User talk:Smartse/archive 1

Notability of Ian stephenson
The article Ian stephenson has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article, which appeared to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the notability of the subject may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 20:21, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Invitation
Thank you for contributing to our articles. If you are interested in making more contributions on cell biology and biochemistry topics, you might want to join the Molecular and Cellular Biology Wikiproject (signup here). You will be most welcome. - Tim Vickers (talk) 01:17, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

March 2009
Hello. When you patrol new pages, acceptable articles or articles which have been tagged for deletion should be marked as "patrolled" using the link at the bottom right of the article. This saves time and work by informing fellow patrollers of your review of the page so that they do not duplicate efforts. ∗ \ / (⁂) 20:55, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I just love tagging and bagging sockpuppets. Thanks for letting me know. I'm going to block both accounts.PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:43, 27 March 2009 (UTC)


 * PS: You now have rollback rights.  You'll find it to be really useful in rolling back nonsense when you're on NPP.  Enjoy!  --PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:45, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Hmm...that one looks iffy, but it's worth keeping an eye on. Thanks again. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:46, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Playback_(Phi_Life_Cypher_album)
Hi I've cleaned and added to the page above. Can you remove speedy delete please? Thanks Smartse (talk) 22:37, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Done--Christopher Kraus (talk) 22:39, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Zen Radio
Hi, Please be aware of WP:COI It seems you have a major conflict of interest with the page above (as guessed from possibly your blog: ). I have therefore had to suggest that the page is deleted. Please do carry on editing wikipedia though it's good!!! Smartse (talk) 17:27, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I understand that putting information on a webradio that is mine, transforms me in the EVIL itself! I'm sick of this rule, sorry. Wikipedia should care about THE INFORMATION not about who wrote it... I'll get informed all the Zen Radio listeners about how things works on Wikipedia. What a shame... (I known real dictature in my life, but deleting a page without any discussion, is worst)Bischoffc (talk) 16:14, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Tagging patrolled articles
I thought I'd been doing that, sorry. Thanks for the warning - I'll keep an eye on it in future. Greggers (t • c) 16:52, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Album artwork
Hi Smartse. :) Glad you asked about this, because a lot of relatively new users tend to face problems with this topic.

Wikipedia is a free-content website, so everything on here (generally) needs to be non-copyrighted. An album's cover is a copyrighted image (owned by the record label); however, uploading copyrighted images is allowed on Wikipedia, but only sparingly and with the purpose of "identifying the subject". Otherwise, copyrighted images that don't serve much of a purpose are usually deleted from the website for legality. Album artwork is perfectly fine to use here, but just make sure that your image includes a "fair-use rationale", which is actually simpler than it sounds.

The best place is to start at the Upload page. Select the sixth option ("album or single"), and on the next page, go to the "in an infobox" option. I generally use Amazon.com for finding album artwork to upload. Once you've selected the file on your computer, start filling out the information in the "Summary" field. Try to add as much basic information as possible in the first several questions. The "Step 3." information is helpful for understanding the template's parameters. After entering the information (record label, title, source, etc.) you should be fine. Hit "upload file". I'll check your fair-use rationale when I can, to make sure everything is in place. (I'll be gone for a few hours soon, though). This is an example of the template used. Let me know if you have any questions. Best, :)  Jamie ☆ S93  17:14, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure, no problem. :) Hope everything worked out well.  Jamie ☆ S93  14:31, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

NPWatcher
Hi,. I have granted you NPWatcher per your request here. After looking over a few of your contributions, your talk page, and your block log, I feel you can be trusted with the tool. If you have any questions, feel free to drop me a note on my talk page. – Juliancolton  | Talk 13:44, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Good question...
I usually take it on a per-case basis. If it's a really blatant attempt at advertising, I'll delete it and block the account if it's recreated. For something which establishes notability but is clearly written by a representative of the company, I'll inform them of the conflict of interest and tag the article with a COI notice as well. It's a real strange, gray area IMO. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 16:57, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

moonview sanctuary - help
i see that a tag has been placed on the moonview sanctuary page to be "speedily deleted" i had previously spoke to SimonP regarding this page and why it was considered to 'blantant advertising' i had asked him for help and even sent a revised version asking for helpful tips in rewriting the page. how is it possibly for such a public site to have people constantly deleting your pages? a similar page for promises treatment centers as not been deleted though the page has the same 'blantant adversting' characteristics as moonview sanctuary's page. i'm at a loss for how to revse the page so it's not deleted. i've asked for help multiple times, with no solid answer given. i would appreciate someone to respond and assist me.

JS2COMM (talk) 18:05, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

moonview sanctuary - thank you!
i just wanted to thank you for all your feedback and help! i hope the moonview sanctuary page meets wikipedia approval now!

216.174.123.69 (talk) 16:00, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Protein/enzymes
Enzymes are a sub-set of proteins, so the rule is that you categorise articles in the most specific category possible. I think helicase would be isomerase, (like DNA topioisomerase), but reading the expansin article it is not clear what enzymatic activity it might have (perhaps hydrolase, perhaps isomerase). Hope that helps Tim Vickers (talk) 18:03, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Anadin
Hi,

I'd be pleased if you could suggest what additional citations you consider are required for Anadin.

As it stands, the article is a stub that basically notes that (a) Anadin is a brand of painkiller marketed in the UK, and (b) lists the brands sold. Those are the only two facts that need referenced- and they have been.

