User talk:Prof. Mc/Archives/2015/August

Metadoxine
Thanks for reviewing the entry I made yesterday. I heard about Metadoxine because Alcobra wants to repurpose it for ADHD. I'll try to expand on that application soon. Fluidcarl (talk) 15:15, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Green Dog Food
Dear Prof. Mc, I would like to contest the speedy deletion of the Green Dog Food Wiki page. The article concerns a national UK brand and according to ongoing discussion on Wikipedia, the general consensus is that brands are worthy of entries. The wiki is fully cited and is one of many such wikis on dog food brands - none of which have been earmarked for speedy deletion, yet a number cite only their own website. The language employed is not bias and I have gone to pains not to reference specific products or use any form of advertising spiel. In support of my case I would cite such wiki entries as can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Dog_food_brands.

I look forward to hearing from you on this. Gruntfuttock115 (talk) 17:25, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


 * FYI Grunt works for a PR agency - see for example the upload information on this file. They presumably have a COI with regards to this company. SmartSE (talk) 20:48, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Harriet Starr Cannon
Thanks for your review of this new page. After I posted it, it had a lot of edits by a supposedly experienced wikipedia editor, which IMHO made it worse, making your note poignant.Jweaver28 (talk) 12:59, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Seema Midha
Dear Prof. Mc. I am a new user and am a creating this page for a friend of mine. Any pointers as to what should be improved upon and why do you feel that it appears to be promotional. Thanks in advance for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ManeeshMohnot (talk • contribs) 13:25, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Frank A. DeMarco
Thank you very much for your review of this page. I am new to this and I hope to keep progressing. Could you tell me what is the next step to see the AFC submission template removed? Ammiamm (talk) 01:01, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Talkback
331dot (talk) 13:17, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

WP:PROD should only be used for an uncontroversial deletion; you will probably need to use the WP:AFD process. 331dot (talk) 13:57, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Rashid Rehman
See section External links of page Rashid Rehman. He is in news of worlds's leading media. I will update the page time to time. on external link you may found so much detail of him. Hope you will remove the tags. Ameen Akbar (talk) 18:34, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm CaroleHenson. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, On New River, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.  CaroleHenson  ( talk ) 10:21, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

inre Articles for deletion/Poovarasam Peepee
While unreleased films sometimes do not merit articles, this is not a hard nor fast rule. Applicable POLICY allows that future events may be spoke of, and in acknowledging this, applicable GUIDELINE for unreleased films lets us know that sometimes a film merits an article even if not yet released. See WP:NFF (paragraph 3). Expanded in the essays WP:NYF and WP:FFEXCEPTIONS. Because it is seen that the film being considered for deletion has indeed been subject of coverage in multiple reliable sources AND because it is slated for release within three weeks, inclusion criteria are met and I ask you to reconsider your deletion stance. There is no shame (and indeed some great wisdom) in withdrawing your nomination. Thank you,  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 04:40, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Makes sense. Thanks. My concern wasn't really about when it was to be released, but that even upon release it didn't seem to meet criteria. But I've got no ego in this. I'm happy to hear from someone with plenty of experience that I should withdraw the nomination. Prof. Mc (talk) 05:19, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Well said. I have no qualms about supporting a delete for topics simply not ready, but when they are, I support a keep. Thank you.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 05:52, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I tried to follow the steps to withdraw my nomination, but seem to have done it wrong. Any advice on what I need to do to actually get the nomination withdrawn and off the page?
 * A bit difficult to simply undo an AFD once it gets listed in the delsorts. So best to do just as you did... but better to do a strikethrough of the nomination statement and do an bulleted and emboldened Withdraw nomination with explanation following right after that. And thank you... Iranian films are difficult to source unless they actually get out of Iran.  As this one was by a notable Iranian film producer, we'll get more.   Schmidt,  Michael Q. 03:09, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks for taking care of that, and for the tutoring. Prof. Mc (talk) 10:22, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Removing AfD template
Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Poovarasam Peepee. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. This is an automated message from a bot about, where you removed the deletion template from an article before the deletion discussion was complete. If this message is in error, please report it.— cyberbot I Notify Online 07:20, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:
 * Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. &mdash; MusikAnimal talk 01:47, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Deleted contributions
You asked on the Star Valley Medical Centre talk page why you couldn't see their earlier creation on the contributions. Only administrators can see deleted contributions (as we can only see deleted content). For example, every page you've nominated for deletion that's been deleted shows in your deleted contributions, which I can see but you can't. Hope that helps :) Ged  UK  12:58, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that does help, yes. I appreciate you taking the time to explain it. Prof. Mc (talk) 13:03, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Are you clear about how WP:PROD works?
As can be seen at
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kelantan_pitis&action=history

you PRODed Kelantan pitis a half hour after created it, with the following reason:
 * There is a short article on the Kelantan keping. This should be a subsection, or an extra sentence.

