisner. Why did you decide that my case and Jon's case are not notable and you even took them as spam while for instance, David Leisner's case is notable and not spam? Or even all the other cases there, those are all notable but ours is not? Since I recovered, my biggest goal in life is to give musicias suffering from this condition hope. Hope because it is a reversible condition even the medical science says it's not. I was diagnosed here in, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina in the hospital "Hospital Italiano", the name of the first Dr. that diagnosed me with focal dystonia is Eduardo Daniel Doctorovich who is even a professor a the U.B.A. university here in Argentina. I was diagnosed a second time by an eminence in neurology Dr. Oscar Gershanik, this time not in the hospital but in a private consultation.

I don't even put any advertisement in my youtube video because it's not my intentino to make a penny out of this. Spam? I am sorry, this is not spam. This is all about helping people. There are not much documented cases of recovery and you are not allowing 2 of them to be shown here. I know this is a enciclopedia and I know my case and Jon's should be here as all the other cases.

Take the case of Billy McLaughlin, why is his case notable and not spam?? Because he is a semi-known musician? He suffers focal dystonia but he didn't recover, he learned to play the other way around. What's notable regarding Focal Dystonia about his case?? Learning to play the other way around has nothing to do with Focal Dystonia, and the article is "Focal Dystonia".

If you have any doubt please contactme at sebastian[at]musiciansfocaldystonia[dot]info that's not my personal email address but I won't write my personal address here. The site to what that email address belongs to is a site that I'm trying to put together to give all the possible information about recovery to musicians suffering focal dystonia, it's not a site meant for economical purposes. You can check that.

I even offer you to have a Skype session so you can know me and you'll see everything I say is true.

Your are doing wrong.

Please if there is something I didn't do correctly to publish the content in question just tell me what it was and I will correct it.

I am not a wikipedia writer or nothing like that so I really don't understand what's wrong. If I compare what I wrote to the other info that is writen I don't see any difference beyond mine was deleted and treated as spam...

I just saw that you also deleted the information about the book from doctors Raould Toubiana and Peter C. Amadio stating that that information was spam... Please, that book is almost no longer available. Why did you do that? That book is a Scientific Medical Book where the authors did an extensive research on musicians focal dystonia and they were the only scientific people until know (as far as I know) to demonstrate that recovery from musicians focal dystonia was posible!! What are you doing please! It's not right. Please. I beg you to review your changes. All the information you took out is very important for all the sufferers of musicians' focal dystonia.

Regards, Sebastián

Sebastiandavid (talk) 05:18, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Focal Dystonia - Notable Cases
Hi Orangemike, I refer to the post above from Sebastián David Gauna, Buenos Aires. I am the other person mentioned in the removed text and would like it reinstating please if possible. I did make an edit to it very recently but this was just to correct an inaccuracy concerning my membership of a particular Band. The edit was extremely minor and yet the complete original text dating back to 2010 has been removed. Was this intentional? JonnyDotNet (talk) 16:26, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 1. I removed references to non-notable musicians as we define them, without prejudice as to medical issues. (See WP:BAND.)
 * 2. I removed a swath of material that did not come from reliable sources as you yourselves admit ("it is a reversible condition even the medical science says it's not") but instead served only to advertise a fringe theory not currently recognized by medical science in the field. Self-published material is not a reliable source, for obvious reasons of neutral point of view; and of course we do not take testimonials here. If you have sources that are more reputable than a YouTube vid, then offer those sources on the talk page of the article, not here. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  18:12, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Orangemike, the subtitle reads "Notable Cases" and not "Notable Musicians" so I don't understand why that section should only apply to notable musicians... If it is the way you say, then, isn't it needed to change that title to anything else but "Notable Cases"? Wouldn't it be then more appropriate something link "Cases of Notable Musicians"? Also, where is all the scientific, reliable and recognized by medical science information regarding the recovery of the other (notable) musicians listed in that section? At least I was publishing a video, yes posted on youtube, where I documented the problems of movement that I had and then show my current situation where those problems don't exist anymore. Sebastiandavid (talk) 23:12, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

I've placed this discussion on the talk page of the article as you said Talk:Focal dystonia, would you please check? Thanks Sebastiandavid (talk) 04:13, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Focal Dystonia - Treatment
Orangemike, here you deleted what I wrote about a book stating it was spam. The book "Medical Problems of the Instrumentalist Musician" was edited by two prominent Doctors, Raoul Toubiana (orthopedic surgeon) and Peter C. Amadio (orthopedic surgeon and biomechanical engineer), published by Martin Dunitz, and contains a extensive scientific investigation about Focal Dystonia (you can search for their names on google and you'll see who they are). In this investigation they state, and proove, that recovering from musician's focal dystonia is possible. They have recovered, and published those cases in that book, more that 30 musicians. So I was stating in this section that two scientifics wrote that treatment of musician's focal dystonia is possible. What did I do wrong there? Why you considered it as spam? How come that book is not a reliable source? Again, why what I wrote is wrong compared to what is writen in that section? Why the references [7] Farias J ,Sarti-Martínez MA and [8] http://handoc.com/Documents/Acquisition_Loss_Skilled_Movement_dist.pdf are reliable sources for you and a Medical Published with well over than 500 pages book is not? Sebastiandavid (talk) 23:12, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * This discussion should be taking place at the proper place, Talk:Focal dystonia. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  14:31, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I've placed this discussion on the talk page of the article as you said Talk:Focal dystonia, would you please check? Thanks Sebastiandavid (talk) 04:12, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Please Orangemike, you didn't comment on this. I did as you told me and moved the discussion to the talk page of the article. I would really appreciate if you comment there about why you don't consider the MEDICAL BOOK I wrote about to be reliable source. Thanks Sebastiandavid (talk) 00:43, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Hunnic Empire
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Hunnic Empire. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 09:15, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

