User talk:Ravpapa/Archive 4

Some advice
Be careful of regularly or emphatically describing things as "libellous", or implying that Wikipedia or its editors are at risk of legal action of some sort. Sooner or later, someone will try to use Wikipedia's policy on legal threats against you.

On a related note, also read this little mini-essay that I wrote. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:20, 14 March 2011 (UTC)


 * That is why I generally limit my editing to articles on people who have been dead for at least 200 years. --Ravpapa (talk) 19:24, 14 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Dead 100 years is best, it makes it so much easier to get photos that you can use without worrying too much about copyright :-)


 * Anyway it looks like Steven J. Anderson has summarised the issues with Jonathan G's editing better than either of us managed. I have some optimism that Steven's comments at AN/I will help things along. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:52, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Boteach
--Steven J. Anderson (talk) 06:23, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

SPI case
I've sent you an email about my behaviour at the SPI case. Hope this is OK. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 17:23, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Attempt to out user and personal comments unrelated to SPI
Would urge you to remove is violation of wiki policy to attempt to out user. Babasalichai (talk) 17:44, 17 March 2011 (UTC)


 * He didn't state who he thought the user was, he just mentioned some articles that the user had edited, and what was said elsewhere about the people related to those articles. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 17:48, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Surely he implied who he believes the user is. A very clear violation of Wiki and would urge each of you to immediately remove all suspect commentary. This is a very serious offense. Babasalichai (talk) 18:09, 17 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Really? What sort of consequences might it have? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:15, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Its a clear violation of Wiki policy and serious offense. Are you his bodyguard ? Babasalichai (talk) 18:19, 17 March 2011 (UTC)


 * You shouldn't be worrying about bodyguards! You have now committed a even more serious offence, about which Wikipe-tan is most displeased. And she wishes to admonish you for it! Please review WP:NOTWIKI where she will duly do so. Thank you. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:35, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Feel free to continue this discussion on my talk page. I am thoroughly enjoying it. Thanks, Demi, for introducing me to the delightful Wikipe-tan. --Ravpapa (talk) 09:52, 18 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I have to say, it is quite amusing. 5W Public Relations have a less than stellar record on Wikipedia given the dimwitted edits people who appear to be connected with them make. This was a nice one. I love the idea that identifying editors who work for PR firms that manipulate articles about themselves, their clients or people they don't like is outing. Brilliant. I'm sure they will be back. Nice work shutting them down for a while.  Sean.hoyland  - talk 16:02, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

You're leaking MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 spam
See what you did there. Palosirkka (talk) 13:07, 11 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Wow! That was really bizarre! I don't even use Microft Explorer. I wonder how that got in there?


 * Thanks for pointing it out. --Ravpapa (talk) 15:11, 11 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Apparently it happens in some condition when copy/pasting stuff from some Microsoft programs. Palosirkka (talk) 18:11, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

5W Public Relations
You asked a question which didnt get an answer and vandalised a page which has been discussed ad naseum and page which has been defiled ad naseum. Pls dont start a needless edit war and before making radical changes discuss any changes. Billybruns (talk) 19:21, 27 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I am having a good deal of difficulty understanding your post. What question did I ask that didn't get an answer? What page did I vandalize? What page has been defiled? And what does any of this have to do with outing users? All very curious. --Ravpapa (talk) 21:00, 27 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Apologize for the inaccurate header and have changed it. Was referring to a question to User: Mosmof which you asked. Copy and pasted the above header inaccurately. --Billybruns (talk) 23:04, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

5W Public Relations
Hi. Just to let you know, a new editor left a note on my talk page regarding your edits to the 5W Public Relations. You might want to drop them a note (as I already did) as they seem to think you restoring valid, sourced content to the article constitutes as vandalism. I no longer have the article watchlisted as it became a huge pain due to the COI issues and "new" users popping up, but if you need any additional help please let me know.  Pinkadelica ♣  23:06, 27 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm putting together an SPI for the "new" users right now. :) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:16, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Investigate as you see fit. Be sure when you report that you report accurately, which you havent done thus far. Stay on target regarding your proposed edits to 5W page and discuss them first on talk is required. There has been consensus and no blogs arent relevant sources. Lastly theres probably more than a few people in NYC who use Wikipedia. --Billybruns (talk) 03:06, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * ...and blocked.  Sean.hoyland  - talk 04:05, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Ronn Torossian Orig
Dearest Sir while you seem to be on a mission dont be on one which violates BLP. Torossian page would need multiple valid sources. --108.21.128.55 (talk) 13:37, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

March 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. Please be aware of Wikipedia's policy that biographical information about living persons must not include unsupported or inaccurate statements. Whenever you add possibly controversial statements about a living person to an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did to Ronn Torossian, you must include proper sources. If you don't know how to cite a source, you may want to read Referencing for beginners for guidelines. Thank you. Versa geek  14:08, 28 March 2011 (UTC)


 * The criticisms in that article were attributed to the New York Times, the Forward (considered a reliable newspaper), The Atlantic, the Haaretz newspaper, and Ad Age. One quote was attributed to Herbert Nolan, a writer on the Gawker website. I would not consider Gawker to be a reliable source for information, even though it is highly respected within the PR community. However, I did not rely on that source for information, but only quoted Nolan's opinion. Nolan himself is well-known and a respected media critic.


