User talk:Rms125a@hotmail.com/Archive 13

Adolfo Müller-Ury
Hello, I see you have reverted some further information I added from the obituary of Stuart Preston which I thought was pertinent and interesting since he does not have his own Wikipedia entry. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/stuart-preston-11184.html In truth I don't know how to add references, and all my attempts as a result of your prompting have failed and I have not saved them. Maybe you can add this reference and then I will see if I can get it to work myself? Stephen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephen Conrad (talk • contribs) 11:21, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello Robert I don't know why you deleted the section on Muller-Ury's critical assessment which I based on one in another artist's page ages ago which was far more subjective than mine. You appeared to accept the changes when I revised it before, and as I can't spend all my time writing for Wikipedia and have only recently begun adding the references you wanted, it is very disheartening that you remove perfectly factual statements. As I have seen more Muller-Ury pictures than anyone else living, I think Wikipedia should accept that I know what I am talking about and that I did not add the section without thought; I may be "close" to the research, but I am trying to make it more accurate all the time as my research and writing of his biography progresses, and in any case you deleted what is a quotation from a source mentioned in the section, and which I had not yet got around to amending the way you want, with a footnote. Please revert the section and allow me time to make changes with references. Thank you in advance.

Hello Robert Please would you not put the section on Adolfo Muller-Ury's third cousin Hildegarde Muller-Uri ahead of other information about HIM, as it makes no sense whatsoever; she is really part of the Lost Colony of Artists in San Augustine, and really I only put her in Muller-Ury's entry at the end until such time as I could get more information about her to create her own page, which she deserves. Placing her in the middle of Muller-Ury's article is extremely misleading. And why delete all the other facts about her, which you can read online in the Lost Colony articles? If you don't know about these obscure American painters, then you will cause confusion by inserting it in the middle, and I have spent twenty years researching Muller-Ury and don't want my hard efforts in search of facts undone. Thank you. It might be better if you communicated with me, rather than just reverting things. When I worked on a related page on Count Antoine Seilern, the editors were more helpful in discussing changes. Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephen Conrad (talk • contribs) 16:22, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Bess Myerson
According to the New York Times obituary today, "Her coronation, on Sept. 8, 1945, just days after Japan’s surrender had ended World War II, came at a time when a beauty queen could still capture the nation’s attention and even emerge a heroine — in Ms. Myerson's case as the first (and, so far, only) Jewish Miss America." If you don't believe that's true, you'll have to take it up with the New York Times. Coretheapple (talk) 23:45, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Gilda's Club


The article Gilda's Club has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * trivial references; not notable

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  DGG ( talk ) 04:36, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Template: Year article header
Hi Robert - thanks for your appreciation. I've noticed that the text at the top of 1927 is garbled:

"1927 (MCMXXVII) was a common year starting on Saturday of the Gregorian calendar (dominical letter B), the 1927th year of the Common Era (CE) and Anno Domini (AD) designations, the 927th year of the 2nd millennium, the 27th year of the 20th century, and the 8th year of the 1920s decade between 1583 and 1929 and with Julian Value: 1927 is 13 calendar days difference, which continued to be used until the complete conversion of the Gregorian calendar was entirely done in 1929."

Everything after the word 'decade' is pretty much incomprehensible. This must be a problem with the template Year article header, I think. I've raised the matter on the template's talk page, but I've also noticed that another editor raised the same issue 9 months ago, to no effect. Might this be something you know anything about? I can't even work out whereabouts in the template code this text is generated. Colonies Chris (talk) 16:44, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Kayla Mueller
&mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 00:03, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Images on date pages
The addition of images to date pages has been generally discouraged on the grounds that there are dozens of events on the page and subjectively selecting images to be included give undue weight to a particular event. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 00:05, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi, can you help me out with a problem here?
Hi, thanks for giving me credit on the shooting of Walter Scott. I have a real problem here. When I type in the word "law enforcement personnel" on Wikipedia, it only automatically linked to the police officer article, which is really inaccurate to say that, since "law enforcement" refers not just police officers but also correction officers and other type of law enforcement agencies. I'm not sure who did it, but I want to link "law enforcement personnel" to the "law enforcement officer" article. Can you help me out? XXzoonamiXX (talk) 21:25, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Red links; subtemplates
Hi,

Please do not remove red links from articles. Also, please do not remove subtemplates, such as URL, from infoboxes. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:24, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