WP Science Fiction in the Signpost
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Science Fiction for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign each answer. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 05:46, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility)
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 07:15, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Floterial district
I disagree with the templates you added. The article already has plenty of footnotes, for its size, and mostly reports the law and court decisions that are cited in it. Links such as at-large (which contains a list of states that used floterial Congressional districts) and the cited chapter of the US Code are other references. If you have specific improvements, they would be welcome. Spike-from-NH (talk) 11:57, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The content looks pretty skimpy for those of us who are not Granite Staters, Spike. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  14:20, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Skimpiness is one thing (about which I can do little more)--insufficient citation is quite different. Again, please be specific. Spike-from-NH (talk) 20:41, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Adaptogen
I have reverted your recent edit to the article Adaptogen. I removed COI as the COI User, MorindaBioactives, was never a major contributor; they made only one edit, which was only slightly problematic and was quickly reverted. I did explain this over at Usernames for administrator attention. I also removed NPOV as there is no dispute, and no unresolved discussion of a dispute on the Talk page. The article is now well sourced with references to clinical studies. (If you wish to respond, please do so either here or over at Talk:Adaptogen.) HairyWombat 15:32, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Your block on User:ReynoldsBrands
Any chance you'll reconsider your block on this user? You'll notice on their talk that they had just agreed to change their username to a non-promotional one, and showed a fair amount of willingness to play by our rules once they knew what they were. Their problematic editing stopped after a COI warning, and they were engaging with me on their talk page. I'm not sure if you meant to overrule the "warnings and wait and see" handling of the situation that was going on, or if we just tripped over each other's feet in trying different methods to handle the user, but in either case I'd appreciate it if you'd consider giving the user another try. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 20:21, 14 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Butting in here, User Orangemike was similarly enthusiastic in blocking User MorindaBioactives. In this case, the user was blocked immediately after I had placed a uw-coi-username on their Talk page, and without them being given any time to respond. While User Orangemike's enthusiasm is admirable, the guidelines at WP:BADNAME do clearly state:

Talk to the user Many users who create new usernames have not read this policy. If you see a username that is problematic but was not obviously created in bad faith, you should make an attempt to encourage the user to create a new account with a better username. Often, the problem can be cleared up in an amicable way.
 * HairyWombat 00:27, 15 February 2012 (UTC)


 * In each case, that's why I used a softerblock, rather than a spamuserblock: the templates includes instructions for requesting a change of username, and in the meantime they are prevented from making COI edits. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  14:03, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I see that, As Courcelles points out, you actually hardblocked (that'll teach me to take someone's word for their block parameters without checking...), but in any case, my point remains that there was no need to block the user at all - they had already agreed to request a username change. Blocking them doesn't hasten that, it only makes us look incompetent, with one admin offering advice and the other contradicting it. How about if you see that another admin or user has engaged the editor in question, especially when the COI edits have already stopped, you let them CHU rather than summarily blocking them mid-conversation and making Wikipedia look like the Keystone Kops? A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 15:24, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * In this case, you didn't even softblock. You blocked with the autoblock ON and account creation disabled. That is a hardblock, and made no sense given the situation.  Courcelles 21:15, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * And in both cases, you used the block template . Did you even look at the talk pages before you blocked, or before you commented here on your blocks?  Because you actually used the exact template you said you did not use. Courcelles 21:22, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * You are right, I was wrong; both accounts unblocked to permit request for change of username, with apologies. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  21:30, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. Courcelles 22:12, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Mitt Romney presidential campaign, 2012
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Mitt Romney presidential campaign, 2012. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 04:15, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