While manufacturer's websites are not- of course- *in general* unbiased sources of information (and should be treated warily for such reasons), it's unlikely that they'd be misleading in the case of the above facts.

If you think that the article is too short, or that it would benefit from more info (which should in turn be verified), then that is a different issue- the stub status is already mentioned.

Ubcule (talk) 11:57, 8 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Your links might back up the fact that it was used within the UK, but the Independent one doesn't provide a proper list of the product range, and the Superbrands study is over five years old, rendering it unsuitable for this purpose (by any reasonable measure).


 * My references were primary sources, certainly, and I already acknowledged that they couldn't be used in all situations- then I went on to explain why for this specific purpose their use was justified and sufficient. (As WP policy basically says)


 * As for "presenting a more neutral point of view in the article". Please bear in mind that all the article says is (a) Anadin is a brand of painkiller marketed in the UK, and (b) lists the brands sold.


 * While neutral POV is an important tenet of WP, asking for a "more neutral point of view" where it already wasn't- and almost couldn't- be an issue suggests that you're parroting advice without considering the specific circumstances.


 * As I stated before, I believe that the references given were sufficient for the facts currently in the article.


 * Ubcule (talk) 12:50, 8 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Regarding your additions; since you're concerned with neutral POV, I thought I should point out that (for example) the Independent's mention of the negative effects of caffeine did not refer specifically to Anadin.
 * The way this was presented in the article wasn't factually incorrect, but the context was slightly misleading as it came across this way. Either way (and in general) I'd say that if a criticism applies equally to a products' competitors, then this should be mentioned.
 * All the best, Ubcule (talk) 18:45, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
...for posting to whoever "unconstructively edited" Gladiator. I've been trying for some time to get a grip on how the introduction and vandalism warning templates work. Yeesh! - meaning I haven't. So, if you ever feel drawn to a worthy cause and feel at all like tutoring an oldie in these dark arts... Haploidavey (talk) 19:04, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * ...and for the light-speed response. I'll see what I can do with those. Haploidavey (talk) 19:18, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Liquid Oxygen (supplement)
Hi Smartse, thanks for your comment on my talkpage and sorry for the delay in responding.

Your question is slightly ambiguous, so I'm sorry if I get it wrong and give an answer that you are not expecting. Liquid Oxygen (supplement) is described in the article as a quack product and it clearly states that it is not oxygen or liquid oxygen (a cyrogenic liquid). On that basis I removed the link to that article from Liquid Oxygen.

I'm not entirely sure why a link is need from Liquid oxygen to Liquid Oxygen (supplement) is needed. The article Liquid Oxygen (supplement) has very few links to it. Is the link needed merely as a means of increasing the number of links to Liquid Oxygen (supplement)?

However, if you think that people might go to the Liquid Oxygen article when they actually want to go to the Liquid Oxygen (supplement) article, the appropriate response is to add to the first line of the Liquid Oxygen article.Pyrotec (talk) 14:20, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Preco
I'll not cite specific other company entries since they are not flagged for deletion, either the Wikipatrol is sleeping, there are double standards, or they are miraculously conforming to the standards. Preco Electronics is notable for patenting and selling the first reverse motion alarm. I would like to know how that is not notable since these alarms are used on every continent and on millions of vehicles. This fact is actually MORE notable than almost any other random company/coporate entry on Wikipedia. Actually, I will go ahead and give you an example so you can give me the specific differences between its entry and that of Preco: SonicWall. Thank you for your time and efforts. I look forward to hearing from you. PS--"Wikipedia" told me to remove the "flagged for deletion" if I disagreed with it. I did and I did. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68halfcab (talk • contribs) 20:41, 14 April 2009 (UTC)


 * After looking at the Preco article, it does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, because there is an assertion of significance made in the article. However, normal deletion discussion is an option; feel free to open AfD discussion on the article. —C.Fred (talk) 21:48, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Diamond Way books at Wikilinks
The book itself is clearly copyrighted, with rights claimed by Diamond Way, per the linked version at Wikileaks. The notice is present on the inside cover.

The nature of Wikileaks is such that they do not obtain permission to post the linked material.

Accordingly, this passage of WP:LINKVIO is relevant: "if you know that an external Web site is carrying a work in violation of the creator's copyright, do not link to that copy of the work." —C.Fred (talk) 21:41, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Correction
I need to check which journals you're talking about. Tim Vickers (talk) 21:54, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Sports Marketing Group
An article that you have been involved in editing, Sports Marketing Group, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. --AbsolutDan (talk) 23:34, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I posted the following for you on the discussion page.

My two cents... while may not be worth much, here are google searches and other searches I did for you guys.

http://news.google.com/archivesearch?um=1&ned=us&hl=en&num=100&q=%22nye+lavalle%22&cf=all http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&newwindow=1&num=100&lr=&ft=i&cr=&safe=off&q=%22nye%20lavalle%22&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wp http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&newwindow=1&as_q=poll&as_epq=sports+marketing+group&as_oq=hated+loved&as_eq=&num=100&lr=&as_filetype=&ft=i&as_sitesearch=&as_qdr=all&as_rights=&as_occt=any&cr=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&safe=off http://news.google.com/archivesearch?um=1&ned=us&hl=en&num=100&q=poll+hated+OR+loved+%22sports+marketing+group%22&cf=all http://books.google.com/books?um=1&num=100&q=%22sports+marketing+group%22&btnG=Search+Books

I think smart didn't add additional search strings to limit. Also, doing searches of major newspapers turned up a lot. The Bob Ryan story from Boston paper was really funny.