JoshXF challenged the PROD, inviting you to bring the dispute to the talk page. You instead reverted his challenge. That is not your prerogative. Once a PROD fails, you have to then resort to the AfD process. Please don't make that mistake again. Thanks 72.244.204.119 (talk) 21:41, 18 May 2014 (UTC) P.S. Perhaps you should consider delaying your WP:Requests for permissions/Rollback ?
 * I think what the log shows is that I reverted his deletion of my PROD. At least, when I compare my revision to his, and look at his Edit Summary, which says "Removed the text." The next revision is me restoring the PROD. At least, that's what I remember. And when I compare each revision to the next, that's what I see. What am I missing? Prof. Mc (talk) 22:15, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Your summary is correct. Anyone can remove a PROD, even the article's creator.  You aren't supposed to restore a PROD once it was challenged. Instead of reverting the removal of the PROD, you're next step was (and still is) an WP:AfD 72.244.204.119 (talk) 22:30, 18 May 2014 (UTC).
 * Oh, yes, I see what you're saying now. My apologies. Yes, lesson learned when it happened. Certainly my request for rollback can be denied, but I still think it's a fair request for me to make. I've worked on a lot of vandalism since then, and have tended to stay away from the new article creation stuff. And, I've stuck to reverting clear vandalism on the non-beer pages. I appreciate the feedback from you, honestly. Prof. Mc (talk) 23:03, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Of course you'll get wp:rollback sooner or later. All that the rest of us can hope is that you make a good-faith effort to learn the WP:PG, while keeping the WP:FIVEPILLARS in mind... Good luck. 72.244.204.119 (talk) 23:47, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'm sure it's not the last mistake I'll make. As far as I can tell, my mistake on the Kelantan pitis was not catastrophic. I've learned from it, and hopefully will from any others I might make. Again, thanks for the feedback. Prof. Mc (talk) 23:54, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Closed AFD discussion of N S Narendra
Hi. Thanks for withdrawing your nomination of the article. I'd like to make some points clear. The article may not be notable by content (esp in the beginning when it's new article), but may be as a subject, just as it was in the case of N S Narendra. So in such cases, all you need to do is just check if all the notability guidelines at WP:N (and any notability criteria specific to the subject are met) by using Google search. If they fail even after these, you may go ahead and nominate them for deletion or in some cases, they may even fall under WP:CSD. If you are not sure of whether the article is a candidate for deletion through any of the process, you may just leave it alone, someone familiar in the subject of the article may nominate it if it is. We all make mistakes and they are meant to be since we learn from them. So, no worries. If you have any queries, feel free to ask me or anyone else. Cheers! &mdash;  Abhishek  Talk 15:36, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of breweries in Georgia (U.S. state), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia (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) 08:53, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Your request for rollback
Hi Prof. Mc. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3A enabled] rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Yunshui 雲 水 12:47, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback should never be used to edit war.
 * If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
 * Use common sense.

May 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=609806528 your edit] to List of breweries in Mississippi may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:20, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
 * 20 May 2014}} In 2012, according to the Brewers Association, Mississippi ranked 51st including the District of Columbia in the number of [[Microbrewery#Craft_

Flowers in the Columbian Exchange
Hi Prof Mc. I just saw your name at the Columbian Exchange and I see that you are historian. I did an edit or two at Dahlia and when I saw it came from Mexico, immediately thought of the Columbian Exchange. It has just dawned on me that no flowers/ ornamental plants are listed at Columbian Exchange. Do you think you could come up with a few, or are they just too many to list? As an aside, do you know that there are at least about 10 species of grasses, wild flowers and trees that entered South Africa accidentally in the bales of fodder that the British brought from Argentina to feed their horses during the Anglo-Boer war? Pampas grass, cosmos, araucarias, tumbleweed, ... Rui &#39;&#39;Gabriel&#39;&#39; Correia (talk) 00:36, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi! I think you'll probably find lists of plants transferred during the Columbian Exchange in books like Guns, Germs, and Steel, but I can't pull out any list right now, sorry. Prof. Mc (talk) 20:39, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Deleting my edits to Fadak
I do not understand why you and others are consistently deleting my edits to Fadak, I will make it more concise and summarize it, but it seems VERY biased that you are not allowing an alternative research to be added for the public to view, rather than a one sided view. I even added a specific header for the alternative opinion and didn't delete any existing information.

The page currently has a lot of detail according to a minority opinion, so for you to say my post is not suitable for the page is rather hypocritical. None the less I shall summarise it and make a different page if need be, so if the public do wish to research it, they can get a balanced research rather than a one sided one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MissyB786 (talk • contribs) 15:10, 26 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi MissyB786. Your edits are being reverted/deleted because they seem to violate Wikipedia's style guidelines with regard to neutrality and point of view. You are quoting from religious texts for information on a place, and the language/prose you're using draws heavily on prose more appropriate to a religious text. You might consider reading through the Wikipedia Manual of Style before making any more edits. Prof. Mc (talk) 15:29, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Removal of thread on project talk?
Hello, one of your recent edits appears to have removed my thread from WT:WikiProject Economics which was inviting any interested parties to consider undertaking the GA review for Global financial system at WP:GAN. Did you intend to remove it, or might it have been a mistake? Judging from the varied removals/additions of entirely separate threads, I cannot discern the intended purpose of your edit. Perhaps you might take another look and correct anything you didn't mean to modify? Cheers,  John Shandy`   &bull; talk 01:50, 28 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi!. I have absolutely no idea how that happened. I was trying to post a note about the MonteDaCunca sock puppet. I'm also not quite sure how to restore that text without being sure that I'm not removing the intervening edits. Can you help? My apologies for that mistake. Again, I've no idea how that came to be. Prof. Mc (talk) 10:19, 28 May 2014 (UTC)