New your help on my first page
Hi Orangemike. I entered my first page for "Tahiti Drink" yesterday and you deleted it today. A couple things. First, I think it makes sense for this page's existence and I contested the "speedy deletion". I don't know if I contested it before or after the deletion. I wonder if you had a chance to read it prior to the deletion? Second, with some editing would you consider reinstating the page? I could enter a much revised page that I think would work and send a notice to you for review when it is up, or whatever process is the way such things are handled. Thx, Gary Garysmith10 (talk) 20:11, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I can move it to a sandbox at User:Garysmith10/sandbox; but the new version must have solid sources (i.e., nothing from the company website or that of its U.S. distributors), and must make a plausible case for notability of the product. Google search results prove nothing whatsoever, and only leave the reader to suspect that you couldn't find any reliable sources to show notability. No promotional garbage about purity, popularity, etc. should be used; in other words, avoid peacock words and an advertising-like tone. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  20:19, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Robert California
I suppose this guy would probably have wound up blocked for something else (I've just caught one of his Ip sockpuppets, so we can at least cite block evasion) but the username is not a violation of policy as it's that of a fictional character, which when I checked is not against policy (cf. User:Harry Potter, User:James Bond 000 and User:SarekOfVulcan). Daniel Case (talk) 05:49, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Even when the only thing they edit is the article about that character? I don't know the other two eds' work, but the editor named after the Vulcan ambassador certainly doesn't waste his valuable skills obsessing with the Mark Leonard character. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  13:55, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

AfD and PROD
Hi Mike. Back in December, you got either an AfD or PROD notification, and it was during one of the template testing project's experiments. If you could go here and leave us some feedback about what you think about the new versions of the templates we tested (there are links to the templates), that would be very useful. (You can also email me at swalling@undefinedwikimedia.org if you want.) Thanks! Steven Walling (WMF) &bull; talk   01:42, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Romanians of Serbia
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Romanians of Serbia. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 02:15, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Possible Place for Input from an Experienced Editor
Hi Mike. Eventhough this article probably isn't the most important one on Wikipedia, it is one that a lot of Wikipedia editors are heavily invested in and that will likely be a source of future disputes.

I don't think such a quick escalation was necessarily in order and hope I've made diplomatic contributions to the conversation here and here. After all, diplomacy will be a key skill in my role on Wikipedia.

However, focusing on the article itself, I did feel the article/discussion treads on many fuzzy (at best) policy lines and could use the interjection of an experienced, uninvolved editor. For example, citing Facebook, contributed articles, blogs and other neutrality issues. I think all of the editors involved (myself included) have a bias or COI, due to the nature of the article. Candidly your response would probably clear up many of my own policy questions.

It's sort of an odd situation of Wikipedia, talking about Wikipedia, talking about Wikipedia.

King4057 (talk) 06:54, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Berlin
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Berlin. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 23:15, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Operation: Osmin
Hiya, responded to you at the BLPN, and have since tried to make the article wiki-worthy, please take a look in as I have now removed the tags and would like your feedback, do you feel that there are still issues to resolve? Cheers!  Captain Screebo Parley! 14:23, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

unblock on hold at User talk:Aerta
You rightly blocked this user for spamming and username issues last year. It looks like they may finally get it, so letting you know I'm considering unblock. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:43, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:PNS Ghazi
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:PNS Ghazi. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 21:15, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Help please
I have come to you for help because I "met" you at the Cracker Barrel article it seems that you may share my concerns regarding allowing private corporations to edit their own Wikipedia articles. Last June Wikipedia made a decision to allow the EPA to edit the chemical articles. Please see USEPA James page here:  On the Clothianidin page James made his first entry, Proposal to almost completely rewrite the clothianidin content, on June 22. It has been my impression that James is less interested in improving the article than he is in removing any controversy related to this chemical. He first urged other editors to use information that he provided on a user page but when no one took him up on his suggestion, he replaced the entire article with his own rewrite and has been actively editing for several weeks.

More recently James has advised two editors that they are not to bring up his EPA employment on the talk page. Here is one of his edits:

...Also, User 67.6.175.184, please refrain from including personal details about me (e.g. my employment etc) on this chemical talk page or elsewhere on Wikipedia, since doing so does not help improve this article and it expressly violates acceptable behavior policies USEPA James (talk) 21:05, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

I replied: ''I note that you have made this same demand to another editor. I think you are going to have to clear this up with with a statement of some sort. Gandydancer (talk) 20:48, 18 February 2012 (UTC)''

Then I opened a discussion regarding this situation, "Policy concerns", he deleted it, I put it back, and he again deleted it. He has put a note on my talk page (#132) in which he states: This notification on your talk page is required before I can take the next step in Dispute Resolution, which I hope to avoid. Also see the following section #133 to better understand what's going on.

Editor USEPA James has now also opened a discussion at the chem discussion page to get some wording/policy changes. I believe that this whole situation needs to be cleared up. Please let me know if you see any problems here and if you are willing to help to clear them up. Thanks! Gandydancer (talk) 15:41, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * This should be taken to Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Since he's openly admitted to being an EPA employee, mentioning it is not a violation of our protocols in any way. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  15:53, 22 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Orange Mike, I would like to suggest that mentioning my employment on an article page might violate a couple of different protocols, especially when it does not serve in some way to improve the article. For example, I believe it violates protocols when mentioning my employment is used to:
 * harass (see the February 24 demand for the name of my supervisor from user 70.59.31.70, who was subsequently blocked for three months);
 * threaten, presumably to discourage me from editing (see user 67.6.175.184's February 8 comment about writing congress); and/or
 * raise COI concerns in order to gain the upper hand in a content dispute. The Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard indicates such behavior "is prohibited and may result in sanctions..." For an example of this sort of behavior, see Gandydancer's opening comment in response to my proposal to modify the WP:CHEMMOS: "I would suggest a great deal of caution when considering the suggestions for changes when they come from a COI editor."