Check factiva and other news sources.

Found a ton of articles if you guys want on their site. They need to redo and update site.

http://www.sponsorintell.com/PDFgallery1.htm http://www.sponsorintell.com/PDF%20Files/SMGClips%2785-%2793.pdf http://www.sponsorintell.com/PDF%20Files/SMGClips%2793.pdf http://www.sponsorintell.com/PDF%20Files/SMGClips%2793-%2794.pdf http://www.sponsorintell.com/PDF%20Files/SMGClips%2794-%2796.pdf http://www.sponsorintell.com/PDF%20Files/SMGClips%2796-2007.pdf

In reading the articles, it appears to me they were media darlings since while one or two articles made snide comments and remarks, no one challenged their research and the quotes I found on the company were from the CEOs and presidents of major ad agencies at the time like DDBNeedham and DMB&B which had Budweiser, GM and all. You should look at Steve Wilstein's page. He was the AP reporter who busted baseball and McGwire. It seems he had a close working relationship or collaboration with the AP. Few companies get to do joint studies and research with the AP. One area no one has mentioned and should be included in the articles is that they did the largest study of sports gambling as well that won an AP award.

The only negative comments I found were in a copy of the Chronicle of Philanthropy that were not news stories, but comments from people from major charitable organizations that complained that lavalle should not do research into charities and if they are loved and hated since all charities are good ones. (tell that one to opposition of NRA or ACLU)

For my two cents, while the article reads like a press release, its more than likely because of the news content that was sliced and diced to prevent problems with copyrights.

My two cents (losing even more value each day) 66.229.128.203 (talk) 17:05, 18 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Dear Smartse,
 * In the re-listed AfD Articles for deletion/Sports Marketing Group, you're technically have !voted twice, as there's 2 entries in which you bold "Delete". May I recommend striking one out, or combining your 2 entries into 1? Regards, --AbsolutDan (talk) 23:26, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

AfD
I've listed this page for deletion here : Articles_for_deletion/CRISP_Foundation. I can't find a template to add to the editor's talk pages. Thanks Smartse (talk) 15:38, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

"For creators who are totally new users: For creators: For contributors or established users:  For an article you did not nominate:"
 * While not required, it is generally considered courteous to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the articles that you are nominating for deletion. Also consider notifying WikiProjects listed on the discussion page. Do not notify bot accounts or people who have made only insignificant 'minor' edits. To find the main contributors, look in the page history or talk page of the article and/or use TDS' Article Contribution Counter or Wikipedia Page History Statistics. For your convenience, you may use:
 * To avoid confusing newcomers, the reasons given for deletion should avoid Wikipedia-specific abbreviation.
 * Unless obvious from the page title, the nomination should also indicate what the nominated article is about.
 * Place a notification on significant pages that link to your nomination, to enable those with related knowledge to participate in the debate.
 * If recommending that an article be speedily deleted, please give the criterion or criteria that it meets, such as "A7" or "biography not asserting importance".

 Chzz  ►  15:52, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
SarekOfVulcan (talk) 01:06, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
MLauba (talk) 23:51, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Gangs
GANGS: Please see the Google - Valdivia links for expertise verification. You guys are smart alecs about a very serious subject that mainly affects minority chuldren. The area of gangs is not simply a law enforcement, incarceration, criminality area. I am known for making sulutions that go into sources and causes of conflict. This is where my work differs from the usual info. Please do not treat the work lightly and with glib attitude. Please read the material, review the numerous articles and esp my award and recognition by the US Congress In the Congressional Record as only one example. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r103:29:./temp/~r103M87RGJ:: There I am noted for developing the current state of the art methodologies. I was retired to Marco Island (glib) but was asked by the UIUC people to work with their Supercomputer center (Seasr) to develop my ideas and models http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2008/may/03/guest-commentary-supercomputers-may-help-map-evolu/?printer=1/. So...what else do you need or want. Whatever it is I will provide a ton of it. Also, you are showing a double standard by allowing Dr. Stith to mention her book and really coming down hard on mine. What gives? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevonmfl (talk • contribs) 14:28, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

GANGS: ATTN:SMARTSE Please review the following discussion between myself and the Wikipedia editor, Nightshift36. He continues to be insulting, cusses and has a superior attitude that I am sure Wikipedia does not condone. Please let me know to whom I can report this person and who I can work with to get my information correctly added on Wikipedia.

To wit:Stevonmfl (talk) 17:03, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Hold on Steve........you are way off base. First, I have said, from the start, that you may very well be an expert in the field. However, I am following Wikipedia policy about self-published sources, self-promotion and conflicts of interest. While you are taking this personally, I am going by the established rules.

Second, as a Ph.D. and author, I'm sure you did some research along the way. With that in mind, you should really know who you are talking to before you start shooting your mouth off and saying things like "Since you have absolutely no expertise in the area of death of thousands of minority children at the hands of other children you need to either bow out or ask other experts". Perhaps if you paid attention for a second when you posted that ridiculous statement to my talk page, you'd have noticed the user box that denotes my membership in the Wikipedia Law Enforcement project. That might give you a clue that maybe my involvement isn't just to be a pain in your ass. Most of my career has been in law enforcement. I am a FGIA certified Gang Specialist. I teach gang recognition and intelligence gathering both under the FGIA and under my agency. I am on more than one gang task force, including the MAGTF (Multi-agency gang task force) that covers Lee and Collier counties (you're in Collier County aren't you?). So don't give me your "I'm better than you and you don't know shit" attitude. Whether you like it or not, we're on the same team. The difference is, you study them and I am on the streets with them and in their houses, dealing with them, their families and their victims.