 * No problem, you must have accidentally selected a large portion of the article text before typing your message. At any rate, I've gone ahead and restored just my thread. I won't bother with the other content, since I cannot discern what else should be restored. We all make goofs from time to time - I certainly have. Cheers,  John Shandy`   &bull; talk 02:53, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Leatherback sea turtle
Please explain this edit. Why is no reason given in the edit summary? Regards, Sun Creator(talk) 08:28, 13 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Reverted a good-faith edit using STiki. I don't usually put more than that, since a comparison of the two versions makes it self evident, but the edit I undid completely reversed the meaning of the sentence, and made it internally self-contradictory. It wasn't quite vandalism, but not quite a joke. So I assumed good faith. Prof. Mc (talk) 12:30, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Evaluation
Thanks for evaluating the new article San Diego Brewing Company for WikiProject Beer. But - stub? really? With three paragraphs and five references? The project quality scale defines "stub" as "A very basic description of the topic; Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition." Just asking; I'm no expert in evaluating articles. --MelanieN (talk) 18:25, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi! First, let me say--it's not personal. Assessing an article as a "Stub" is not a judgment on the importance of the subject. Second, it's subjective. Third, as usual I looked through the assessment criteria at WikiProject Beer when I examined this page. The relevant section, to me, for calling it a "Stub" was "The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work to become a meaningful article." It seems short to me, and while it has some organization I think it's still in the "rough collection" stage. It seems to require more content to make it to the next level.


 * That having been said, if you think it qualifies as a "Start," then please feel free to change it. As I wrote, it's not personal, and it is subjective. I can see some reasons it might be labeled a "Start," and am of course not about to engage in an editing-assessment war over start vs. stub. I do, however, think it should remain assessed as a Low-Importance article, based on the information it currently contains.


 * I hope this all helps. Prof. Mc (talk) 18:36, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * No worries, I'll accept your judgment. I'm just used to thinking of a stub as being one or two sentences. And I certainly agree about the "low importance". --MelanieN (talk) 20:05, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * OK. Well, like I said, it's subjective. I certainly think it's right on the edge. Another paragraph with citations and I'd have probably said "Start." Or even on a different day. I think it goes either way. Prof. Mc (talk) 20:18, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, and thanks for the re-evaluation! I didn't mean to lobby you (well, I guess I did, a little bit) but I do think that reflects the current state of the article. And thanks for the behind the scenes work you do in maintaining these articles, it's thankless but important. --MelanieN (talk) 14:40, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, and while I am shamelessly lobbying, could you take another look at Beer in San Diego County, California? I think it may have moved beyond the "start" category but I don't believe in rating my own articles. --MelanieN (talk) 14:45, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm happy to look at it again, sure thing. If you don't mind I'll put it on a list of things for this weekend or early next week at the latest. Doing Stub and Start are fairly quick to do, but I'd take a bit more time assessing Start --> C. On quick glance it does look good, but I'd prefer to take some time on it, if you don't mind. Then I can leave some feedback on the Talk page explaining my process, instead of doing it in the Summary. That OK? Prof. Mc (talk) 14:54, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * That would be great, whatever works for you; there's certainly no rush. And I do appreciate the care you take in rating these things. Part of the reason for rating is to encourage people to improve the articles, and as you can see it worked here! (Heck, maybe I could learn a little so I could do some rating of other articles as needed.) --MelanieN (talk) 15:17, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

List of breweries in Indiana
I'm working on updating this page to list all breweries here in Indiana. I assume you just deleted the updated list because of all the red links and probably because I wasn't logged in. I am working on updating this list right now to reflect the links to each brewery's wiki page if it exists. The red links help me see which link needs to either be updated or removed. I am not linking to their websites and this list comes from the Brewers of Indiana Guild. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IndyHomeBrewer (talk • contribs) 14:10, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi. Yes, I did remove those because it was a list of redlinks and the edit came from an IP address with no other edits. Though I will say that they'd have probably been deleted anyway. Now that I'm aware of what you're working towards, so I'll won't delete the stuff you're doing so quickly, but in general the "List of breweries" pages are patrolled pretty tightly for redlinks and spam. I'm just one of four currently active people who watch those. So you might consider making the list in your sandbox, getting it in shape, and then pasting it in. You might also look at the other "List of breweries" pages as a guide, starting with List of breweries in Arkansas etc etc etc. Prof. Mc (talk) 14:16, 20 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Was curious why the list of breweries I added to the Indiana page was removed on Sept 6th? All of the city, state links were correct and any brewery that had a wiki page had a link to the page. --IndyHomeBrewer (talk) 18:29, 15 November 2014 (UTC)-
 * I removed them because there was no evidence that they actually existed. Generally you need to include a link to an independent source [ie. a newspaper, magazine article, etc. and not the brewery's website] showing that the brewery is real. Prof. Mc (talk) 01:42, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Ahhhhh... So I'll need to find an article somewhere talking about the brewery?  Would I add that link to the See Also or Reference section? -- (talk) 14:32, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Look at some of the other "List of Breweries" pages to get an idea for how they're done, but in general they are references/footnotes. Prof. Mc (talk) 19:29, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Will do, thanks IndyHomeBrewer (talk) 19:57, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Sam Adams Edits
I noticed that in all the great editing you're doing that you un-wikilinked Lager. What that intentional? Prof. Mc (talk) 20:05, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, yes. I was thinking of WP:LINKCLARITY and WP:SPECIFICLINK because what I unlinked was part of a product name, and the link went to lager rather than pale lager, so the intention was to link the pertinent part of the description of the product (as in "a 5% abv pale lager"), but I didn't come upon a description, so it got overlooked. I will look up the product shortly, and then write a short description of it, linking the part(s) of the description that may be helpful. If I don't get around to it in the next day or two, and you already know the product, then please go ahead and write a description yourself.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  07:42, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