 * Am I wrong in believing protocols were violated in these three examples? To whom should I raise objections regarding Gandydancer's apparently prohibited behavior? I would also like to know your opinion regarding how user 67.6.175.184's threat to write congress serves to improve Wikipedia. Thank you. USEPA James (talk) 17:41, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Inter-Services Intelligence
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Inter-Services Intelligence. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 19:15, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

SocialSweetSpotMedia
You may want to look at PR agent, Special:Contributions/SocialSweetSpotMedia. —teb728 t c 01:19, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * It's worse than that; they were running a second account at Special:Contributions/Socialwweetspot. Both accounts have been blocked as spamusernames. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  15:40, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

tb
Pam D  00:08, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Richard Lynn
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Richard Lynn. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 16:15, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

thank you sir
i apreciate what are you doing, i know and i understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site ! what i'm trying to say is i'm writing this biography about my brother which i'm in his supporting team, i'm not writing this about myself. when u say "If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy" i'll say it again sir (this is not me) and this is Morocco which in africa and it's not Amrican or the whole occidental world, we have famous people who are not famous on the internet ! and i hope you understand it.

and i'm sorry about my bad english.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryan_Belhsen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Osamabelhsen (talk • contribs) — Osamabelhsen (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Your English is much better than my Arabic, believe me! We have very stringent standards on articles about musicians and other performers, and there is nothing to indicate that your brother is notable in any way. Many good musicians go unnoticed their entire careers. If your brother is genuinely notable, then somebody who is not related to him or to his record company will write about him. I noticed that there is no article about him in the Arabic-language Wikipedia, for example, where providing sources surely would be much easier. Since you are "in his supporting team" you are the worst possible person to be writing about him, since you want to see him become better-known. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  21:50, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

1930s state senators and Deletion
Hi Mike! In your remarks at VPP, you mentioned that "Few new editors want to write about 1930s state senators and other dead people; too often, they want to write about obscure new bands they like". This was a great way to communicate the concerns about wikipedia having quality dilution.

It also struck me as a little ironic-- the articles I were trying to add were on sitting elected officials who represent a city population of 400,000 people. That's people right now, wielding actual power, and I fear they aren't notable enough for wikipedia's current standards. A list of 1930s legislators would be awesome-- but I burnt out just trying to chronicle the basics of SITTING officials. And I know there are a lots more reliable sources in 2012 than there were in 1930.

Not that important, I just want you to understand there really are some geeks who might do nothing but chronicle historic legislators-- but Wikipedia make it quite difficult to keep these types of people. --HectorMoffet (talk) 11:53, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Please help me get it right on Mendocino Music Festival! I am learning slowly and want to do this right. John told me to contact you
Hi! I am sorry I so completely messed up on the promotional aspect of my edits. I hope I now understand what I can do, but I still would like to try to edit factual information, and I put a note on my talk page about what I am trying to do and John told me to put a note here to ask if you could look at my talk page and maybe tell me how to go about editing properly. I included here my last two conversations with John because I just don't know if you can see those on his talk page or mine so I wanted you to have them. I would like to add a photo to the Festival page, and I just sent a note to en-permission with a photo and a note from the photographer to see if that is ok. I would like to try to make proper factual changes too though, if that is possible. I am just a volunteer for the festival, which has a really small permanent staff, and we are trying to update our information wherever it appears so people can see what the festival is now. I am not sure the best way to show you the edits I would like to make--should I copy the current page and edit it? If that would be the way to go, is there a way to highlight the edits so you can more easily see them? For example the Festival does not have a petting zoo any more or a children's concert; but it does have some new musical genres like jazz and blues. Also, one of my paragraphs had listed performers and works for the season, and I wonder if I can do that? I had used the Oregon Shakespeare Festival page as an example to work from and I think I saw one other arts page where they listed the works for the season and the past seasons, and that is what I used as a model for that part of the edit. Would that be able to go back into the article?? I appreciate your time and help and again apologize for getting it so wrong! (Mendokitties (talk) 00:50, 26 February 2012 (UTC)).