Third, I actually agree with most of the info you posted. But you need to learn the rules and policies here. Instead of your "I'm going to put it up there no matter what" attitude, I'd suggest you partner with a more experienced Wikipedia editor and work on how to properly get the material included. It almost sounded like you were asking me to do that, somewhere in between your insult and condescention.

Lastly, you will win no points here by insulting people, refusing to discuss changes or failing to go by established policies.

Now, if you'd like to see what we can work out, I might be inclined to assist you since I think the material is valid and would be educational to many reader. But I guess much of that would depend on whether or not you decide if I am even worthy, given that I have "absolutely no expertise" in the topic. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:37, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits I am responding to glib and borderline insulting statements and unwarranted treatment by your people re: this most important topic. Please understand there is a huge battle raging between those of us who believe gangs to be a symptom of societal machinations (regardless of country) and therefore preventable and solvable and those who would use force and incarceration on increasingly younger ages to no avail. I have worked over 30 years in this field and the book 12 years to bring this new information to light and it is being extremely well received. More people need to know it is available as the reliable alternative. The reviewer/editor seems to dish insults rather than review content. Forgive me if I seem to have little patience for what is occurring here. The seriousness of the subject affects my toleration level. I request this matter be reviewed by a higher and hopefully more objective and less personality driven reviewer than those who have been deleting this work. If Wikipedia is thus managed and controlled, perhaps it is not as open and available to new ideas as advertised.

You asked for it. I am trying to get beyond your personality and assist the Wikipedia process. Also, I have had first hand experience beyond the narrow focus of a law enforcment view. And I served on more and larger and comprehensive task forces during the period and the model of DOJ targeting is MY MODEL! I was gang czar in Los Angeles for 10 years during the 1980's and experienced the riots. And operated (SUCCESSFUL) anti-gang ops since 1975. You denigrate my work and expertise and it is not at all appreciated. Stevonmfl (talk) 16:18, 21 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh my god, I said "shit". No doughnut for me. Read wp:notcensored. Niteshift36 (talk) 21:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

GANGS

Thank you for intervening smartse, I am following the advise of CobaltblueTony and pursuing this overheated --- (nightshift36) using the correct complaint procedures once I figure it out. Stevonmfl (talk) 23:03, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Just curious
Just wondering why you felt the need to complain about my mention of his attacks in the COI discussion, but were silent when OrangeMike made a couple of entries about it? Niteshift36 (talk) 14:23, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


 * To answer your second question first....I just like the userboxes, so I decided to put them on both pages. I delete the talk posts a)When the particular conversation is over or b)When I get tired of looking at them. I don't like wading through a bunch of old stuff. If I could only keep my living room that neat. LOL. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:59, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


 * If you find a clean up button on your computer, PLEASE, send me directions to it right away. It will be SOOOOO appreciated. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:10, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard
I am investigating claims by that  has behaved in a less than civil manner towards him. I have already blocked Stevonmfl for 24 hours to limit the disruption caused by this disagreement (due to his multiple uncivil, personally-directed comments), but I am having trouble determining if Niteshift36 has done (read: "said") anything which is inappropriate. Since you made the comment that 'neither side had been particularly courteous', I am trying to be fair and see if Niteshift36 could use a pointer or two himself. This is, of course, if you have the time. Thanks for any comments you can make! - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 14:34, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

From Stevonmfl
For the record and maybe more as it is important to keep insults credited correctly here as this seems to be a favored method of operating, the above discussion by Smatse is NOT CREDITED CORRECTLY. To wit: "...It was clear that Stevonmfl was in the wrong pretty quickly. Comments like "Maybe you're just not used to people who aren't bowled over by your "expertise", but I'm not some grad student or TA who is required to scrape and bow to you" don't really help us to have civilised discussions." In fact, the above comment on being "bowled over" was actually uttered by Nightshift36 as an insult to me. Smartse assumed it was me and I was blocked like a child. Maybe you need to ask yourself why you made such an assumption. At any rate, I am too used to these kinds of "mistakes" and suffering the repercussions from same and wish you all well. Have a white day.Stevonmfl (talk) 11:05, 26 April 2009 (UTC) Stevonmfl (talk) 11:05, 26 April 2009 (UTC)


 * No I did not - I was demonstrating that Nightshift36 could have been a little friendlier to you in my opinion. Smartse (talk) 14:20, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, I do apologise. Please do not go too hard on him. (Oh...you didn't).Stevonmfl (talk) 14:45, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Look, save your blocks and your one-sided viewpoints and punishments. I am leaving this website as soon as I can figure out how to erase my presence. If you can assist me with this I will consider us even and we can both breath a sigh of relief. Stevonmfl (talk) 14:49, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Territorial Support Group
It's a statement that has to supported as per any other. Using other cases in the article to support 'often' would be WP:OR. Oh, and that wasn't proprganda, what tosh. Feel free to re-insert it! ninety:one 20:13, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Rival Brand
You tagged the article Rival Brand for proposed deletion, with the concern "No notability asserted-speedy declined but ""rival brand" clothing columbus" produces no relevant google news stories." However, the article already has a reference from a magazine. -- Eastmain (talk) 18:55, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