List of breweries in Tennessee
Why in the world did you revert all the hard work I spent on adding to this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brian-L (talk • contribs) 16:01, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Because if you are going to list breweries on a page, they need to have an independent source verifying their existence and significance. So, a link to a newspaper article or to an already-existing Wiki page. A link to a brewery's website is not an acceptable source.Prof. Mc (talk) 13:25, 3 August 2015 (UTC)


 * You've got to be kidding. That doesn't make sense, as for one thing 99% of Wikipedia content has no "newspaper article or to an already-existing Wiki page" linked. So how is a breweries existence any different? Besides, a brewery's website has more credit than an already-existing Wiki page. And how does a newspaper article make things official? And what if no "newspaper article or to an already-existing Wiki page" exists to link to? Those references just clutter up things anyway. And many link to articles with outdated information that is no longer true. I showed my version of the page to a few people who found no problem with it.
 * It seems like you would welcome and appreciate the lengthy work of others, and if you want links, work on adding those yourself or allowing other users to, instead of just discarding the whole page. Honestly I highly doubt anyone other than you would have a problem with these breweries being listed. And why would they? FYI, I've been to most of these breweries personally.


 * Just curious, why do you think this is all your decision? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.141.177.179 (talk) 17:15, 3 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi and . Thanks for your response here. I've been curating the "Breweries" pages for a bit more than a year, along with a few other editors, including, ,  and a few others. We curate the pages following the generally-accepted guidelines for Wikipedia in general, and for the beer-related pages specifically. Here's a general guide that covers this: WP:LISTCOMPANY. Here are the general, project-related Guidelines: WikiProject_Beer/Guidelines.


 * In terms of "my decision," it is not. I'm curating the pages based on generally-accepted Guidelines established by the Wiki community and the Project Beer folks. Feel free to initiate a discussion about this at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Beer. \


 * Finally, I've reformatted your replies and posts to my page. When you reply, please use the colon [:] to indent your reply to keep them readable. Also, please remember to sign your posts. Thanks! Prof. Mc (talk) 17:34, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Removed Content
Hi there,

The reason I didn't explain why I removed content was just Wiki ignorance. I don't know how or where to explain.

I removed the link to Jennifer Coolidge birthday on Aug 28, Because the link takes you to her page where she is listed as being born on June 1.

Thanks Tuneman45 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.116.40.122 (talk) 20:49, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks!

Kashmir
You will never understand the pain caused by militiants and pakistanies on innocent like me who are living as Kashmir pandits in the region come to reality you fkr Girish ghost (talk) 02:40, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Good faith?
Is pipelinking a BLP's name to "Fat Bert" really a "good-faith edit": ? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:10, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Benefit of the doubt? Getting soft. Yeesh, I have no idea. I had just handed out a few vandalism warnings via Stiki and was starting to feel guilty. Mea culpa, for sure. Prof. Mc (talk) 01:12, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * You might want to hand out another warning template or two, Mac. There is some sort of crazy IP edit-war going on over Bret Bielema's name, with several IP users pipelinking the article title to "Bert Bielema" or "Fat Bert" or variations thereof in multiple Arkansas Razorbacks and Wisconsin Badgers articles.  You can check out the 10 or 15 most recent rollbacks in my contributions log -- I don't use rollback that often and they stand out like a sore thumb.  Cheers.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:17, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Maybe it needs to be nominated for temp protection? Prof. Mc (talk) 01:19, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Looks like it was already done. Pubs closed early tonight? Prof. Mc (talk) 01:21, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Mac, if that's a suggestion that I need to stop editing, and go have a pint, you may have a valid point.   Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:28, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Ha! No, I was thinking that the edit-war was because people were bored. But heading out for a pint isn't a bad idea. If I still lived in England, I'd definitely head out. Nothing like an English pub to soothe the troubles. Prof. Mc (talk) 02:47, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Matteo Renzi
Hello, I assume that you don't like zodiac signs and that you are the judge about the fact that putting the zodiac sign is to be considered "not constructive". Btw which is YOUR zodiac sign? p — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.61.81.145 (talk) 19:17, 14 August 2015 (UTC) /Archives/ }}
 * format=Y/F
 * age=1
 * archivebox=yes
 * box-advert=yes

Welcome to my talk page. Have fun.

