User talk:Plhofmei

Hi, welcome to my talk page. If I leave a message for you on your talk page I will watch there for a response. If you leave a message for me on my talk page I will respond below that. Thank you!Plhofmei (talk) 21:50, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Brian Brunette

 * You tagged the Brian Brunette article as possibly non-notable. I'll be brief: Brunette was a professional athlete for six years, he fought for a world title, and he retired from professional boxing with a record of 24 wins and 1 loss.  Please explain to me how, in light of WP:ATHLETE, the career of this individual is of questionable notability. Brain Rodeo (talk) 06:40, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I appreciate it. Brain Rodeo (talk) 15:24, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * That really isn't a surprise, since his professional career ended before the advent of the internet. Brain Rodeo (talk) 23:31, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

K-Dow
Realistically, due to infrastructure, K-Dow will probably end up in Wayne County or possibly the Aerotropolis. Same infrastructure reasons that NextEnergy went to Wayne county. Sources so far indicate the company wants to be close to the Dearborn community.Thomas Paine1776 (talk) 16:56, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

RE: Dow Chemical
Actually, no. You removed a significant amount of content relating to Bhopal (as evident here). I'd ask that you re-add it, otherwise all of your changes could be undone. - Rjd0060 (talk) 22:57, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Evolution of the human diet
"It reads like an advertisement and needs to be rewritten from a neutral point of view."

Please explain in what way the article reads like an advertisement. --Phenylalanine (talk) 04:48, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I was reading it wrong, at first glance it looked like an advert for the "new diet of the week". It does need some expansion and in-line citations though.Plhofmei (talk) 04:54, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I would rather use a "stub banner" instead of the eye jarring "exclamation mark" banner. It's just a first draft. --Phenylalanine (talk) 04:58, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Feel free to replace expand with the appropriate stub then. I noted you have several links, surely you can find a place to make one inline, at least near/around "Based on archaeological and paleontological evidence, it has been possible to infer past human diets and to study their role in human physical and behavioral evolution."Plhofmei (talk) 05:05, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Tuesday Wilkinson
The user (and his sockpuppet) are blocked, thanks for the heads up. The place to report simple vandals like that is Administrator intervention against vandalism, commonly referred to as WP:AIV or just AIV. For more complex vandalism, you may want to file a report on the incidents noticeboard, commonly referred to as WP:ANI or WP:AN/I.

If you have any more questions, feel free to ask away. Cheers! J.delanoy gabs adds 23:55, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Probably unwanted advice
Before nominating a brand-new article on what might be an encyclopedic topic for deletion, as you did with Carter County, Ky schools, it's usually a good idea to check that we don't already have an article on the topic under another name, to which the new article can be redirected. (We have tons of school-district articles.) In this case, a WP search for "Carter County schools" uncovered the existing article in the first few results. Also, we don't include "Votes" sections in AfD discussions, since they're not supposed to be polls—see "Deletion discussions" in Deletion policy. Deor (talk) 00:10, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The advise is good, though the tone could use some work. Plhofmei (talk) 14:29, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Your rollback request
Hello Plhofmei, I have granted your account rollback in accordance with your request. Please remember that rollback is for reverting vandalism, and that misuse of the tool, either by revert-warring with other users, or simply reverting edits you disagree with, can lead to it being removed. For practice, you may wish to see New admin school/Rollback. Good luck. Acalamari 21:31, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Molluscum Contagiosum
WP:Not the other rx sections in this article are only descriptive of treatments available from qualified healthcare professionals. this section described how to do it yourself. this principle has been debated in the medicine project and the overwhelming consensus has always been that for wp to offer treatment advice is a major, major can of worms. the other instance of this in which i have been involved was the removal section in the 'tick' article. if you go back and read the removed material, it conceded that self-applied cryosurgery could result in a 'permanent discolouration'. beyond that, a little common sense dictates that wp should not be telling children to burn themselves with hot pins. it did offer the disclaimer that a dermatologist should be consulted first. fine. the dermatologist advises otc wart freezers or hot pins, that's his/her business. we should not. they have malpractice insurance. we don't(?). one kid winds up with a fulminant necrotizing fasciitis (unlikely, but...)and that's the end of wikipediaToyokuni3 (talk) 05:33, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Thomas E. Corning
I think that the flagging of this article for non-notability was inappropriate under the circumstances. The article qualifies under the basic definition: "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject." In addition, the Nova Scotia House of Assembly is a "first-level sub-national political office, including members of a legislature", as stated in Notability_(people), which means that the subject of this article qualifies on multiple levels. If you have difficulty assessing the notability of the article, then it would have been more appropriate to use the tag, as suggested in Notability. ---Big_iron (talk) 11:30, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Citation hypocrisy
Hello,

Wikipedia is not your personal assistant. If you want to find the citation that your requested in Deepwater Horizon oil spill, please read through the already added references, and find the correct article for the citation - I bet any of them would do. For the work that it took you to request a citation you could have already added it yourself. Because Wikipedia is not your personal assistant, or a competition for the most citation neededs added, I have reverted your edit. hydrox (talk) 00:29, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe it'd be best if you look up the definition of the word "hypocrisy". It was my understanding the fact template was made for items that weren't properly cited and seemingly made up.  Maybe you'd care to reference a portion of Wikipedia Policy to help me understand your position?Plhofmei (talk) 14:38, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation
Your upload of File:Bay City Fireworks Festival.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:55, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

New deal for page patrollers
Hi ,

In order to better control the quality  of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:29, 13 November 2016 (UTC)