gang help
Smartse I get it. I get it. I understand the COI, etc. I am not trying to force my will on anyone. I did not know the "rules" when I undid the removals. But I quickly saw how this place operates. There is no need to request your assistance.Stevonmfl (talk) 01:54, 1 May 2009 (UTC) Stevonmfl (talk) 01:54, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Linda Maguire
I don't know if she's notable. She says that she had a 23-year career, but she gives no details of what roles she sang with which companies at which houses, no dates for the bulk of these roles, and no references for verification. You could either AFD the article (I'd support deletion), or you could leave a note on the talk page of the Opera project and see if anyone there wants to get involved. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:09, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * She hasn't come back to add any refs, I see. -- Ssilvers (talk) 00:08, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Feature Model
Hi, It looks as the discussion on Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard is not evolving nor there's been any evidence of COI so I suggest we close it.Mikolasj (talk) 14:58, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Corrib Gas MedCab
Hi, thought you might be interested to know that MedCab has opened on some of the issues I brought up on the COIN noticeboard. G ain  Line  ♠♥ 23:26, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] The Ten Commandments: The Musical
Hi, you have undone the work of previous editors who have cleaned up this article. I have therefore reverted your edits. Smartse (talk) 19:24, 12 May 2009 (UTC) REPLY: Hi, we have received the authorization to publish this information. It has been approved by Wikipedia by the following tickets: Re: [Ticket#2009051110034908] PERMISSIONS TO USE THE MATERIALfor page THE TEN COMMANDMENTS THE MUSICAL Therefore, we would appreciate if you could revert the edits in particular the reference information as it was noted in the headline that additional references were needed. In the future, it would be great if you could check with the person entering the information prior to deleting information. The process is quite difficult without having unfounded interferences.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:123music" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123music (talk • contribs) 20:36, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Smartse: How do I message a user? Bill Mohler
I've searched Hi and Lo for a way to contact you and other authors directly, to announce the conference more intimately, but I can't find a tool for directly messaging. Hence the "spam" post. Any advice? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wmohler (talk • contribs) 13:56, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

RE industrial Mixers
Hello Smartse,

Firstly, I've gone through the page and corrected all of the grammar and spelling mistakes someone else has made, with no thanks or mention, which you have undone.

Secondly, Yes were as I am loosely related to Perry process and it could be 'seen' as an attempt to drive more traffic, but you have just removed information which is relevant and proper for Wikipedia. This is not right and it s not on, dont cut your nose off to spite your face! Don't destroy a good edit because you think a link might be driven be marketing, thats just foolish.

Thirdly, I would care to disagree that Perry Process is not a legitimate source of information about process equipment, and by default mixers, as they have 73 years of experience in the technology, implementation and information around. Perry process and the author (the MD) in particular are generally regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand, owning to the international reputation and scale of business and the high regard they are held in.

Fourthly, please dont mention this "will not be tolerated and may lead to your account being blocked if you continue" when you have not had any prior communication with me personally it just plain rude you talk to someone to know there story first.

Fifthly, Who is ["U.S. Machineries Mixers and Blenders". http://www.usmachineries.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=1_7.] who are they? They dont appear to be adding anything to this topic? especially over and beyond what I added which was of higher quality and interest? I see the images are lifted from there website but they are clearly a commercial entity wishing to promote themselves. I dont want to waste my time to check if you are related to them, and to be frank im not bothered if you are. I want good/relevant content on the page and also to see people rewarded for it. So if you dont mind I will re-edit the page, add the content which is reliable and trust worth and which adds value to the page, I will not wage a war with the person who has a link on there already and I will make the page better.

I will hold leave you time to respond before I make any edits out of common decency. I apologise if this seems like a rant I am just sick and tired of people getting so jumpy around Wikipedia, I understand all you want to keep the content good. All I want to do is add good content to it and source the rightful person. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dancave (talk • contribs) 10:49, May 18, 2009

Fertilizer article
Thanks for the input! I was not sure how much is too much. There are a lot of factual statements in the article that will require citations, it seems that this article is a magnet for unsourced statements, or is really old and doesn't get much turnover. I have made effort to add many citations on the article in order to add to verifiability of content. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Apothecia (talk • contribs) 20:58, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Help with Kenneth Cobonpue page.
smartse!

thank you very much for your offer to help out with the article let me send you a copy of the script via email? i really can't seem to figure out how to do this and its becoming frustrating. Thank you hoping for a speedy reply

Kenneth Cobonpue (talk) 00:29, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Sharing of account
Hi Smartse, you are never a pain to us. We thank you and welcome you to give us feedback and comments that you may have pertaining to our Wiki entries.

We quoted "we" is not because we are sharing an account (there is no need to do so, it is free to create one in Wiki), but rather all our entries and comments are a conscious decision and discussion as a group and from a group of volunteers, so when we said "we", it is representing the group as a whole and not from an individual.

Thank you for reminding us this policies and we thank you also for assisting us to resolve a wiki dispute.

Blessings, NCC Web Team Nccwebmaster (talk) 16:17, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Your suggestions
Many thanks for your comments and offer to help- &mdash; I need it. Lots to learn to conform to both coding, style, and policies. Presently, my User:Cytowic page is inexplicable blank, and clicking "edit this page" brings up Cytowic:talk. So how do I create a user page? I'm intending to use the generic and boxboxtop templates.