Thanks for your response to me John. I am wondering if, since all my edits were deleted, you can remove the conflict of interest note? Also, one of the edits that was deleted was a photograph I tried to upload. I now have some email from the photographer and a different photograph, and I wonder if I can at least upload that now? I tried to send the photographer's email to permissions-enwikimedia.org but my email program told me that was not a valid address!! I guess I just don't know how to do any of this correctly!! I do see your point on the edits by the way. And I want to edit the page just to correct some things that are no longer true about the festival. So I am going to do what you suggested, and post the edits on the talk page of the Mendocino Music Festival. May I ask you whether you think it ok for me to list the performers for the 2012 season and the works? I did that because I used the Oregon Shakespeare Festival page as an example, and I saw that they had listed their works for 2012. May I do that do you think, without any superlatives and adjectives??? I really appreciate your help. I am new to all this! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mendokitties (talk • contribs) 17:53, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to be slow replying. You missed an @ out of the email address, it should be permissions-en@wikimedia.org. The instructions for what to do are towards the bottom of WP:Donating copyrighted materials. I'm afraid I am going to be away for about three weeks - I suggest you post on the talk page the changes you would like to make, including the suggestion of adding a performers' list, and then leave a message on the talk page of user Orangemike (talk) asking if he thinks it's OK. I suggest him because he has already been involved on this page - he is very hot on shooing away advertisers, but will be helpful if you ask advice and make clear you are trying to obey the COI rules and not promote. JohnCD (talk) 23:18, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Miloš Obilić
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Miloš Obilić. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 14:15, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Wisconsin Blue Book 1872
Hi-If you ever need information about members of the Wisconsin Territorial Legislature or members of the two Wisconsin Constututional Convention, the 1872 Wisconsin Blue Book has the lists. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 16:19, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The members of the territorial leg., the officers, etc. are repeated in several of the subsequent Blue Books as well. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  02:52, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Texas Revolution
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Texas Revolution. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 12:15, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on draft you have seen once before
Hi OrangeMike. Thanks to you and UKExpat for your advice on the article I've drafted on Heritage Preservation. I've made all the changes you recommended, and I'm hoping that the article is acceptable for publishing now. If you have a chance (or someone else does that watches this page and is willing) to take a look and let me know if you think it is ok, I would very much appreciate it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ELH7897/ELH7897/sandbox Many thanks! ELH7897 (talk) 15:31, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい ) 21:50, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Talk page comment rremoved
Why did you remove my talk page comment?-- JOJ  Hutton  22:33, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Edit conflict; now corrected. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  22:38, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Pakistan
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Pakistan. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 09:15, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Arnold Leibovit
I would not at all classify myself as a buddy of Arnold Leibovit. I have never met him, I have never talked to him in person or on the phone. I only know where he lives by finding another reference to him online and as it turns out we do not even live in the same state. I have sent and received emails from him regarding photo permissions. I am preparing an edit of his page to be more in line with Wilipedia guidelines. Recado (talk) 00:01, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * In this edit you said “I am maintaining a number of Wikipedia pages for a friend, Arnold Leibovit, president of a movie production company…” Do I infer correctly from your post above that rather that a friend you are rather a paid writer/consultant? —teb728 t c 02:02, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Your inference is incorrect. I am not being paid nor have I ever been paid for any work done on the Arnold Leibovit and linked pages. . A third party connected us a few years ago and I voluntarily agreed to edit his pages thinking this would be great way to learn how Wikipedia works. Early on, I thought about whether or not getting paid for this was even appropriate but a little research showed me it was not. I never met the guy,never talked to him on the phone...only email. I think or at least I thought I was behaving in line with the philosphy of Wikipedia which I understand to be: Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia where anyone can contribute to and edit pages. It is in that light that I am trying to learn the Wikipedia way. However regretibly, I have run head on into an enormous collection of image submission guidelines that are significantly confusing and complex, and while I have asked a few times for help, I get only criticism and false accusations. Is there anyone there who can actually explain to me like I am a fifth grader and not an IP attorney how to properly get an image onto a page so that it won't be deleted in 7 days? Thanks.Recado (talk) 06:15, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * You say, "A third party contacted us..." Who are we? —teb728 t c 07:43, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Methinks thou nitpicketh too much. You can try until the end of time to prove I am a paid writer/consultant, buddy to Leibovit, close friend, etc, etc, and you will have wasted a lot of valuable time because it just ain't so. We (sorry, you) have lost the fox here. Recado (talk) 06:59, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, I understand now: by "us" you meant you and Leibovit. For some reason I thought you meant you and a colleague had been connected to Leibovit, which sparked my curiousity. Sorry for the misunderstanding. —teb728 t c 21:12, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Ralph Drollinger
Hi Orange Mike. I was wondering if you could help me understand why you deleted the edits I did for Ralph Drollinger. I spent about 3 hours doing research and thought I had done a pretty good job of editing (no I am not a copy writer, but working to improve). Am I missing something? Thanks AccuracyInPosting (talk) 20:28, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Except for the basketball stuff, your edits leaned on non-reliable sources such as Drollinger's own website. Also note that we don't generally allow links to, much less rely on, stuff like court filings by either side of a lawsuit/counterclaim situation such as this. What was needed was reportage from neutral third parties such as newspapers and books from reliable publishers. Given Drollinger's history of tampering with this article to make himself look better, combined with the non-neutral description of most of his affiliates leaving him as a "failed coup attempt", I simply rolled back instead of (as I should have) reverting with more detailed explanation. (Note that I'm going to copy this conversation to the talk page of the article, for the information of other editors.) -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  21:01, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks! I will admit I took a little liberty, and probably shouldn't have used that phrase - I consider myself rightly chastised. When I was reading the Counterclaim, I was pretty amazed at what was being said, and it seemed the original posts were pretty harsh in the other direction, i.e. "his Bible study groups were kicked out of the governor's offices." I guess we will have to wait for the outcome of the suit and see how the newspapers cover it. I have google alerts active so when it happens, I will try to make a much more balanced post. In the mean time, I will do a smaller change to the basketball section alone. Thanks again for helping me out. AccuracyInPosting (talk) 21:30, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I believe the term "kicked out" came from the press reports on the incident. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  21:33, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

New Page Triage engagement strategy released
Hey guys!