Metadoxine
Thanks for reviewing the entry I made yesterday. I heard about Metadoxine because Alcobra wants to repurpose it for ADHD. I'll try to expand on that application soon. Fluidcarl (talk) 15:15, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Green Dog Food
Dear Prof. Mc, I would like to contest the speedy deletion of the Green Dog Food Wiki page. The article concerns a national UK brand and according to ongoing discussion on Wikipedia, the general consensus is that brands are worthy of entries. The wiki is fully cited and is one of many such wikis on dog food brands - none of which have been earmarked for speedy deletion, yet a number cite only their own website. The language employed is not bias and I have gone to pains not to reference specific products or use any form of advertising spiel. In support of my case I would cite such wiki entries as can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Dog_food_brands.

I look forward to hearing from you on this. Gruntfuttock115 (talk) 17:25, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


 * FYI Grunt works for a PR agency - see for example the upload information on this file. They presumably have a COI with regards to this company. SmartSE (talk) 20:48, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Harriet Starr Cannon
Thanks for your review of this new page. After I posted it, it had a lot of edits by a supposedly experienced wikipedia editor, which IMHO made it worse, making your note poignant.Jweaver28 (talk) 12:59, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Seema Midha
Dear Prof. Mc. I am a new user and am a creating this page for a friend of mine. Any pointers as to what should be improved upon and why do you feel that it appears to be promotional. Thanks in advance for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ManeeshMohnot (talk • contribs) 13:25, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Frank A. DeMarco
Thank you very much for your review of this page. I am new to this and I hope to keep progressing. Could you tell me what is the next step to see the AFC submission template removed? Ammiamm (talk) 01:01, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Talkback
331dot (talk) 13:17, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

WP:PROD should only be used for an uncontroversial deletion; you will probably need to use the WP:AFD process. 331dot (talk) 13:57, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Rashid Rehman
See section External links of page Rashid Rehman. He is in news of worlds's leading media. I will update the page time to time. on external link you may found so much detail of him. Hope you will remove the tags. Ameen Akbar (talk) 18:34, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm CaroleHenson. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, On New River, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.  CaroleHenson  ( talk ) 10:21, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

inre Articles for deletion/Poovarasam Peepee
While unreleased films sometimes do not merit articles, this is not a hard nor fast rule. Applicable POLICY allows that future events may be spoke of, and in acknowledging this, applicable GUIDELINE for unreleased films lets us know that sometimes a film merits an article even if not yet released. See WP:NFF (paragraph 3). Expanded in the essays WP:NYF and WP:FFEXCEPTIONS. Because it is seen that the film being considered for deletion has indeed been subject of coverage in multiple reliable sources AND because it is slated for release within three weeks, inclusion criteria are met and I ask you to reconsider your deletion stance. There is no shame (and indeed some great wisdom) in withdrawing your nomination. Thank you,  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 04:40, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Makes sense. Thanks. My concern wasn't really about when it was to be released, but that even upon release it didn't seem to meet criteria. But I've got no ego in this. I'm happy to hear from someone with plenty of experience that I should withdraw the nomination. Prof. Mc (talk) 05:19, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Well said. I have no qualms about supporting a delete for topics simply not ready, but when they are, I support a keep. Thank you.  Schmidt,  Michael Q. 05:52, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I tried to follow the steps to withdraw my nomination, but seem to have done it wrong. Any advice on what I need to do to actually get the nomination withdrawn and off the page?
 * A bit difficult to simply undo an AFD once it gets listed in the delsorts. So best to do just as you did... but better to do a strikethrough of the nomination statement and do an bulleted and emboldened Withdraw nomination with explanation following right after that. And thank you... Iranian films are difficult to source unless they actually get out of Iran.  As this one was by a notable Iranian film producer, we'll get more.   Schmidt,  Michael Q. 03:09, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks for taking care of that, and for the tutoring. Prof. Mc (talk) 10:22, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Removing AfD template
Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Poovarasam Peepee. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. This is an automated message from a bot about, where you removed the deletion template from an article before the deletion discussion was complete. If this message is in error, please report it.— cyberbot I Notify Online 07:20, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:
 * Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. &mdash; MusikAnimal talk 01:47, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Deleted contributions
You asked on the Star Valley Medical Centre talk page why you couldn't see their earlier creation on the contributions. Only administrators can see deleted contributions (as we can only see deleted content). For example, every page you've nominated for deletion that's been deleted shows in your deleted contributions, which I can see but you can't. Hope that helps :) Ged  UK  12:58, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that does help, yes. I appreciate you taking the time to explain it. Prof. Mc (talk) 13:03, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Are you clear about how WP:PROD works?
As can be seen at
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kelantan_pitis&action=history

you PRODed Kelantan pitis a half hour after created it, with the following reason:
 * There is a short article on the Kelantan keping. This should be a subsection, or an extra sentence.