Regarding COI, I'm following User:Scarpy's guidance to make suggestions and cite third-party references only on talk pages to let regular Wikipedia editors use on article pages. Will provide further notes on notability. Offhand, I'd say having Nabokov's afterword, synesthesia's skyrocketing interest among researchers, the book being first to cover all varieties of synesthesia and it's chapter on art and creativity make it notable. Richard E. Cytowic (talk) 17:52, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Photorespiration
Well, you can click the google translate link on the template to get a machine translation.... Admittedly machine translation of Chinese is pretty horrible! We'll just have to wait until a helpful editor comes along... I'm trying to get WP's translation architecture set up better. There's really tons and tons of content in other wikipedias that would be much easier to translate than to research from scratch. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:34, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Taxobox help
I want to know how to italicise the titles of species articles e.g. Paracerceis sculpta so that they look like this Thermococcus litoralis (or if on this User talk:Smartse). I've looked at it and tried a few things but can't get it to work. I think it might have something to do with the taxbox. Thanks in advance. Smartse (talk) 00:37, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

*You can't italicize article titles. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 01:55, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes you can; see the example given in the request.


 * Apparently it is done with the magic word, but I'm not yet sure which tempate is using it.   Chzz  ►  02:11, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

It's done using a JavaScript hack. See Template:Italictitle. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:41, 23 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Hello. I have just spent a couple of hours getting to the bottom of this;


 * a) There is a funny bit of a hack with mediawiki that allows the titles to be displayed in italics


 * b) The template on these articles, template:Taxobox uses this feature,


 * c) For some unknown reason, it contains code that says, 'if the name given is the same as the page name, put it in italics'


 * d) In Thermococcus litoralis, there was no 'name' parameter specified. In Paracerceis sculpta, there was, with " . Because  is not the same as   (in computer terms, the actual string), the template did not italicise the title.


 * I removed the 'name' parameter with this edit, and it is now italicised.


 * I sincerely hope that this has helped.  Chzz  ►  03:36, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

RE: Sabrina (American singer)
Thank you for your help. But could you please, then, explain to me the proper way to introduce secondary reliable sources rather than listing them as I did? Thank you in advance.--Jklein212 (talk) 02:42, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Nevermind, I thought you were an admin.--Jklein212 (talk) 03:00, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank You
I have seen that the COI tag has been removed. Thank you so much. i now need to get the other tag to be removed. which parts of my article so far needs more citations and verifications?

Again thank you and hoping for a speedy reply

Kenneth Cobonpue (talk) 02:06, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Kenneth, when you place that template here, it sends support helpers a message that Smartse needs help. It is intended to be used on your own talk page. For more information on adding specific references in the text of the article, see this page.  If you have further questions, please place them on your own talk page, along with the  template. Gigs (talk) 02:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Declan Ganley Sources
Well I can assure you I am not. All I am doing is adding in information which Quotationman does not like. He on the other hand, is not adding anything to the page, only removing sources. Also, he only edits during the day (9-5 working hours). While he was blocked from editing for 24 hours, IP addresses originating in Libertas Headquarters. Something to think about.

Quotation Mans awareness of some obscure anti-Libertas group is also questionable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthinirishpolitics (talk • contribs) 15:07, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Image problem
I've added an image I found on commons to Novum Organum but for some reason it isn't coming out properly on the page - I've put a copy here. I can't see anything wrong with it and I've had a go with fiddling it. It works fine when it hasn't been shrunk - i.e. displayed as File:Novum Organum 1650 cropped.jpg by itself. I'm a bit miffed! Thanks for your assistance. Smartse (talk) 10:05, 27 May 2009 (UTC)



When an image is displayed on a Wikipedia page, the software automatically makes a smalled version of it. If you look at the properties of that image, it gives the filename with "cropped" on the end. I think that what has happened here is, you have copied the name from there. The actual file on commons is File:Novum Organum 1650.jpg. So, here, I have put, and it displays fine.

I've fixed it on the article too, with this edit.

Cheers,  Chzz  ►  11:07, 27 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks but the reason it has "cropped" in the title was because I took the image from commons and cropped it so that it was only the cover and not the book. Am I right to think that you can't have "cropped" in the name of a file? Should I just re-upload the cropped version with a different name? Smartse (talk) 11:54, 27 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see. I didn't realise that part. Please hold on for about 5 minutes, and I'll reply again. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  12:03, 27 May 2009 (UTC)


 * No worries, it seems to work now! Weird! Smartse (talk) 12:08, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

(outdent)

Right. All sorted. Explanation;

Free pictures should preferably be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. This is so that the picture is available to our Sister projects - other language wikis, Wiktionary, etc.

The original file, "Novum_Organum 1650.jpg", was on commons.

You uploaded the cropped version to Wikipedia, as "Novum Organum 1650 cropped.jpg".

This caused the odd problems, because when the commons version was displayed on a page, a cached, 'wiki-cropped' version of the original but with 'cropped' appended was auto-generated by the software.

It mysteriously started working when the wiki-cropped version was removed from the cache (after a certain time).

I think that just moving your new version from Wikipedia to Commons would 'solve' the problem, but I hate making assumptions, so to avoid any possible future problems, I have moved it to commons and renamed it at the same time, to "Novum Organum 1650 crop.jpg". I have also requested that File:Novum Organum 1650 cropped.jpg be deleted (using the  tag, so that might be a red link by the time that you read this.