 * The anonymous editor 108.21.128.55, in the article 5W Public Relations has used an interesting tactic - he has removed all the footnotes from the section critical of 5WPR, so that he can now contend that the information is unsourced and removed it. I am wondering if he used the same trick at Ronn Torossian.


 * If you still feel that my last version contained criticisms that were not adequately attributed, please advise me which. Otherwise, I plan to restore that version. Thanks, --Ravpapa (talk) 20:22, 28 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Seriously, I think some of this is going too far. "a Jewish orthodox organization whose yeshiva headquarters is in the old Arab walled city of Jerusalem" - true maybe, but which RS commented on it? We should not be making such observations in Wikipedia's voice. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 07:04, 29 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Point taken. Nonetheless, see my post on Versageek's talkpage. Interested in hearing your opinion before proceeding. --Ravpapa (talk) 07:07, 29 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't think I'll have any sensible opinions until I've slept, woken, eaten a hearty breakfast, and then recovered from it. Unfortunately, this could take quite some time. (Some more socks and IPs seem to be on the loose in the meantime, but hey, no rush.) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 07:26, 29 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Talk to you in the morning. --Ravpapa (talk) 07:32, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

5wpr client section
The client format i used for client section is a well used format being used by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogilvy_%26_Mather. It would seem this format is the path of least resistance.. as this section is clearly labeled as "clients" and this format does just that.. If user wants to get a better understanding of a client, he is free to view their individual entry for more information. This section does not require explanations. Agreed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheNYCdan (talk • contribs) 10:46, 29 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I already agreed to this on the talk page. On the other hand, I think the fact that 5WPR is a leader in representation of clients who are representatives or US supporters of the Israeli far right is something, I believe, that Torossian himself would be proud of. Therefore, it deserves mention somewhere in the article. Agreed? --Ravpapa (talk) 12:32, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

I think even the term "far right" is something relative.. even those on the far right would believe there are people farthER to the right.. even the word far itself is relative to your position. I would argue that the word far doesn't define anything without a full explanation of the political landscape.. which of course has no place on this companys page ,and should be, as it is, left out. --theNYCdan

I would also like to review the reference to GAWKER. is that a reliable source? it would appear the client section was removed as it was deemed "source not reliable" I would argue that gawker by definition is a gossip site, and site and source should be removed,[User:theNYCdan|theNYCdan]] — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheNYCdan (talk • contribs) 07:25, 30 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree that Gawker is not a reliable source for information. However, I did not cite any information from the cite. Rather I quoted the opinion of Herbert Nolan, who, as you may know, is a respected critic of the PR and media sectors. I think that we can agree that an article signed by Nolan is an accurate representation of his opinion, even if it is in Gawker.


 * if you agree, than why do you use his quote on the Ronn Torossian page? Hamilton, not Herbert, is not an expert on education as far as I know, and I am not sure how that quote lends to any more than a host of naysayers who attack what they dont agree with.  It is tantamount to me writing about your level of intelligence without knowing you, without knowing what you know and are capable of, and having mt comment speak to an encyclopedia audience as a referenced to your true intelligence.  I suspect without knowing that there is a bias you're trying to skew for this piece.

Abigail7 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:13, 30 March 2011 (UTC).


 * Nonetheless, if you feel a different critical quote would be more appropriate, I would agree to substituting it. Lord knows there are plenty of them out there. --Ravpapa (talk) 07:56, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * And that "Lord Knows" comment doesn't reveal a bias intent? The Pistons quote is bias.  Why do you need more bias when you offer no positive comment?  Isn't balance essential or am I missing the intent?

Abigail7 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:27, 30 March 2011 (UTC).


 * Why do I have such trouble understanding what you people are saying? Who is Hamilton, and what does being an expert in education have to do with anything? "The Pistons quote is bias". I really am confused. This is something that Torossian said in an interview to the New York Times. It is quoted in much the same context as it appeared in the Times article. Do you feel it no longer expresses Torossian's attitude toward what makes good PR? If so, find me a quote that shows that, and I will gladly include it.


 * But all this is beside the point. Abigail, you just committed the cardinal sin of Wikipedia. You exist in our little world only a few hours, and already you have committed a 3RR. You are on your way to a ban. Sorry, Try again later with a different username. --Ravpapa (talk) 17:57, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Edward Mermelstein
If you were attempting to send to AfD again, it did not work. But if you do, let me know, that article is a pile of shit.--Milowent • talkblp-r 13:18, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I noticed the same thing. "Relisting" at AfD means that the article's ongoing deletion discussion cannot be closed just yet because a consensus has not yet been reached. Old AfDs that have already been closed cannot be relisted that way. I have removed your entry from yesterday's log. I have also reverted your additional notice to this old AfD, because this is not good style (It appeared as if the closing administrator ignored your sockpuppetry explanation). I have taken your comment to initiate a new AfD which you can find here. Cheers, Pgallert (talk) 08:13, 31 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for straightening this out. --Ravpapa (talk) 08:47, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar
Thanks, --Ravpapa (talk) 04:20, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Elie Hirschfeld
I nominated this article for deletion. It is the third time the article has been nominated. However, when I view the deletion discussion on the deletion page, it is the old discussion, rather than the new one, that gets transcluded.

What have I done wrong?

