User talk:Stephen Singer

Your submission at Articles for creation: Joe Wallach has been accepted
 Joe Wallach, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Huon (talk) 21:58, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User_talk:Stephen_Singer help desk] .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Disambiguation link notification for July 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Brian Williams, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Today Show. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

March 2017
Hello, I'm Usernamekiran. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Jim Garrison without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. ''

You had done a similar removal of content on March 27th. At that time, you removed the same content, along with some other content. The other content was definitely uncyclopaedic and not related to the topic, so i didnt add it back, but i did add the papers statement.

If you think it should be deleted from the article, then kindly post adequate reasoning on the talkpage of the article. If you need further help or discussion, feel free to contact me. :-)'' — usernamekiran (talk ) 23:31, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

REASON FOR DELETION OF FALSE STATEMENT The following false statement was published on the biographical page on former New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison: In 2015, Garrison's daughter released his copy of the film, along with a number of his personal papers from the investigation. The reference to "Garrison's daughter" previously entered in the content of the page on Jim Garrison is in error. The specific citation regarding the statement demonstrates clearly that it is untrue. The citation from the New York Post article of 11/19/2015 by Richard Morgan does not support the assertion regarding "Garrison's daughter" but instead says: "Bill Rau of New Orleans' MS Rau Antiques told The Post he purchased the files less than a month ago from the daughter of the lead investigator for Jim Garrison..." Based on this and other facts, I have deleted the statement for the second time. Please do not replace the false statement.

Sincerely, Stephen Singer


 * hi Stephen. I apologise for the mess. Actually, both of us right. I mean, the wikipedia article states
 * "In 2015, Garrison's daughter released his copy of the film, along with a number of his personal papers from the investigation."
 * and nothing more than that. Theis statement simply means the daughter released some stuff of his father [which was confidential before that]
 * you are saying the statement in the article is incorrect as she sold the stuff to Bill Rau and went to England, right?
 * Actually, when the daughter sold the stuff to Rau, she could have asked to keep that stuff confidential for a particular time, or till she dies. She has this right. But she made these documents from confidential to public. And then she handed this public stuff Rau. Usually, in such cases the new owner cant make the stuff confidential again. So in this case, Rau will always have the "public stuff" not confidential stuff. Now Rau can do anything, auction, closed auction, select party auction, or selling photocopies at very high rates. Anything.


 * in other words, the daughter had some confidential files, she converted them to public, and sold to Rau.
 * even though she sold it to an individual or the antique shop that indivdual works for, she sold them the "public" version of the stuff.
 * after condensing all that, we get "In 2015, Garrison's daughter released his copy of the film, along with a number of his personal papers from the investigation."
 * i hope is clears your doubts. :-) — usernamekiran (talk ) 01:02, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Hold on for a moment
I will sort everything out. Please be patient. :-) — usernamekiran (talk ) 00:25, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi
Hi, i feel sort of bad now. What you did now, giving your reasoning, you should have done it earlier. But anyways all is good now. :-)

And you dont seem to be vandal type either. Actually, you are a very good editor. But you do lack some thigs regarding wikipedia. Like, how it works n stuff. It is not a big deal. That can be learnt in a week or two.

If you would like, it would be my pleasure to keep helping/guiding you once in a while. Please let me know what you think. — usernamekiran (talk ) 01:13, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you
I am most grateful for your help and support. I know I have a lot to learn but am very dedicated. I need also to clear up a few final points regarding this particular posting in order to get it finally correct. If I am responding incorrectly, please tell me where I should send you this note and I shall do exactly what you say. I assure you that I am quite well informed about this as I was on the staff of DA Garrison over 50 years ago, licensed by the state of Louisiana. I also talked to the family and the "daughter" never sold or gave away any of the materials referred to. What the newspaper cited was precisely correct. It was not Garrison's "daughter" but the daughter of his "lead investigator" who sold the items as the newspaper article clearly states. So the line should not say that "Garrison's daughter" did anything at all. It should refer to the daughter of the "lead investigator" as stated in the New York Post reference. Thank you again -- Stephen Singer, 1 April 2017.


 * Hi. The statement in the article now says: "In 2015, Garrison's lead investigator's daughter released his copy of the film, along with a number of his personal papers from the investigation." - and looks to be correct now, based upon the source and is in synch with your statement.


 * Rather than removing content, without explanation, it is better to edit the content in the article.


 * Another option is to add a discussion (click on "New section") on the article talk page, in this case that would be Talk:Jim Garrison - and add your comment about an issue that you have with an article. Is there any way that I can help with the steps for editing or anything else that might be useful?–CaroleHenson (talk) 19:47, 2 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello sir,
 * I apologise for the delay to reply you. I also apologise for the mess that took place earlier. I feel very bad about it.
 * I will be more than happy to make you familiar with editing wikipedia, and it will be my honour to provide any assistance to you. So please feel free to ask me anything. If you need to contact me through email, you can go on this page: User:Usernamekiran, then on the left hand side, in the column, there is an option "Email this user". You can send a simple email to me from there. Then i will reply to you from my email, after that we can exchange normal emails. :)
 * Again, please feel free to ask me anything. I will be happy to assist you. — usernamekiran [talk]   20:11, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Susan Blakely, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page NCIS ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Susan_Blakely check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Susan_Blakely?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:30, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Shelley Smith
Hi, we need a reference for her death, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 22:56, 8 August 2023 (UTC)


 * More users have added this since, but we still have no sources per WP:BLP. BilCat (talk) 01:44, 12 August 2023 (UTC)