I'm dropping you a note because you filled out the New Page Patrol survey, and indicated you'd be interested in being contacted about follow-up work. This is to notify you that we've finally released both the initial documentation about the project and also the engagement strategy, which sets out how we plan to work with the community on this. Please give both a read, and leave any comments or suggestions you have on the talkpage, on my talkpage, or in my inbox -.

It's awesome to finally get to start work on this! :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 02:01, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:7 World Trade Center
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:7 World Trade Center. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 09:15, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Advice, please
I am asking you for advice about a peculiar username situation because I have a hunch this has something to do with The Way Things Used to Be Done Here, so I figure I have to ask an administrator who has been here a long time and has some involvement with username policy.

I've seldom gotten involved with username issues here. However, today I ran across a strange (to me) case of a user page that doesn't properly link with the user's contributions history. It turns out that the name the user registered in 2005 (Frog one) did not have the capitalization he wanted. In November 2005 he created a second account with the desired alternate capitalization (Frog One), created the user page for that account, then redirected his original user page to the version with alternate capitalization. He continues to edit (occasionally) under the original name (except for a few edits in December 2005), but uses the alternate capitalization for his user page and user talk. To complicate matters further, he used/uses the Frog One name at Wikibooks:.

It seems to me that the two user names should be merged, together with their edit histories, but I know it's not that simple. The existence of an account on another Wikimedia project complicates things a bit. Also, I have a hunch that this situation might have arisen because it may have been more difficult to rename a user in 2005, in which case the approach to the user might be somewhat different than if a similar situation were to arise now.

How should I go about getting this resolved? --Orlady (talk) 04:43, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oy! That one's outside of my field of expertise. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  19:14, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem. I figured out who to contact. Thanks for trying! --Orlady (talk) 19:30, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Palestinian people
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Palestinian people. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 07:15, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Delta International University of New Orleans
I note you had tagged Delta International University of New Orleans as notability, refimprove here. Radio-Canada ran a piece on DIU's Montréal office, Management Institute of Canada on Canadian national terrestrial TV March 1 as part of its newsmagazine, "Enquête". (see article talk page)

The piece is French-language and focusses primarily on Montréal (and the lack of any accreditation in Québec or Canada), but it does identify MIC as merely a one-room sales office for DIU and indicates Québec's Ministry of Education has repeatedly demanded it cease any university operations, to no avail. --66.102.83.61 (talk) 17:02, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that tip; I've added that reference to the DIU article. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  19:07, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Category:House painters
Category:House painters, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 04:06, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Puerto Rico Republican primary, 2012
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Puerto Rico Republican primary, 2012. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 04:15, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Discussion on occupation categories
I think it would save us a lot of effort if we worked out a general principle on this. See Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion. Mangoe (talk) 19:49, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, and advice, please
You just blocked a user for conducting his account with multiple people in furtherance of an advertsing campaign on Martin CJ Mongiello. Since you are, presumably, uninvolved apart from executing the block, are you able to run an experienced eye over that article with a view to recommending a valid course of action. The man may even actually be notable, but it is hard to see the wood from the trees at present. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 14:32, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Dear Lord, that one's a real crap-fest, ain't it? I too am inclined to believe there's a salvageable article in there somewhere. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  14:35, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * It's. well, er, hmm, absolute, oh dear. Got any mates who can skim floaters off the top? I've been having a go. I do expect, by the way, a surfeit of angry socks as soon as this chap wakes up. Would you mind keeping an eye on things? I'm about to go and rip out some of the primary sources. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 14:50, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I've followed your lead, and the article may now be seen more clearly from amid the flurry of stuff. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 16:00, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


 * We may now see that there is, probably, no pony. I fear there is not even a Chihuahua. Your mileage may vary. If it alters either positively or negatively your opinion at the deletion discussion I know you will feel free to deal with that. You may also disagree with the cleanup. I will be wholly unoffended if you do so. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 22:43, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

OrangeMike - your help please
Hi OrangeMike,

I'm coming to you in search of some help.

I am a relative newbie on Wikipedia administration and one of the articles I had been trying to clean up is Readyflowers. However, I'm finding this a near impossible task for reasons that I have listed in the Talk Page. It appears that the owner and those associated with the company are being quite aggressive in their protection of the page and the accuracy and substance of the Wiki is very questionable.