Thanks, --Ravpapa (talk) 11:11, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi. I've fixed it now - at Articles for deletion/Log/2011 March 31 it needed to link to Articles for deletion/Elie Hirschfeld (3rd nomination), not Articles for deletion/Elie Hirschfeld. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:36, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * (PS: The link from Elie Hirschfeld was already fine -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:37, 31 March 2011 (UTC))


 * Got it thanks --Ravpapa (talk) 11:41, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
--Steven J. Anderson (talk) 12:22, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Ronn Torossian 2
I see from the history that you at some point restored the quote about the Pacers-Pistons game, and I just wanted to let you know I took it out: in my opinion, it is excessive detail and not very encyclopedic. BTW, I looked at the discussions on the BLP noticeboard. I think that the article in its current state is fine, and that the criticism is handled in a way that is balanced enough for a BLP. Whether those three editors are indeed sock puppets is another matter, I reckon, and for now not so pressing: there are enough eyes on the article. But who knows, maybe we'll have to look more closely into that. (Also, a new thread on the same noticeboard was opened by one of those accusing you, but it looks like it will be closed pretty soon.) Regards, Drmies (talk) 18:26, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Can you explain why bias is permitted: www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:Ravpapa/Tilt You stated at a discussion board you went overboard on Torossian article is that still the case. --greenbay1313 (talk) 18:38, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Bad AIV at you
This user just created a report on you at WP:AIV. Not likely to cause anything at you, but you might want to have a talk with them about this. Cheers! Zakhalesh (talk) 18:40, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Warning
Do not again post inaccurate blogs at Ronn Torossian page. Your comment regarding Our Jerusalem is not sourced in the article clean it up. The Hebron source is an inaccurate blog can you clean those up - it doesnt say he is a spokesperson. --greenbay1313 (talk) 18:48, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Ronn Torossian
Hi, Ravpapa. I see that Zakhalesh sort of mentioned it above, but I thought I'd just drop you a line about greenbay1313. He's pretty upset about some edits at the Ronn Torossian page, and as such has tried to open an RfC, arbitration case, COI report, and AIV report against you. Thought I'd notify you, since he seems to have skipped that step. All of the extraneous forum shopping posts have been either removed or closed, and I'm trying to direct any discussion to BLPN. – GorillaWarfare talk • contribs 20:39, 31 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I was rather alarmed when I woke up this morning. I read the first half of your post, and went to look for all these complaints and could find none. I see now they have all been blown away already. I will look at the BLP post. --Ravpapa (talk) 04:17, 1 April 2011 (UTC)


 * They also threatened to sue Wikipedia, which is well done and will surely provide the result they're looking for if not dismissed. Zakhalesh (talk) 04:25, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

You are using the site 5wpr.com do you think thats a valid source as is the blog on Hebron. Whether or not sockpuppet exists would that allow you to make a living person biography inaccurate and harmful ? Are there any Israel profiles on Torossian regarding politics or are all regarding PR ? So why is Israel bulk of the biography ? greenbay1313 (talk) 21:41, 2 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I am really confused about this. Everything I read about Torossian suggests that he is proud and outspoken about his connection with Israel and his humanitarian and political activism there. "I am a proud Zionist," he writes in his blog. There are even hints in the Jerusalem Post profile that he is considering a political career.


 * Yet you and your friends are constantly militating to remove or downplay this aspect of his biography. Offhand, I would guess that this would be something he would personally want to play up, rather than hide. But then, I don't know him. Perhaps you could ask him. Or ask him to write me directly at ravpapa@yahoo.com.


 * Being a proud Zionist is a personal matter much different than owning one of Americas largest PR agencies which works for many companies. Torossian is not involved actively with Hebron or many of these other matters.  They are clients, much as Coca Cola, Barnes and Nobles and Cantor Fitzgerald are (which you commented on on the BLP Page). Simple balance. Torossian is a Jewish Zionist but he's not noteable for that. He's noteable for owning a PR agency and basic human decency dictates that the page be cleaned up.  Criticism is fair but make it accurate.  He worked for Netanyahu, Barkat and Olmert as a spokesperson - Not Hebron who hired for 1 project.  Never worked for Benny Elon - Worked for Ministry of Tourism when Elon was Minister, and worked for Ministry of Foreign Affairs when peres was minister. All of which are 1% of 5W work. greenbay1313 (talk) 13:18, 3 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Incidentally, I thought you were a Shomer Shabbos. Aren't you posting this on Shabbos? --Ravpapa (talk) 05:46, 3 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Being a proud Zionist is no different than being involved in hiphop or beauty clients for his company. Who says Torossian remains active with it. Maybe as a youngster he was involved in politics but today his involvement is as a PR professional and he is no Arthur Finkelstein involved strictly with right-wingers.  He worked for Shimon Peres for a long while and Ehud Olmert and co-founder of Our Jerusalem was Yoel Hasson. Would we write on Wikipedia he's in hiphop because he works for Sean Combs ? He's prominent for PR work not for Israel, which incidentially he hasnt been an activist for perhaps 10 years. Also works in Albania, Serbia, Ukraine and elsewhere. greenbay1313 (talk) 13:03, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Dang
You missed the Economic history of the Jews (actually, you can still read it here). Don't miss the Economic history of the Christians and Economic history of the Muslims. You can probably improve your essay with thoughts about these. Tijfo098 (talk) 18:31, 2 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Fascinating. Thank you. --Ravpapa (talk) 19:23, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

MiszaBot
Hey Ravpapa, I was noticing this page is getting rather long. I have been trying to follow a few of the conversations on the page but those (and presumably the other active ones too) are at the bottom. I was wondering if you would be interested in using MiszaBot, if you aren't all ready to archive your talk page every so often. If you already use MiszaBot you may also want to set it to archive discussions sooner. Just a suggestion. Thanks,  @ d \/\/ | | | Talk 12:30, 3 April 2011 (UTC).