Cheers!  Chzz  ►  12:29, 27 May 2009 (UTC)


 * P.S. Please upload all future 'free' images at upload.  Chzz  ►  12:32, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Tough start to life
I can't believe I fell for the "born penniless and illiterate" gag. It seemed notable. From such a disadvantaged beginning... Oh well. Good catch. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:21, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries, it took me a few times to see it - then I thought, wait a second isn't everyone?! Good work on Chocolate-covered bacon by the way - I forget how I found this before but it really made me laugh! Smartse (talk) 19:14, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. The latest in bacon is up at DYK for May 27. A couple have already been put into the queue, but there are still quite a few remaining. Wikipedia's coverage of bacon has gotten a lot meatier. :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:41, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

COIN discussion re, User:Levanteditor, et alia: desirable outcome
Hi Smartse. Thanks for lending an even-handed point of view to this COIN discussion and those that have taken place on the side. I agree with you that sorting out the multiple account issue is one step to resolving this COI. However, given the agenda prosecuted by these accounts, I wonder if I can persuade you that an equally proper outcome is an agreement by this user not to edit these or other articles in which he or she has conflicted interest. Are you open to this? (I'll see your response if you answer below.) Regards, Jim Ward (talk·stalk) 17:10, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I can promise for myself. Don't know about the others.Nora abazed (talk) 19:25, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Smartse: you have a question to your edit of jud newborn's entry to the hans scholl biograhy:
Sorry, Smartse, I don't know how you get notified of this, so I"m putting it here. Please see my response to your "reverting" of my edit on the Hans Scholl biographical entry on my "talk" page--Jud Newborn. This has never happened to me before, so I don't know how to be sure you are alerted to this.  Go please to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jud_Newborn#Conflict_of_interest   I can also give you my e-mail address or phone number if you want to contact me, given the importance of the material which you have removed.  Thank you.  Jud Newborn, PhD.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jud Newborn (talk • contribs) 05:15, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Armormax
I was just about to add a new Armormax section to COI/N but I see you've already tagged it for speedy. I wasn't sure of the procedure here. It's not really a COI issue, and since I'd already tagged the article once, I was afraid that tagging it again might be construed as edit warring. Rees11 (talk) 16:52, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Pat O'Donnell
An article that you have been involved in editing, Pat O'Donnell, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.

Demby's vandalism
Hi, I left a message at User talk:Constancemary and I see you've recently warned Demby about her self-promo. I just created the article for her main album, Novus Magnificat: you may want to watch-list it too. Demby has just vandalized her own bio twice in the last hour, and I fear what's going to happen to the album article once I'm away. (Especially with that unsourced Grammy, and her website's claims that her music "heals" people, if you catch my drift...) &mdash; Ekans talk @ 18:58, 7 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the heads-up I've left a final warning on her talk page as I've already told them to desist previously. Smartse (talk) 20:28, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Improv Asylum
Why did you delete all of my edits? I have never edited a page before and it took me forever to learn how to use wiki and then actually write the article. I based everything off their website so I don't know what the problem is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Improv Asylum (talk • contribs) 16:48, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Bt toxin
Fair enough. I responded on the article's talk page. I hope you will end up re-splitting, but thanks for your stewardship of wikipedia either way. mcs (talk) 05:25, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Invitation on controversy section under New Creation Church Singapore
Hi Smartse,

Pertaining to the controversy section on doctrines, we wish to bring up for discussion. I have also invited Mishlai for this discussion as she is pretty experience in Wiki. As advised by Mishlai and other more experience user, for any articles that could have POV conflict, it is best to come to an agreement before it was post up. Let's come to an agreement in the talk page before we post up, rather than engaging into another edit wars. Thank you so much!

Nccwebmaster (talk) 07:13, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Edited your comment
Hi Smartse,

You might have already noticed, but I felt that as a matter of courtesy I should let you know I applied WP:IAR and edited your comment at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Tree_of_life. I think the way you had it before linked just linked to the most recent dif on that page. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 14:46, 10 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Well spotted! Thanks for letting me know. Smartse (talk) 14:50, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Pygmy Seahorse
Hi, Please see this and if you can (I'm lucky enough to be able to read it, this) - pygmy seahorse is now used to describe a whole group of small seahorses - This article needs to be changed accordingly. I was perhaps a little quick to redirect it - I'll start a new article at User:smartse/pygmy. Please feel free to help. Smartse (talk) 15:04, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Smartse,


 * I had heard there are now a whole bunch of seahorses clasified as "Pygmy" and I agree there should be a new article. For the time being though, until such article is created, I would suggest we leave the current article in place and it can be used as the basis to start of the new article instead of deleting it all together. In other words, the current article can be edited to include information regarding all Pygmy seahorses.Jnpet (talk) 12:43, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree I should have made the article first, rather than making the redirect. I think perhaps the best solution is to move the article at User:smartse/pygmy to Pygmy seahorse once it is done and then also have a Pygmy seahorse may also refer to Hippocampus bargibanti at the top - or maybe The pygmy seahorse. You seem to have much more knowledge in this field - I only stumbled across it because Hippocampus satomiae was rated as a top 10 newly described species of 2008. If you can help improve the article in my workspace it would be great. Please email me if you'd like a pdf of any papers. Shall we move this to the talk page of [Hippocampus bargibanti]] in case anyone else wants to join in the discussion? Smartse (talk) 12:59, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Request for help to review the proposed re-draft of the article on New Creation Church
Hi Smartse,