JoshXF challenged the PROD, inviting you to bring the dispute to the talk page. You instead reverted his challenge. That is not your prerogative. Once a PROD fails, you have to then resort to the AfD process. Please don't make that mistake again. Thanks 72.244.204.119 (talk) 21:41, 18 May 2014 (UTC) P.S. Perhaps you should consider delaying your WP:Requests for permissions/Rollback ?
 * I think what the log shows is that I reverted his deletion of my PROD. At least, when I compare my revision to his, and look at his Edit Summary, which says "Removed the text." The next revision is me restoring the PROD. At least, that's what I remember. And when I compare each revision to the next, that's what I see. What am I missing? Prof. Mc (talk) 22:15, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Your summary is correct. Anyone can remove a PROD, even the article's creator.  You aren't supposed to restore a PROD once it was challenged. Instead of reverting the removal of the PROD, you're next step was (and still is) an WP:AfD 72.244.204.119 (talk) 22:30, 18 May 2014 (UTC).
 * Oh, yes, I see what you're saying now. My apologies. Yes, lesson learned when it happened. Certainly my request for rollback can be denied, but I still think it's a fair request for me to make. I've worked on a lot of vandalism since then, and have tended to stay away from the new article creation stuff. And, I've stuck to reverting clear vandalism on the non-beer pages. I appreciate the feedback from you, honestly. Prof. Mc (talk) 23:03, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Of course you'll get wp:rollback sooner or later. All that the rest of us can hope is that you make a good-faith effort to learn the WP:PG, while keeping the WP:FIVEPILLARS in mind... Good luck. 72.244.204.119 (talk) 23:47, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'm sure it's not the last mistake I'll make. As far as I can tell, my mistake on the Kelantan pitis was not catastrophic. I've learned from it, and hopefully will from any others I might make. Again, thanks for the feedback. Prof. Mc (talk) 23:54, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Closed AFD discussion of N S Narendra
Hi. Thanks for withdrawing your nomination of the article. I'd like to make some points clear. The article may not be notable by content (esp in the beginning when it's new article), but may be as a subject, just as it was in the case of N S Narendra. So in such cases, all you need to do is just check if all the notability guidelines at WP:N (and any notability criteria specific to the subject are met) by using Google search. If they fail even after these, you may go ahead and nominate them for deletion or in some cases, they may even fall under WP:CSD. If you are not sure of whether the article is a candidate for deletion through any of the process, you may just leave it alone, someone familiar in the subject of the article may nominate it if it is. We all make mistakes and they are meant to be since we learn from them. So, no worries. If you have any queries, feel free to ask me or anyone else. Cheers! &mdash;  Abhishek  Talk 15:36, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of breweries in Georgia (U.S. state), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia (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) 08:53, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Your request for rollback
Hi Prof. Mc. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3A enabled] rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Yunshui 雲 <sub style="font-size:90%">水 12:47, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback should never be used to edit war.
 * If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
 * Use common sense.

May 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=609806528 your edit] to List of breweries in Mississippi may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:20, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
 * 20 May 2014}} In 2012, according to the Brewers Association, Mississippi ranked 51st including the District of Columbia in the number of [[Microbrewery#Craft_

Flowers in the Columbian Exchange
Hi Prof Mc. I just saw your name at the Columbian Exchange and I see that you are historian. I did an edit or two at Dahlia and when I saw it came from Mexico, immediately thought of the Columbian Exchange. It has just dawned on me that no flowers/ ornamental plants are listed at Columbian Exchange. Do you think you could come up with a few, or are they just too many to list? As an aside, do you know that there are at least about 10 species of grasses, wild flowers and trees that entered South Africa accidentally in the bales of fodder that the British brought from Argentina to feed their horses during the Anglo-Boer war? Pampas grass, cosmos, araucarias, tumbleweed, ... Rui &#39;&#39;Gabriel&#39;&#39; Correia (talk) 00:36, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi! I think you'll probably find lists of plants transferred during the Columbian Exchange in books like Guns, Germs, and Steel, but I can't pull out any list right now, sorry. Prof. Mc (talk) 20:39, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Deleting my edits to Fadak
I do not understand why you and others are consistently deleting my edits to Fadak, I will make it more concise and summarize it, but it seems VERY biased that you are not allowing an alternative research to be added for the public to view, rather than a one sided view. I even added a specific header for the alternative opinion and didn't delete any existing information.

The page currently has a lot of detail according to a minority opinion, so for you to say my post is not suitable for the page is rather hypocritical. None the less I shall summarise it and make a different page if need be, so if the public do wish to research it, they can get a balanced research rather than a one sided one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MissyB786 (talk • contribs) 15:10, 26 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi MissyB786. Your edits are being reverted/deleted because they seem to violate Wikipedia's style guidelines with regard to neutrality and point of view. You are quoting from religious texts for information on a place, and the language/prose you're using draws heavily on prose more appropriate to a religious text. You might consider reading through the Wikipedia Manual of Style before making any more edits. Prof. Mc (talk) 15:29, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Removal of thread on project talk?
Hello, one of your recent edits appears to have removed my thread from WT:WikiProject Economics which was inviting any interested parties to consider undertaking the GA review for Global financial system at WP:GAN. Did you intend to remove it, or might it have been a mistake? Judging from the varied removals/additions of entirely separate threads, I cannot discern the intended purpose of your edit. Perhaps you might take another look and correct anything you didn't mean to modify? Cheers,  John Shandy`   &bull; talk 01:50, 28 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi!. I have absolutely no idea how that happened. I was trying to post a note about the MonteDaCunca sock puppet. I'm also not quite sure how to restore that text without being sure that I'm not removing the intervening edits. Can you help? My apologies for that mistake. Again, I've no idea how that came to be. Prof. Mc (talk) 10:19, 28 May 2014 (UTC)