 * Thanks. I had been thinking about this, but not doing anything. Your link was a great help. --Ravpapa (talk) 12:44, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Torossian Comments
Wanted to correspond to you directly rather than on Torossian page. Accurate to say that the Jewish stuff is getting too much attention. He's not involved in it at all other than for clients, of which Israel is less than 1%. And even that which is there is inaccurate.

Correct that Taglit-Israel should be removed, and keeping it in context so too should immoral - it discusses Agroprocessors and no source would state Torossian was personally involved. Its off, wrong and hurtful. Regarding Hebron would agree if he was a spokesperson it should be cited but he wasnt and has never been a spokesperson. They hired him to represent their dinner as did AJC and many Jewish organizations - They issued a press release. Thats not a spokesperson as you know.

Regarding Israel activities, Torossian represented both Ehud Olmert & Benyamin Netanyahu when they were Prime Ministers- Shouldnt those be inclued ? Can you add ? http://www.thejewishweek.com/features/confident_comeback http://www.mediabistro.com/prnewser/prnewser-interview-ronn-torossian-founder-president-ceo-5wpr_b770 http://www.thefreelibrary.com/PROFNET+WIRE%3A+GOVERNMENT+%26+LAW%3A+Middle+East+Peace+Process.-a0140538812 Torossian and the current Mayor of Jerusalem, Nir Barkat (again relevant and again shows non extremism). http://www.trcb.com/news/israel/general/mayor-of-jerusalem-nir-barkat-to-hold-press-conference-on-the-13377.htm http://newsblaze.com/story/2009032411430200002.pnw/topstory.html http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-10029606.html Easy to translate this from Globes Israels most respected business publication: http://67.199.80.177/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/ronn_torossian_globes_israel.pdf Chairman of Kadima, Yoel Hasson was co-founder of Our Jerusalem (liberal political party in Israel - in 5W and available on Youtube him praising: http://www.thejewishweek.com/features/legacybuilding_time_olmert

You seem to have an understanding of Israeli politics and are aware of the subtle differences between settling Eastern Jerusalem as Our Jerusalem sought to do, and expelling Israeli Arabs. Thats not what Our Jerusalem sought to do and should be corrected as Jerusalem Post stated.

The bio as you have it is simply wrong and you alone can correct it without controversy. Perhaps in his 20's Torossian was an activist - and was National US President of Betar - but thats a lot different than the extremism attributed to him by this Wikipedia entree. Moreover hes prominent for PR not for Israel activities. Thank you for your attention. If you'd like Torossian to contact you am sure can ask him to. greenbay1313 (talk) 13:13, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Seems you think Torossian is an activist. He's not - maybe until 1998 - not since then. The sockpuppet incident and others werent attributed to him as any media you read will state. He has had Israel clients, including Ahava and Elal but its tine percentage of his business. Reality and fairness and decency should be exhibited.greenbay1313 (talk) 13:20, 3 April 2011 (UTC)


 * You know, Greenbay, you are really getting to be a pain in the butt. Yesterday, you complained that I was a vandal, had a conflict of interest, and that I should be banned from editing. Today you are flattering and appealing to my good nature - "You seem to have an understanding blabla bla", "you alone can correct blablabla".


 * I have a lot of patience, but you and your friends have stretched it to its absolute limit. I suggest you take a long vacation from Wikipedia. Go to the Bahamas, or Venice Beach. Hang your keyboard on the Willows, and weep by the rivers of New Jersey as you remember Wikipedia. Because if you don't, your right hand may lose its cunning and your tongue may cleave to the roof of your mouth; or, in other words, your vacation from Wikipedia may be forced by general ban.


 * Finally, let me say this: my only interest in this and related articles is to see that they reflect reality in a way that approaches neutrality and good taste. That is hard to do with you blithering on my talk page. So go away. --Ravpapa (talk) 14:01, 3 April 2011 (UTC)


 * You alone dont have a monopoly on Wikipedia nor on the truth. I do think you have a political agenda and am not sure what friends you think I have or who you think I am. Neutrality means fairness. You have sources which show Olmert & Netanyahu and what you are doing has real life consequences.  The article is slanderous and libelous and we all have an interest for Wikipedia sake of it being fair and neutral.  Your continued assistance in doing that is appreciated.  Why dont you answer the issues raised rather than talking about personal issues. The content now there isnt balanced fair or neutral and you know it. Simply lets change it and can wish each other well (or not) from afar.  If you think that libelous content will continue to exist you are sorely mistaken. greenbay1313 (talk) 14:13, 3 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Simply review the content and balance. You are a fair person who got carried away as you stated. Torossian owns a company he is not an activist and you may spend tens of hours fighting it or can simply state it. He's not a hiphop artist because he represents Snoop Dogg and Sean Combs, isnt a beautician because he represents beauty brands and isnt an activist because he represents Israel causes. Maybe in 1997. Not in 2011.  Fairness and decency all part of BLP. greenbay1313 (talk) 14:19, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * You changed Our Jerusalem to read Palestinians. That is different than the source used The Forward so clearly you admit The Forward is wrong. Please correct it to read what The Jerusalem Post states.  You are aware that Kadima's Hasson who cofounded Our Jerusalem would never say such a thing. Dont let your emotions be involved. Pls fix. greenbay1313 (talk) 14:35, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Mindless automatons stomping around Wikipedia
Having been reading some folklore as well as chasing sockpuppets, I had a little idea and therefore commissioned a userbox to add to my collection:

I wanted to know whether you think (1) it gets the idea across? and (2) it's in acceptable taste ? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:38, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Highest possible "like." Dayewalker (talk) 02:27, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

May I ask who is that a picture of ? Do you have proof of what you are stating or is it below the belt ? greenbay1313 (talk) 12:46, 3 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Below whose belt?--Ravpapa (talk) 12:50, 3 April 2011 (UTC)


 * The person in the picture. Who is it ? If you are implying someone is a sockpuppet its a serious offline allegation of someone who makes a living in PR.  By the way, he wasnt involved in Agroprocessors you are aware. His company was.  Noone accused him of any involvement in fact he was away that week as media at the time stated. greenbay1313 (talk) 13:00, 3 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Uh, the text clearly states that paid PR socks are disapproved - it's not everyone who works on PR business, just the people who disrupt Wikipedia by bringing the PR here (which is disapproved by the entire community as seen here and here). You shouldn't be offended, unless you're actually a PR pusher. Zakhalesh (talk) 13:07, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, the "person" in the picture is a statuette, not an actual person. I'm pretty sure it's not offended. Zakhalesh (talk) 13:08, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Was referring to Ravpapas picture -

Its someone's face - and am sure its a serious offline allegation to call someone who makes a living in PR a sockpuppet unless its true. Whose face is it ? greenbay1313 (talk) 13:15, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Ravpapa is this not an actual living person you used in above photo ? Care to remove and apologize am sure you are aware cant out anyone and also cannot call someone a sock-puppet. This is offensive behavior. Would rather not report can you simply remove instead of reporting. Thanks. greenbay1313 (talk) 14:14, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, I was just looking for a picture of someone with a really big nose. Perhaps, by accident, I chose a picture of someone whom you may know. I apologize. I will remove it. Sorry. --Ravpapa (talk) 14:39, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * By accident you chose Torossian's picture identifying him as a sockpuppet ? and now to rectify it refer to him as someone with a "really big nose." You attempted to out Torossian as a sockpuppet and now further insult him, and you removed the picture which you had placed there. greenbay1313 (talk) 14:45, 3 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, I removed the photo. Isn't that what you asked me to do? --Ravpapa (talk) 14:49, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Needed to complain to forums. You attempted to out someone and slandered them in the process.  You then fixed it by apologizing and insulting ? You stated "by accident." It was by accident ? Thats not appropriate behavior, is it ? You are allowing your emotions to cloud your thinking on Torossian issue. Fix the mistakes you made and stop with this behavior which has real life consequences. Remember BLP and human decency. greenbay1313 (talk) 14:54, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

You are right. I was wrong. I have deleted the photo. I apologize. Now will you go away? --Ravpapa (talk) 15:00, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

What do you apologize for ? It wasnt an accident and is 1 of many insults you have made there is basic human decency involved and you are calling a live person things they are not including the above activities. Correct the Torossian page and stop this behavior you are capable of ending it and doing the right thing. greenbay1313 (talk) 15:04, 3 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Greenbay, please advise me before you post a complaint to the Administrators noticeboard. Otherwise, I don't get a chance to read it before it gets deleted. Thanks. --Ravpapa (talk) 15:27, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

So now am informing you I want to post a complaint. You slandered and libeled Torossian and outed him. To where does the complaint get directed. Should this matter not be rectified amiciably I'd venture Torossian will resort to legal means immediately. Your comments have off-line real life meaning and harm. To call the winner of every 40 under 40 list of a PR agency the accusation you made is damaging to his multi-million dollar empire. greenbay1313 (talk) 20:39, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged revisions, underwent a two-month trial which ended on 15 August 2010. Its continued use is still being discussed by the community, you are free to participate in such discussions. Many articles still have pending changes protection applied, however, and the ability to review pending changes continues to be of use.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under level 1 pending changes and edits made by non-reviewers to level 2 pending changes protected articles (usually high traffic articles). Pending changes was applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't grant you status nor change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:22, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Torossian compromise
Posted a proposed Torossian article here for compromise at suggestion of users on other page. Welcome edits. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Greenbay1313/Sandbox Also at your request asked Torossian to contact you. I have urged him not to take legal action as you are accurate that he is litigious and has often used lawsuits to accomplish business goals. Would hate for wikipedia to have an unnecssary lawsuit due to libel. There are changes which are very very inaccurate. greenbay1313 (talk) 20:37, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

you changed Our Jerusalem to read they threw out Palestinian citizens ? When ? Where ? You arent leaving this guy with any choices but to take outside legal action. Subpoenas here will work against all who contributed to the page and damaged. greenbay1313 (talk) 21:37, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

You seem like a reasonable man - There's a ton of Israel stuff, but no mentions of work for: Foreign Ministry and Tourism Ministry of Israel and Likud Party and current Mayor of Jerusalem: http://www.jpost.com/Features/InTheSpotlight/Article.aspx?id=150936 has also represented Israel Prime Ministers Ehud Olmert and Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu. http://www.thejewishweek.com/features/confident_comeback Trained Israeli government officials for media appearances. http://www.prweekus.com/israel-branding-effort-aims-to-humanize-nations-image/article/56167/ But some no name Reform Rabbi criticism is included ? If work with ruling Israeli government of course some fringe Rabbi will criticize. Its undue balance. you are a reasonable man and can singlehandedly solve this issue by being reasonable. greenbay1313 (talk) 02:51, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Israeli art
I vaguely remember seeing somewhere that you were planning to do something on Israeli art. If so, I stumbled across an overview article by Alec Mishory at JVL.  Sean.hoyland  - talk 12:07, 10 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Actually, I had suggested that someone else write such an article. I thought about translating the article on the Hebrew wikipedia, but I thought that all the pictures in that article would probably be deleted as copyvios. I now see that they are in the commons, so I guess they are okay.