List of ICTY ...
Why are you removing the charges from the list for those whose indictments were withdrawn? It is still official and open record. I am not sure that this is the best idea. Rmhermen (talk) 03:30, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

List of people indicted in the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia
Hey, RMS. There is a discussion occurring at WP:BLP/N which you should be aware of. I don't see a problem, but you should probably put in an appearance at BLP/N. Cheers, and keep up the good work. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:40, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Curtis Culwell Center attack
Please: 1) do not change it from the American date format, without any appropriate reason; and 2) do not delete RS-sourced material, especially without noting that you are doing so in the edit summary. Thanks. --Epeefleche (talk) 18:47, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry: I always make a point of distinguishing between mm/dd/yyyy and dd/mm/yyyy format consistency, and always user the former for anything to do with the USA. So I don't know what happended unless there was some kind of edit conflict. As for the second, I have to check what you are referring to but sometimes for what I consider minor changes I do just put "ce" (for "copyedit"). Let me check. Thanks. Quis separabit?  18:53, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I checked the diffs and found this damning one, in which the following text: Soofi was raised as a Muslim by his father. When his parents divorced, he and his brother moved to Pakistan to live with their father and stepmother,, and then later from Pakistan to the US in 1998 to live with his mother. In the 1990s, Soofi attended a private school in Islamabad, Pakistan. was removed. I would never intentionally remove important text like that. I think I had copied and pasted my version when I hit an edit conflict, checked the last edit and misviewed only minor edits, and updated my text. Sorry. Quis separabit? 18:59, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * No worries at all. Fast-moving article, so I can understand how that could happen unintentionally.  All the best.  BTW - if you want to move this thread to the one where it started, including my comment, that would be fine with me. Others could then more easily follow it. Best. Epeefleche (talk) 19:02, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Twitter
Twitter can be a WP:SELFPUB WP:PRIMARY source, as long as the account is verified by Twitter. See WP:TWITTER. Scott Walker's account is verified. Elizium23 (talk) 02:03, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Gräff
Dear User Rms125a@hotmail.com, I saw zour changes at Matthias Laurenz Gräff. Please chance the name back to Matthias Laurenz Gräff, because this is the name of the artist. Thanks a lot. Greetings --Artium72 (talk) 18:42, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

I have found the button to change the name back into M L G. Please dont change this. Thanks a lot. Kind regards --Artium72 (talk) 19:37, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Fulton Oursler
Rms125a, do you have any particular interest in Fulton Oursler (or his family), that you edit his Wikipedia entry at times? Aboudaqn (talk) 16:59, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * No. Never heard of him before I came upon his article. Quis separabit?  17:26, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion tags
I have removed the speedy deletion tags from Denise Milani. I had to go to a sysop to create that article since it was creation protected. She said that since my version was "substantially different" than the previous versions so she allowed for it to be made. She also said that their was a high probability of it getting CSD tagged, so she moved it herself. So I can imply that she would have also removed the CSD tag. That is my justification for removing it, since it says that the creator of the article can't remove CSD tags. Read this. Rainbow unicorn (talk) 23:46, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

May be of interest
User_talk:Airplaneman Airplaneman   ✈  14:56, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Wake Island Holidays
Hi Rms125a, you removed the edits I made to Public holidays in the United States and March 22 that listed holidays for Wake Island. According to the U.S. Air Force which runs Wake Island, "Wake Island observes all US holidays except Presidents’ Day and Columbus Day. Wake Island also celebrates Wake Island Day (22 March) and the King of Thailand's birthday. In order to sync with US Holidays, all Friday holidays are celebrated on Saturday and all Monday Holidays are celebrated on Tuesday. Weekday holidays such as Thanksgiving are celebrated as they fall." This info can be found here: http://eaest.com/pdf/06Component_Plan_D_Biosecurity_Mngt_Plan.pdf

I would like to re-update the pages accordingly. Surfsupusa (talk) 14:23, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

a couple of requests
When you withdrew your AFD of Marcy Borders you wrote: "I was focusing on 9/11 aspect but apparently the notability in this case was the iconic photograph. Live and learn." Sorry, I don't think that you came very close to recognizing your mistakes, here. For starters. In your nomination you wrote: "I must be a heartless bastard. It's just not fair to others who survived and who died from the 9/11 attacks and have no other claims to notability." You got that approximately right. A long, long time ago some wikipedia contributors seemed prepared to try to cover every 9/11 victim, every 9/11 survivor, and a whole bunch their friends and relatives too. The general consensus was to only cover individuals who first became known through an association with 9-11 if they subsequently measured up to the GNG criteria.
 * 1) captured in an iconic photo;
 * 2) 9-11 survivor who subsequently succumbed to cancer at an early age;
 * 3) fully profiled in multiple articles, in multiple notable publications, across a range of years;
 * 4) specifically invited to appear as a representative at remembrance events, for instance she was flown to Germany for a remembrance event of the tenth anniversary of 9-11;
 * 5) subject of a play;
 * 6) notable enough to be recognized by a nickname -- "dust lady".