 * No problem, you must have accidentally selected a large portion of the article text before typing your message. At any rate, I've gone ahead and restored just my thread. I won't bother with the other content, since I cannot discern what else should be restored. We all make goofs from time to time - I certainly have. Cheers,  John Shandy`   &bull; talk 02:53, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Leatherback sea turtle
Please explain this edit. Why is no reason given in the edit summary? Regards, Sun Creator(talk) 08:28, 13 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Reverted a good-faith edit using STiki. I don't usually put more than that, since a comparison of the two versions makes it self evident, but the edit I undid completely reversed the meaning of the sentence, and made it internally self-contradictory. It wasn't quite vandalism, but not quite a joke. So I assumed good faith. Prof. Mc (talk) 12:30, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Evaluation
Thanks for evaluating the new article San Diego Brewing Company for WikiProject Beer. But - stub? really? With three paragraphs and five references? The project quality scale defines "stub" as "A very basic description of the topic; Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition." Just asking; I'm no expert in evaluating articles. --MelanieN (talk) 18:25, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi! First, let me say--it's not personal. Assessing an article as a "Stub" is not a judgment on the importance of the subject. Second, it's subjective. Third, as usual I looked through the assessment criteria at WikiProject Beer when I examined this page. The relevant section, to me, for calling it a "Stub" was "The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work to become a meaningful article." It seems short to me, and while it has some organization I think it's still in the "rough collection" stage. It seems to require more content to make it to the next level.


 * That having been said, if you think it qualifies as a "Start," then please feel free to change it. As I wrote, it's not personal, and it is subjective. I can see some reasons it might be labeled a "Start," and am of course not about to engage in an editing-assessment war over start vs. stub. I do, however, think it should remain assessed as a Low-Importance article, based on the information it currently contains.


 * I hope this all helps. Prof. Mc (talk) 18:36, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * No worries, I'll accept your judgment. I'm just used to thinking of a stub as being one or two sentences. And I certainly agree about the "low importance". --MelanieN (talk) 20:05, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * OK. Well, like I said, it's subjective. I certainly think it's right on the edge. Another paragraph with citations and I'd have probably said "Start." Or even on a different day. I think it goes either way. Prof. Mc (talk) 20:18, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, and thanks for the re-evaluation! I didn't mean to lobby you (well, I guess I did, a little bit) but I do think that reflects the current state of the article. And thanks for the behind the scenes work you do in maintaining these articles, it's thankless but important. --MelanieN (talk) 14:40, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, and while I am shamelessly lobbying, could you take another look at Beer in San Diego County, California? I think it may have moved beyond the "start" category but I don't believe in rating my own articles. --MelanieN (talk) 14:45, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm happy to look at it again, sure thing. If you don't mind I'll put it on a list of things for this weekend or early next week at the latest. Doing Stub and Start are fairly quick to do, but I'd take a bit more time assessing Start --> C. On quick glance it does look good, but I'd prefer to take some time on it, if you don't mind. Then I can leave some feedback on the Talk page explaining my process, instead of doing it in the Summary. That OK? Prof. Mc (talk) 14:54, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * That would be great, whatever works for you; there's certainly no rush. And I do appreciate the care you take in rating these things. Part of the reason for rating is to encourage people to improve the articles, and as you can see it worked here! (Heck, maybe I could learn a little so I could do some rating of other articles as needed.) --MelanieN (talk) 15:17, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

List of breweries in Indiana
I'm working on updating this page to list all breweries here in Indiana. I assume you just deleted the updated list because of all the red links and probably because I wasn't logged in. I am working on updating this list right now to reflect the links to each brewery's wiki page if it exists. The red links help me see which link needs to either be updated or removed. I am not linking to their websites and this list comes from the Brewers of Indiana Guild. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IndyHomeBrewer (talk • contribs) 14:10, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi. Yes, I did remove those because it was a list of redlinks and the edit came from an IP address with no other edits. Though I will say that they'd have probably been deleted anyway. Now that I'm aware of what you're working towards, so I'll won't delete the stuff you're doing so quickly, but in general the "List of breweries" pages are patrolled pretty tightly for redlinks and spam. I'm just one of four currently active people who watch those. So you might consider making the list in your sandbox, getting it in shape, and then pasting it in. You might also look at the other "List of breweries" pages as a guide, starting with List of breweries in Arkansas etc etc etc. Prof. Mc (talk) 14:16, 20 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Was curious why the list of breweries I added to the Indiana page was removed on Sept 6th? All of the city, state links were correct and any brewery that had a wiki page had a link to the page. --IndyHomeBrewer (talk) 18:29, 15 November 2014 (UTC)-
 * I removed them because there was no evidence that they actually existed. Generally you need to include a link to an independent source [ie. a newspaper, magazine article, etc. and not the brewery's website] showing that the brewery is real. Prof. Mc (talk) 01:42, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Ahhhhh... So I'll need to find an article somewhere talking about the brewery?  Would I add that link to the See Also or Reference section? -- (talk) 14:32, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Look at some of the other "List of Breweries" pages to get an idea for how they're done, but in general they are references/footnotes. Prof. Mc (talk) 19:29, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Will do, thanks IndyHomeBrewer (talk) 19:57, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Sam Adams Edits
I noticed that in all the great editing you're doing that you un-wikilinked Lager. What that intentional? Prof. Mc (talk) 20:05, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, yes. I was thinking of WP:LINKCLARITY and WP:SPECIFICLINK because what I unlinked was part of a product name, and the link went to lager rather than pale lager, so the intention was to link the pertinent part of the description of the product (as in "a 5% abv pale lager"), but I didn't come upon a description, so it got overlooked. I will look up the product shortly, and then write a short description of it, linking the part(s) of the description that may be helpful. If I don't get around to it in the next day or two, and you already know the product, then please go ahead and write a description yourself.  SilkTork  <sup style="color:#347C2C;">✔Tea time  07:42, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