 * Even if we just translate the Hebrew, it is a really big project. Maybe we can divide it up? --Ravpapa (talk) 12:44, 10 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't be able to help with the transation unless the words were anagrams of the Peace Now logo and then I wouldn't know what they meant. However, if it does get translated I'll be happy to help out where I can.  Sean.hoyland  - talk 08:11, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

קאטשיטי = Cochiti ?
I'm still gradually working my way through the Todros Geller "From Land to Land" woodblock prints to get them all loaded up to commons. One of the translations from Yiddish you provided was "Indian village (?) New Mexico". The word you weren't sure about was קאטשיטי. After staring at the Hebrew alphabet and searching for tiny places in New Mexico for a while, I think it might be a rendering of Cochiti, New Mexico.....which is still 95% Native American. Do you buy that ?  Sean.hoyland  - talk 16:21, 15 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Definitely. א in Yiddish is "o". --Ravpapa (talk) 05:41, 16 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks, that's great. I don't think this is documented anywhere by the way. No one seems to be working on researching Geller other than a little bit of recent work by Professor Susan Weininger for an ongoing Spertus Institute history of Chicago project. I think I'll send the print to the Pueblo Tribal Council in Cochiti (they are still a sovereign nation) as I'm pretty sure they won't have seen a picture in an all but forgotten Yiddish book of woodblock prints. It's nice to compare Geller's 1936 print to a photo of the village taken around 1880. Thanks again for your help.  Sean.hoyland  - talk 10:20, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

/* Debussy L 103, No. 1 &amp; 2, Danses Sacrée et Profane */
It is my belief that they are Chamber music, by their sound and by their listing at List_of_compositions_by_Claude_Debussy. On what basis do you feel that they are not Chamber music.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:57, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I would appreciate it if you would drop them in orchestra in the most appropriate place if you feel that they belong there.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:58, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Ravpapa: I've confirmed your edit. See here and here. Thanks. -- Klein zach  08:17, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Kleinzach. I think deleting the files, as you suggest, might be a little drastic. Tony might want to use them at Transcription (music). --Ravpapa (talk) 11:57, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I apologize. I was a bit confused between the term chamber orchestra and performers of chamber music.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:54, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Bach
Also, if you know classical music, can you tell me if File:Air.ogg is BWV 988 or 991?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:00, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * What do you think of the placement of this file now?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:52, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Also what is the difference between a baroque orchestra and a string orchestra?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:53, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

A baroque orchestra is an orchestra that plays baroque music. Usually the instruments are baroque instruments - that is, the versions of the instruments as they existed in the 18th century. In the last 250 years, many instruments - stringed instruments in particular - have undergone numerous changes, subtle in their outward appearance, but with dramatic impact on the way these instruments sound. So a baroque orchestra usually sounds quite different from a modern orchestra.

A baroque orchestra can include wind instruments and percussion. Listen, for example, this performance of the Bach Orchestral Suite number 1 includes oboes and a bassoon. A string orchestra is, of course, only strings, and usually with modern instruments. --Ravpapa (talk) 16:25, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Saul Raskin
I've made a start on the Saul Raskin article by the way. It resembles many mélange's I have hit with a hammer and is very much a work in progress. He was an interesting chap. There are hundreds of sources out there with snippets of information and no detailed biographies as far as I can tell. I don't think I've managed to get even a semblance of coherence in the article at this point.  Sean.hoyland  - talk 06:18, 6 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Great job! I wish I could photograph my pictures and put them in Commons, but I'm afraid it won't pass the copyright police. But I'll see if I can dig up anything. Regards, --Ravpapa (talk) 14:32, 8 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I've been looking through pictures trying to find representative examples his work. I was planning to add them once the text was more complete. I've only added the Hebrew Rhapsody cover lithograph so far. AgadaUrbanit added the watercolor self portrait but I might replace it with this self portrait as it shows his technique, and I'll add some other images. Some of the illustrations may be out of copyright and I'll go for fair use for the rest. He seems to have had quite a lot to say about art and various other issues which isn't really covered in detail at the moment.  Sean.hoyland  - talk 15:47, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Your edits to Jascha Heifetz
Hi Ravpapa, I just want to let you know that a user by the name of Skol fir has made non-sense edits to this page. You may want to keep an eye out. Jillk67y (talk) 00:24, 4 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the heads up. It is not Skol Fir, but another user called Babafat22a wjp jas been making the nonsense edits. Skol Fir is one of the good guys. --Ravpapa (talk) 04:55, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

req for ammendment
I dont think there is a chance of a general amnesty going through, so I proposed a different amendment that deals with Nishi and Gila alone. Sorry if I stepped on your toes, but I think the general amnesty bit will preclude the arbs looking at the specific cases.  nableezy  - 18:40, 14 June 2011 (UTC)