I'm losing any faith in trying to sort this out I have also now been victim of personal attacks by users (that appear to be associated with the company, even to the point of accusing me of being a competitor? I have nothing to do with their industry.

Anyway, any help would be really appreciated.

Many thanks Jackobs. Jackobs (talk) 21:22, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Indigenous peoples
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Indigenous peoples. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 02:15, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

The Christmas Choir

 * I would prefer keep, although, it may need edits from time to time, information from List of policies and guidelines, it is still a valuable contribution from the few sources, and as usual, a notable source for Hallmark Channel.Users, may help in editing the article instead of a proposal for deletion. --GoShow (...............) 17:00, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Larry N. Jordan
Orange Mike, since last night I have been exchanging messages with some other Wikipedia helper who is trying to help me edit/correct my new entry on Larry N. Jordan and now I see you have undertaken a discussion about targeting it for deletion before the 10 days is up and while I am still trying to make changes. I am confused. Please explain. I am new to Wikipedia and I find the whole thing so complicated I am struggling here. -- Lisa Brown — Preceding unsigned comment added by LisaBrown2012 (talk • contribs) 17:06, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

I saw your unkind comments about my entry on Larry N. Jordan and it being a "puff piece" but I fail to see the distinction between my entry and most of what I read about people on Wikipedia, which cites their accomplishments, etc. As for your statement I "admit" to being close to the source, let's get one thing clear: I'm not romantically involved, I'm not related to him, I don't have a crush on him. What are you implying exactly? He is a professional colleague, THAT'S ALL, and I think he is deserving of being on Wikipedia. Since I first posted last night I have dug a little deeper and looked up articles at newspaperarchive.com to find out more. Would you prefer that Wikipedia posters have NO knowledge of a subject. What's wrong with knowing the person you're writing about. I have added more specifics to the description but even the links I initially provided -- if you took the time to follow them -- would confirm what I was stating. The link to the magazine website, for example, lists his name as publisher of Midwest Today. His name is on the cover of the book I linked to. What more do you want? Lisa Brown
 * We need some evidence that he is notable enough for there to be an encyclopedia article about him. That doesn't include publisher's blurbs, or unattributed phrases of praise, or unsourced assertions of what famous people allegedly said about him, or peacock words in general. As to conflict of interest: just what it says. We shouldn't be writing about our friends and relatives, because it's harder to maintain the requisite neutral point of view about them. Most working journalists are not notable enough to be in here. That includes me, my late father, and (as far as I can tell) Larry N. Jordan. That's not a criticism, that's a simple fact: on a globe of seven billion and counting, most of us human beings are not notable. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  19:48, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hello OrangeMike. Pardon my clumsiness and obvious frustration in trying to understand and cope with the very complicated Wikipedia process. I now have gained more respect for it because over the last several hours several people have tried to help and that reflects well on all of you! I apologize for my irritation. I added a reference to a rather lengthy newspaper article on Larry Jordan and his book that appeared in two Texas newspapers but I didn't know how to make them a footnote so I merely made them a link. Perhaps you or someone can help with that and get it straightened out. I also am aware that there are some other published stories confirming some notable accomplishments. And I have found a copy of a letter on White House stationery that was posted on the web from Hillary Clinton to Mr. Jordan to document one of the Clinton quotes. But how do I get that to you for verification? Lisa BrownLisaBrown2012 (talk) 20:50, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * As anybody who's been following things like the Barack Obama "Kenyan birth certificate" nonsense knows, purported scans of alleged documents uploaded onto the Web are of no value. If the letter was not published in a verifiable, reliable, third-party source, it has no place in the article. (Have I mentioned that I'm married to a Bertram girl, a Kirkwood alumna who used to work at that station: "...with less power than the common lightbulb!"?) Now we need to get an article about his former employer, Senator Riley, set up. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  22:09, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Link you requested
Here is a link to an article on Tom Riley per your request. I didn't know how to footnote it on the Larry N. Jordan page. Maybe you can help: http://thegazette.com/2011/07/21/“a-feisty-champion-of-the-people”-tom-riley-dead-at-82/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by LisaBrown2012 (talk • contribs) 22:36, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No need to. That's what internal links {"wikilinks") are for. I've already put a wikilink into the Jordan article; the "redlink" is a cue to the reader that the article Tom Riley (Iowa politician) has yet to be written. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  22:42, 9 March 2012 (UTC) typing this as I look out the hotel window at the Wisconsin State Capitol building

"Sri Sant Prabhu Dutt Brahmachari" article deleted by you
Hello Orangemike! You have deleted a article "Sri Sant Prabhu Dutt Brahmachari" without notifying me in my talk page. & you have deleted under CSD A1, I don't think that the article should delete under this. -- Srikant  Kedia  07:57, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * "So the Congress have to decide whether this is the country of Jawahar Lal Nehru or that of Prabhu Dutt Brahmachyari"???? That made no sense whatsoever; and the link given was of no use in attempting to understand the subject of the article. Note also that we don't use titles like "Sri" in article names. If you can get me some references that work, I'll be glad to figure out what the actual subject and title of the article should be; for example, is "Sant" a name or a title? -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  08:26, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oky, Sant is the title. You can search the information in web. & move the article to my sandbox, i will add sufficient information there, when i will get time. -- Srikant  Kedia  08:34, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