What you have overlooked is that a surprising number of survivors, victims, and some relatives HAVE subsequently measured up to the GNG criteria.

Marcy Borders is an example of a survivor who does have other claims of notability. This can apply even to individuals who were merely relatDebra Burlingame, for instance, was an NN individual, who was merely related to a 9-11 victim, who subsequently measured up to GNG, post-9-11.

I have noticed that some of the very longest serving wikipedia contributors can be quite stubborn about complying with wikipedia conventions that grew up after their habits were set. Many of us expect those who nominate an article for deletion to do a due diligence check, prior to making the nomination. Failing to do so pisses people off, because it wastes their time. This is the WP:BEFORE convention.

Another very long-standing convention is that the individual who nominates the article for deletion should leave a heads-up on the talk page of the person who started the article. The reason why it is very important for nominators to do this is that our deletion decisions are supposed to be consensus based. The person most likely to voice arguments for retention is generally the person who started the article. When you make the decision to not follow the convention, and fail to leave that heads-up, it gives the unfortunate appearance you don't want a real discussion. When someone starts an article, and only learns it was nominated for deletion AFTER it was deleted, they are generally angry, sometimes furious, that they didn't have a chance to voice the arguments for retention. Even if, for the sake of argument, most experienced contributors thought deletion was a foregone conclusion, it is still really important to inform the article creator. If deletion really was a foregone conclusion, and they honestly didn't see why, then participating in the deletion discussion, voicing their reasons as to why the article should be kept, and having other patient people point to whatever wikidocument makes deletion a foregone conclusion is part of their wikipedia education.

Robbing them of that learning moment is (1) not fair to them; (2) bad for the project as a whole, because they still won't know any better, and may continue to repeat the same mistake, over and over.

So, without regard to how many years your habit of not informing the person who started the article is, I urge you, in the strongest possible terms, to leave that heads-up if you ever initiate another AFD.

I listed six factors that contributed to Marcy Borders notability. No offense, but it think if you had complied with WP:BEFORE, and had researched Ms Borders yourself, you would have been aware that there were multiple factors here.

Factor #2, surviving 9-11, only to succumb to cancer at an early age. Many volunteers who were going through the rubble also succumbed to cancer. This happened to hundreds, maybe thousands, of people associated with 9-11, and very few of them will measure up to the GNG criteria.

But, what many deletionists seem to forget, is that wikipedia notability is cumulative. Very few of our biographical articles are about individuals who are really only known for one notable factor. By long standing convention, winning a Victoria Cross, or Congressional Medal of Honor, or your countries equivalent, conveys notability, all by itself. Many deletionist argue for completely discounting lesser medals. That is wrong. A Bronze Star, Navy Cross, or Coast Guard Gold Lifesaving medal should all, also be recognized as conveying some lesser measure of notability. And the same should hold true for that subgroup of 9-11 survivors, who succumbed to cancer at an early age. That conveys some notability.

Borders is a member of a much smaller group -- survivors, who succumbed to cancer at an early age, and had that cancer connection prominently discussed in many newspaper articles after their death.

This brings me to my second request. You seem to have a habit of not feeling any obligation to read the article in question very closely, and not feeling an obligation to do your own web search to make an independent decision as to whether the subject measured up to our notability criteria, before initiating an AFD. If you really have this habit, and you don't think you can break it, then I am going to suggest you consider retiring from nominating any more articles for deletion.

AGF, AGF, AGF. Everyone calls for others to show it. And it seems sometimes that those who call for AGF to be shown don't show very much of it themselves.

The thing is, we all have a limited store of ability to assume good faith. It would be much better for the project if we all did what we could to not call upon our fellow contributors to expend their AGF unnecessarily. When we can avoid behavior very likely to piss other people off, we should avoid it.