To prevent stirring up unnecessary disputes in view of my COI status, may I request your help to:

1. review the proposed redrafting of the article by BL here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:New_Creation_Church#Making_the_Article_Neutral and

2. give your comments here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:New_Creation_Church#Comments_on_Draft

Thank you very much! Tanlipkee (talk) 10:11, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Smartse,

Hans Scholl
I agreed with your comments on the Hans Scholl article concerning Newborn- but it seems that his self-promotion goes on via the inclusion of an 'essay'- which was only posted on his web-site in May 2009- but he claims was written in 2006. It has not been published in the public domain. Once again, as in his book, he offers no sources for his claims- except a 1999 book- that was not cited in 2006! —Preceding unsigned comment added by SOCAMX (talk • contribs) 00:49, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

The explanation on his web-site is that he wrote the essay in 2006 (but could not include it in his book) and so put it on his site in May 2009. He says his 'startling new evidence' is based on a book by Holler from 1999 (which he seemed not to have read in 2006). His book 'Sophie Scholl and the White Rose' has no footnotes at all. I thought the essence of good scholarship was footnoting so other researchers can test knowledge. In one of your posts you asked him to come up with original sources. Did any appear? If Holler discovered Hans Scholl was 'gay' then surely Holler should be cited- not Newborn. I just read your debate with him on the talk page and I have to say that you were absolutely spot on in your analysis. I think your original view on this page was right and shows you are an excellent editor.

Here is the 'explanation' of the 'new essay' Since 2006 on Jud Newborn.com.

"Dr. Newborn has incorporated the dramatic answers to these questions in his lectures and at book signings. He also describes them fully in his booklet-formatted article, “Solving Mysteries: The Secret of the White Rose,” © Jud Newborn, 2006. Originally intended as an Afterword to SOPHIE SCHOLL AND THE WHITE ROSE, it was unable to be included because of publication schedule time constraints.

Although not yet finalized, corrected and revised for publication, he wishes to make these important new revelations available to those who already have read the book."

There is no copyright in unpublished essays- based on secondary sources I'm afraid.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SOCAMX" —Preceding unsigned comment added by SOCAMX (talk • contribs) 12:20, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Truegreta
As I told Sarek, even if it isn't a shared account there are other reasons for it to be blocked. Daniel Case (talk) 15:25, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Kevin becvar
Are you sure this meets A7? It clearly establishes significance, as required to not be speedy deleted. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:39, 5 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't really think that the article does "indicate the importance or significance" personally. Producing an unpublished film is hardly significant IMO. It also looks like an WP:AUTO which isn#t grounds for deletion but makes me think that CSD is more appropriate than PROD. Smartse (talk) 19:50, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Perhaps. Looks like you were right, as the admin deleting the article agreed. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 19:53, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your help. I've just googled my name and it prominently brings up the COI page with two critical comments about me. This will be having an adverse effect on my academic reputation. Given I fully intend to comply with guidelines and not to further edit my own page how long is this necessary? Fauncet (talk) 08:13, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

July 2009
Thank you for marking Dabizi's personal issue with me as a editor resolved. I'm not a bad editor or anything, i just refused to work with him after how rude he got with me over my misinformed contributions. NitroMan3941 (talk) 21:40, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

RE:Protest in the United Kingdom
Hello Smartse. Thanks for alerting me to the opportunity. I'm not sure how much help I will be, but I will do what I can. Police,Mad,Jack ☺ 17:19, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Late reply
Hi! Saw you comment about Pygmy Seahorses at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fishes and gave reply there. --Stefan talk 02:06, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

New Axoneme Image
Hey, thanks for the new image of the axoneme x-section. Definitely an improvement on the old one, which I made using Microsoft "paint" a few years back.--AaronM (talk) 22:44, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries, let me know if there you find any other biological diagrams that could do with vectorising. I found this one: File:IFTsimplified.JPG that you made, let me know if there are more and I'll get round to sorting it sometime. Smartse (talk) 23:15, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Harrassment
Hi. I was encouraged to become part of the campaign again systematic bias (see my talk page). On 18 July editor Quibik reversed links by me to 'Royal Canberra Hospital' in the 'Royal Canberra Hospital Implosion' entry on the basis of 'overediting.' (see history of edits) But the links were in separate paras and so (I felt) not contrary to the policy and I wrote this up on the article discussion page. There has been a campaign by the ACT government to downplay the public angst felt about its demolition of this much loved hospital and I accused this editor of possible bias in explaining my undo. Now this editor as added notifications to both the article about me (which has now been through many editors hands and which I haven't touched since requested not to) and that of my father Marcus De Laune Faunce (where I acknowledged neutrality issues immediately). This motivation of Quibik in doing this seems clearly related to my accusing him/her of potential bias and I suspect him/her may have some COI related to the Royal Canberra Hospital and my father's opposition to its closure. In relation to myself my reading of the Wiki policy was that opposing 'harrassment' and 'outing' was supposed to take precedence. I wish the edits of Quibik on those two articles taken down as flowing from COI or harrassment. Should I do that myself? Should I report him/her to the COI page? This is harrassment of me and is deleterious to my academic reputationFauncet (talk) 08:15, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

AFD
Hi. Please see: Articles for deletion/Rossport Solidarity Camp. I know you inputed into some os the Shell to Sea stuff earlier in the year. Mediation has stopped. Thought you might like to give your input here G  ain  Line    ♠  ♥ 16:49, 22 July 2009 (UTC)