"Meaningless fluff"
OrangeMike, why did you eliminate all references to the two Texas interviews with Mr. Jordan? Even if you don't like the comment about the sales rank which came from the stories, those are recent large stories that deserve to be referenced. I feel like you are weakening the article. LisaBrown2012 (talk) 20:37, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * An interview, like a review, is not in and of itself encyclopedic content. It should only be referenced as a source of some kind of substantial information about the subject. We are not a press clipping service, nor a collection of ratings and reviews. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  00:52, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

OrangeMike, I understand your point now but even on that basis, the articles DID supply "substantial information" about Mr. Jordan's book other than the sentence you removed about the sales figures. Have you read the Texas story I linked to? It's fairly long and there is a lot of information in there. One of the sentences that someone has said needs a citation talks about how long it took the author to do his book, and I assume there can be a presumption that what he said to the press and they reported is correct. The Texas stories mention some of these facts. Wouldn't this satisfy the need for a citation of basic facts? Are we not to trust published information from legitimate news sources like these two Texas newspapers?LisaBrown2012 (talk) 04:10, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Username policy question
Given the users one edit is User:Clydecofriend an issue ? Mt king (edits) 20:41, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I have filed a report at WP:UAA.--ukexpat (talk) 21:58, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:University of Pristina/RfC: split proposal
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:University of Pristina/RfC: split proposal. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 00:15, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

You are being discussed here
Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship. You truly set standards.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 08:37, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

canary lee burton ??? copyright issues?
I worked deligently to put up a page for Ms. Burton ==with whom I am not "affiliated" except in friendship.

It seems from the cursory explanation you have some problem with copyright on the JPEG I submitted to Wikipedia Commons? Ms. Burton owns the copyright and she allowed me to use it. But even if there is some issue I must clear up about the JPEG, why remove the entire article?

Otherwise, it seems you may find the account of Ms. Burton's community efforts and her radio show un-neutral? So, I guess in order to make it acceptable to Wiki someone has to get an article published in a local "rag"..making it more credible? With the exception of the quote, which is from an email from Ms Burton, the "facts" about Ms. Burton are transparent to the artistic community in and around Provincetown, MA. In a newspaper article you can describe someone's activities in a colorful way because that person's life is colorful and interesting. I didn't say anything about her compositions being the best or most important..in fact the only evaluation of her music in the article was in the quote from Fanfare.

So, I'm waiting to hear more to know what I must do not to get "trashed"

Sincerely,

Penelope Foran

Granny Stands With Fist — Preceding unsigned comment added by Granny Stands With Fist (talk • contribs) 01:51, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Articles in Wikipedia are deliberately written in a neutral, fact-centered manner. Content must be from a neutral point of view, must be sourced to reliable third-party sources, and must be properly cited to those sources. E-mails from the subject, for example, are of no value to us. The article was not "trashed": just reverted to the prior, neutral and properly cited version. Friendship with the subject, by the way, does constitute a conflict of interest, since naturally one wishes to portray one's friends in a colorful, interesting and favorable light. If you have published information to offer, by all means offer it; but the best way, given your friendship with the subject, is probably via the article's talk page. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  02:02, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Is the "talk" page accessible to the public? Is it possible to get permission to use the Jpg? Since I have acknowledged that Ms Burton is a "friend" does that mean any additional modifications I make to her page will be "reverted?" (since you don't like my usage of "trashed").

Sincerely, Penelope Foran GRANNY STANDS WITH DIST — Preceding unsigned comment added by Granny Stands With Fist (talk • contribs)
 * In order:
 * Of course; it's the "talk" tab at the top of the page, which links to Talk:Canary Lee Burton
 * The use of the jpg is subject to the copyright of the photographer, who must give a license which allows use and re-use not only in Wikipedia but in other venues, including for-profit venues.
 * Your edits will be scrutinized, just as everybody else's edits are scrutinized, for compliance with regard to neutral point of view, verifiability, non-advertising, our Manual of Styleetc. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  14:57, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Martha redirect
You deleted this page (Martha/redirects) this morning. The page was the result of me moving a redirect (to facilitate a page move) and was intended to preserve its edit history; the move stemmed from the discussion here. Is it possible to get it back? The whole idea of moving it was so we wouldn't lose the history; deleting it leaves a gap in the reasoning. Moonraker12 (talk) 22:41, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Somebody took care of this before I could. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  00:50, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ushuaia
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ushuaia. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 22:15, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Brandon Society Parallax Award
Mike, thanks for the correction! I did similar things for a few other occurences of the award, so I'll go back and change them. Darrah (talk) 01:38, 13 March 2012 (UTC)