Informing other contributors when you nominated an article they started is an example of avoiding a behavior likely to piss someone else off.

Similarly, actually reading an article carefully, with an open mind, and then doing your own independent web search, to reach a well informed opinion as to the topic's notability, before calling for its deletion, is another example of avoiding a behavior likely to piss someone else off.

Thanks for your consideration of my requests. Geo Swan (talk) 01:12, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Khaled al-Asaad
OK. Cool. I'd put 82 just to make it the same as in the article at least. But it's good to get the facts right about such a decent and heroic man. Dick Shane (talk) 01:03, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Disappeared
No problems, thanks also to you (and others) for helping expand this article. I'm pleasantly surprised that it seems to have been un-affected by edit wars etc. like other Troubles-related to articles! Regarding the 16/17/18 - there were 16 Disappeared in the Troubles, then add Gareth O'Connor and Lisa Dorrian adds the 18 total. GiantSnowman 12:19, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Mather(s)?
In this edit to Cotton Mather, in the puritan resistance section, you say "Mathers disagreed, and most, if not all, Puritan pastors stood with Mather." Do you mean "The Mathers" or "Mather". Generic1139 (talk) 16:01, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Tagging Categories nominated for Deletion or Merging
Hello, Thanks for nominating Category:Pine City, New York for deletion. There are tons of underpopulated small town categories out there that a local editor created in good faith but have no hope for growth. I tagged the category with the Template:Cfd on your behalf. If the category is not tagged, when the closing admin goes to remove it, they generally won't proceed. (Template:Cfm is used for merging categories.) Thanks.RevelationDirect (talk) 01:47, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Thompson (band)
In April 2014 you have tagged the article with POV. It is not immediately clear what is the problem with the article; to me it seems that controversial stuff in it has been largely whitewashed in the last year or so. Could you briefly describe the POV problems in the article's talk? I might add some comments of my own, and I'm also considering doing a (POV) cleanup. GregorB (talk) 18:27, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Lena Dunham
Given your obvious personal vendetta against Lena Dunham, I suggest that you may wish to refrain from editing her article moving forward. Our biographies are not designed as a platform for those with a demonstrated personal dislike and/or hatred of their subjects to express or vent those viewpoints. Should you make similar comments in the future, I will file a request for enforcement of the discretionary sanctions relating to biographies of living people. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 07:54, 12 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Rms125a@hotmail.com, if I'd seen that hair-raisingly offensive comment when it was fresh, I'd have blocked you like a shot. I agree with NBSB that you'd be well advised not to edit Lena Dunham further. Bishonen &#124; talk 10:51, 12 March 2015 (UTC).


 * that needs rev del. Murry1975 (talk) 11:06, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Sure. I didn't have time to check it was still there, but I've removed it now. Thanks, Murry1975. Bishonen &#124; talk 12:36, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * , if you revdel that diff, then you also need to revdel the subsequent edits in the history until the comment was redacted, otherwise it's still visible to anyone. BencherliteTalk 12:40, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know it's not perfect. Pity nobody alerted an admin at the time. I'm not actually going to delete all the later stuff; that's too high a price. The revdel I did has made it harder to find, and has made a point to the editor who posted it, which I certainly hope they take note of. That'll have to do. Bishonen &#124; talk 12:50, 12 March 2015 (UTC).

Discretionary sanctions alert 2
Hipocrite (talk) 13:57, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Lee Radziwill
Lee Radziwill was an actress look under "Career and fame" on her page Redsky89 (talk) 04:11, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Right to work
Hi Rms125a@hotmail.com, this is what I saw:

On March 9, 2015, Walker signed legislation making Wisconsin a right to work state.[135] In 2012 he told reporters at the state Republican Party convention that right-to-work legislation "It’s not going to get to my desk ... I’m going to do everything in my power to make sure it isn't there because my focal point (is) private sector unions have overwhelmingly come to the table to be my partner in economic development."[136]

While campaigning for re-election in 2014, Walker said he had no plans to pursue right-to-work legislation focused on private unions, and "private sector unions are my partner in economic development." Once the legislation was initiated in the state legislature, Walker stated: "I haven't changed my position on it, it just wasn't a priority for me. But should they pass it within the next two weeks, which is their target, I plan on signing it."[137]

What do you think? I'll leave the final decision with you. -- Somedifferentstuff (talk) 13:05, 15 March 2015 (UTC)