List of breweries in Tennessee
Why in the world did you revert all the hard work I spent on adding to this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brian-L (talk • contribs) 16:01, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Because if you are going to list breweries on a page, they need to have an independent source verifying their existence and significance. So, a link to a newspaper article or to an already-existing Wiki page. A link to a brewery's website is not an acceptable source.Prof. Mc (talk) 13:25, 3 August 2015 (UTC)


 * You've got to be kidding. That doesn't make sense, as for one thing 99% of Wikipedia content has no "newspaper article or to an already-existing Wiki page" linked. So how is a breweries existence any different? Besides, a brewery's website has more credit than an already-existing Wiki page. And how does a newspaper article make things official? And what if no "newspaper article or to an already-existing Wiki page" exists to link to? Those references just clutter up things anyway. And many link to articles with outdated information that is no longer true. I showed my version of the page to a few people who found no problem with it.
 * It seems like you would welcome and appreciate the lengthy work of others, and if you want links, work on adding those yourself or allowing other users to, instead of just discarding the whole page. Honestly I highly doubt anyone other than you would have a problem with these breweries being listed. And why would they? FYI, I've been to most of these breweries personally.


 * Just curious, why do you think this is all your decision? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.141.177.179 (talk) 17:15, 3 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi and . Thanks for your response here. I've been curating the "Breweries" pages for a bit more than a year, along with a few other editors, including, ,  and a few others. We curate the pages following the generally-accepted guidelines for Wikipedia in general, and for the beer-related pages specifically. Here's a general guide that covers this: WP:LISTCOMPANY. Here are the general, project-related Guidelines: WikiProject_Beer/Guidelines.


 * In terms of "my decision," it is not. I'm curating the pages based on generally-accepted Guidelines established by the Wiki community and the Project Beer folks. Feel free to initiate a discussion about this at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Beer. \


 * Finally, I've reformatted your replies and posts to my page. When you reply, please use the colon [:] to indent your reply to keep them readable. Also, please remember to sign your posts. Thanks! Prof. Mc (talk) 17:34, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Removed Content
Hi there,

The reason I didn't explain why I removed content was just Wiki ignorance. I don't know how or where to explain.

I removed the link to Jennifer Coolidge birthday on Aug 28, Because the link takes you to her page where she is listed as being born on June 1.

Thanks Tuneman45 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.116.40.122 (talk) 20:49, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks!

Kashmir
You will never understand the pain caused by militiants and pakistanies on innocent like me who are living as Kashmir pandits in the region come to reality you fkr Girish ghost (talk) 02:40, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Good faith?
Is pipelinking a BLP's name to "Fat Bert" really a "good-faith edit": ? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:10, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Benefit of the doubt? Getting soft. Yeesh, I have no idea. I had just handed out a few vandalism warnings via Stiki and was starting to feel guilty. Mea culpa, for sure. Prof. Mc (talk) 01:12, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * You might want to hand out another warning template or two, Mac. There is some sort of crazy IP edit-war going on over Bret Bielema's name, with several IP users pipelinking the article title to "Bert Bielema" or "Fat Bert" or variations thereof in multiple Arkansas Razorbacks and Wisconsin Badgers articles.  You can check out the 10 or 15 most recent rollbacks in my contributions log -- I don't use rollback that often and they stand out like a sore thumb.  Cheers.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:17, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Maybe it needs to be nominated for temp protection? Prof. Mc (talk) 01:19, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Looks like it was already done. Pubs closed early tonight? Prof. Mc (talk) 01:21, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Mac, if that's a suggestion that I need to stop editing, and go have a pint, you may have a valid point.   Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:28, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Ha! No, I was thinking that the edit-war was because people were bored. But heading out for a pint isn't a bad idea. If I still lived in England, I'd definitely head out. Nothing like an English pub to soothe the troubles. Prof. Mc (talk) 02:47, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Matteo Renzi
Hello, I assume that you don't like zodiac signs and that you are the judge about the fact that putting the zodiac sign is to be considered "not constructive". Btw which is YOUR zodiac sign? p — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.61.81.145 (talk) 19:17, 14 August 2015 (UTC)