 * You done good. --Ravpapa (talk) 04:36, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Sasson Report and Yair Farm
Hello Ravpapa. You cited the Sasson Report's appendix at an article a while back (Psagot). I just added some material from the report cited to Peace Now's summary, but I was hoping you might confirm that the report has this information and perhaps add a reference citing it directly. The article is Havat Yair (another question, you think this should be moved to Yair Farm?). Thanks,  nableezy  - 04:54, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

If you ever read
Patrick White's great novel Voss, it is indispensable to listen to certain passages while Alban Berg's Violin Concerto plays in the background. I don't think this tidbit of obscure information is suitable to wikipedia, but it's what cropped up in my mind this evening. I don't imagine I can commit to this place as I did in the past. But it would be nice to reacquire a freedom lost. However things go, thanks, pal.Nishidani (talk) 19:59, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Or
prince aux poules? Nishidani (talk) 13:50, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Prince des poules. --Ravpapa (talk) 15:28, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Aber spricht man hier nicht von Prinzip, pal?Nishidani (talk) 17:38, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Abbiamo dire sciocchezze --Ravpapa (talk) 19:33, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

feygelekh in buzem tor zikh nit leygn :)Nishidani (talk) 20:04, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Ben Türkçe bilmiyorum. --Ravpapa (talk) 11:08, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Türkçe? S'iz Targum-loshn tsu mir. Gratias maximas tibi ago, amice, et vale.Nishidani (talk) 12:52, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * addendum. Sorry for those lengthy comments on the Mein Kampf page. I saw it mentioned at Ae or wherever, checked it, looked only at the lasty comments, and weighed in. I now see everything that worried me had already been noted by yourself and several others earlier up the talk page. Which makes me look like a self-inflating know-all. Perhaps I deserve such a rep. I thought it best to plunk this self-rap here then. Mea culpa.Nishidani (talk) 13:29, 7 August 2011 (UTC)


 * On the contrary. I had actually decided to distance myself from this article, and your comments returned me to the fray. Now there may actually be a chance that this horrendous cesspool of an article might be deleted. --Ravpapa (talk) 13:34, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, a further reason to blame myself. Have you ever studied game theory? Someone does an egregious piece of jerryrigged slapup construction that is plunked in a neighbourhood. The rule is: the case must come before law before it can be removed or demolished. The law is notoriously protective of squatting rights. It can't be removed, so the coalition of the willing, the Joes and Floes in the street pitch in, clean it up, do all of the work the original specbuilder failed to do, sweating, to make it minimally compatible with the environment it defaced. In the distance, one can see the spec builder, quietly smiling. His work has been done for him, without him scarcely lifting a finger. etc. He can now go to council and get approval for the neat little shack he is now heir to, and perhaps earn a place in the local newspaper for his work. :) Nishidani (talk) 14:26, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Your post to Wikiproject:Judaism
Please remove your post from the talk page of Wikiproject:Judaism as it does not relate to the content that is under that Wikiproject but to moral support for a banned user. If you do not remove it I will. Cheers.Griswaldo (talk) 15:11, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It is not a call for moral support for a banned user, but a request for comments regarding an amendment to an administrator's decision. It is a subject which is certainly of interest to members of the project, and removing it would be quite inappropriate. Regards, --Ravpapa (talk) 15:17, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Discussion re. "Icon of Evil"
Hi. I have opened a discussion about the status of the book- "Icon of Evil: Hitler's Mufti and the Rise of Radical Islam" here. Following your remarks on the Talk: Mein Kampf in the Arabic language page, I thought you might want to contribute (my feeling is that unless a reasonable consensus is reached regarding how this book is used as source material, then problems will continue cropping up in the future). Yours Prunesqualor   billets_doux  22:13, 30 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Added my two cents. --Ravpapa (talk) 05:47, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Re. your suggested version of the Mein Kampf in the Arabic language intro- If you choose to make that edit I would support that decision (as I have indicated on the relevant talk page). Prunesqualor   billets_doux  11:24, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Let's give other editors a couple of days to respond. If others support, or are indifferent, I will undertake a revision of the article. No need to hurry. --Ravpapa (talk) 11:49, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

That makes sense (I'm still learning the ropes re. how things are done on Wiki) Prunesqualor   billets_doux  15:13, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Non-free files in your user space
Hey there Ravpapa, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Ravpapa/DearYassi. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.


 * See a log of files removed today here.
 * Shut off the bot here.
 * Report errors here.
 * If you have any questions, place a template, along with your question, beneath this message.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:04, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

B'Tselem
Hi Ravpapa. I'll review the section in question and leave some comments later. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 21:16, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

A Palestinian rabbi for you!
Thanks for your support at the Afd on Palestinian rabbis. Chesdovi (talk) 14:22, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to join group
Hi, I noticed that you have an interest in Israeli art and was wondering if you would like to join a new project. If you join the Hebrew project page then you will be invited to the Wikipedia Israel "behind the scenes" upcoming tour. We look forward to hearing from you. Drkup(IMJ) (talk) 01:27, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

art of israel
הי. עניתי לך בדך השיחה שלי, אבל לא ידעתי כמה אתה נכנס לממשק העברי. אמש מישהי מטעם המוזיאון התחילה לתרגם את הערך, כך שאני מציע לך לבחור מאמר אחר מתוך רשימת המומלצים או הטובים בפורטל האמנות הישראלית. אשמח אם תודיע לי מה החלטת בעניין בדף השיחה שלי. יאיר טלמור 77.125.89.119 (talk) 04:53, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
 * hi Ravpapa. did you find some otheir article to translate? talmoryair — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.25.77.118 (talk) 09:19, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

דיווח על התקדמות פרויקט גלאם/מוזיאון ישראל בבלוג של עמותת ויקימדיה ישראל
ראי דיווח בבלוג של עמותת ויקימדיה ישראל. גמר חתימה טובה :) Talmoryair (talk) 19:45, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

ויקיפדיה:מיזמי ויקיפדיה/גלאם/מוזיאון ישראל בפייסבוק
מאתמול, למיזם יש גם דף פייסבוק. הדף, כמובן, פתוח לתגובות, קישורים ושאר ירקות. Talmoryair (talk) 07:57, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

controversy
I see you've beat me to the punch. I had thought I might post just the single word "checkmate" and let it go at that. For one thing, I've been making an obnoxious nuisance of myself, constantly posting arguments here and there, and even if no one else is getting tired of it, I am myself. FYI, I don't know if you may have ever looked at my userpage, but only a few days ago I finally introduced myself there. Sometime back in the discussion I had suggested that it might be interesting to research the history of the second sentence in the guideline to see what the arguments were, for and against. Well, I did research it myself, and found that around 2006, as I recall, or thenabouts, someone suggested that since the gist of the second sentence was the agreed-upon de facto rule being followed, it ought to be formalized. So the guideline actually started with the second sentence rather than the first. I thought it best not to post this finding. Also, FWIW, take a look at Jerome Kohl's final post at the OCLC section on his talk page - it's just as well that he stayed aloof. I've conversed some with MistyMorn on his talk page about strategy, if that might be of interest. Rider unquestionably has the law on his side. Robert, on the other hand, is just being amazingly obtuse, unable to see how his arguments keep missing the point. Finally, if you might care to take a look at my own pet peeve, the Rubinstein discography, THD3 feels, rather naturally, possessive about his baby. So to sum up, I'm ready to throw in the towel (I thrive on cliches), and leave you guys to your own devices. You summed it up very nicely in your response to Jack - "the reader is the enemy". In the meantime I have real work to do, and need to get on with it. Cheers, and all the best. I remain very appreciative of your valiant efforts. Milkunderwood (talk) 15:07, 22 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Don't consider yourself a nuisance. Your comments have been right on, even if we did lose this one. But, as you say, time to get back to real work. --Ravpapa (talk) 15:11, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

first easy question
Right below your "Done!", I had posted Did you have any thoughts concerning this suggestion? Milkunderwood (talk) 23:07, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Immediately above Ravpapa's excellent new "Recordings" section is a section on "Score order". Might it be useful to add a link here to Shorthand for orchestra instrumentation? I'm not a musician, and on first encountering examples of this shorthand it was beyond Greek to me. (I'm also not an experienced wikipedian, and wouldn't know the best way or place to add it.)

Sure. Go ahead and add it. --Ravpapa (talk) 03:50, 3 November 2011 (UTC)


 * :-) Took me a while to find an appropriate example of a template - I can never find anything at all in the thicket of WP: what-to and what-not-to and where-to or where-not-to, but never any how-to stuff. So this is what I put at the bottom, using ((Further|)):
 * No idea if that's what you might have put there. Milkunderwood (talk) 05:24, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * No idea if that's what you might have put there. Milkunderwood (talk) 05:24, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Johann Tost
I've left a note at Talk:List of string quartets by Joseph Haydn in response to you and DavidRF. Milkunderwood (talk) 20:41, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

wit
Ravpapa, you might be interested in looking down toward the bottom of this discussion. Milkunderwood (talk) 02:40, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Classic Judaism


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

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Spartaz Humbug! 12:50, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry about the misdirected template. Its automatic. Spartaz Humbug! 14:40, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Gideon Levy
You have broken the references that I have fixed.Why?--Shrike (talk) 14:54, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

It was you who broke the references by moving text into a footnote. Try reading what you edit before saving. --Ravpapa (talk) 14:55, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Gideon Levy". Thank you.

Death and the Maiden rename
I haven't been following the long discussion, but shouldn't it be a capital 'Q'? String Quartet No. 14 (Schubert)? If not and its a long explanation, don't worry about it. I'm just checking to make sure its not a typo. Thanks.DavidRF (talk) 23:00, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Quite right, but fixing it is not so simple, Wiki won't let me move the page (I am guessing because moves are case insensitive), I have asked an administrator to turn his hand to it. Tnx. --Ravpapa (talk) 06:19, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you
What can I say? Thank you. MistyMorn (talk) 20:01, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

FA status in Piano music of Gabriel Fauré
Does this article deserve FA status? Please see this discussion. Best wishes, Gidip (talk) 19:21, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Your HighBeam account is ready!
Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know: Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 20:58, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Your account activation code has been emailed to your Wikipedia email address.
 * Only 407 of 444 codes were successfully delivered; most failed because email was simply not set up (You can set it in Special:Preferences).
 * If you did not receive a code but were on the approved list, add your name to this section and we'll try again.
 * The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
 * To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1; 2) You’ll see the first page of a two-page registration. 3) Put in an email address and set up a password. (Use a different email address if you signed up for a free trial previously); 4) Click “Continue” to reach the second page of registration; 5) Input your basic information; 6) Input the activation code; 7) Click “Finish”. Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive.
 * If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi.  Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
 * A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate
 * HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
 * Show off your HighBeam access by placing on your userpage
 * When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.