User talk:Unbroken Chain/Archive 10

Question
I suppose you're not a huge fan of me right now, but I just have one question, and then I'll leave you alone if you want.

If I were to (hypothetically) replace my userpage right now with, would that be okay? --Rschen7754 01:10, 1 September 2014 (UTC)


 * If I'm breaking any policies I'm not aware of by all means please remove it. I have correctly attributed the quote and I have not modified it in anyway. I suppose signing it would make it more clear it's a quote and not posted by you. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 01:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, I think it is breaking policy, but I shouldn't be the one enforcing that. But what I mean is this: doesn't my volunteer effort count too? How demoralizing do you think it is for me to see that message? You asked for transparency, and I tried to be as transparent as possible. It's not anything personal against you, I just didn't think that you were a good match for this particular role. That doesn't mean that there aren't other roles that you can fulfill on Wikimedia. I got rejected too, a year ago and found other opportunities. --Rschen7754 01:20, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree completely it's demoralizing. I'll consider your rationale. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 01:26, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Ok I've considered the situation. My feelings are unchanged. I'm sorry that this bothers you, really I am but the fact that I keep coming back to is that, I'm not the one that said it. I understand that this may not be your finest or proudest comment you've made but under the circumstances and nature of the entire scenario this is possibly not your opinion at all and is perhaps the message the other clerks wished you to convey on their behalf (honestly the only people that know is the people involved in the private conversations) and if that's the case hopefully you can use this to show that private determinations like that cause problems. I would note a few have said nice things when I opened my RFC but the gist I got from that is "We are not to be questioned." Sadly this is just the straw that broke the camels back, I'm tired of being a whipping post. I admit freely that some of that has been my own doing but with so many things I am not suited for it makes me question why stay here at all, if I wanted to stay in one place I would stay in one place. I have goals, I want to be needed somewhere. The overall message I've had for a while is that I'm not needed and from a vocal few I'm not wanted. I guess life goes on and the search continues. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 02:48, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * So in the process about complaining about being demoralized and not wanted, you demoralize someone else and indicate that they are not wanted? You may feel like you are not wanted on Wikimedia, but you shouldn't take it out on other people... --Rschen7754 03:10, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Rschen I'm not making any judgements about you, you obviously have much more success here then I have and in the nature of the conversation I think it's probably more accurate to say that you were speaking on behalf of those other users. The fact that this situation is one of the main causes of my departure is regrettable and even more so regrettable that the Clerks and CU's have allowed you to be a scapegoat is also a sad as well. Hopefully if my departure does anything it will help steer a positive change in the process. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * "you obviously have much more success here then I have" - well, that wasn't always the case, if you look around enough you'll find that I was sanctioned by ArbCom at one point, and a few other lovely things. Getting to where I am now didn't happen overnight. It takes hard work, but it is possible to change one's image here. But if you choose to leave, I wish you the best. --Rschen7754 03:24, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

I wish I could believe that but I've been trying to do that for almost four years now and it hasn't changed a thing, I'm happy that you have managed to overcome your 2008 difficulties. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 03:33, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Welcome
Precious and missed You welcomed me here, it's still on my talk and I will keep it. You are No. 10 of my sad pattern. Take care of what is important for you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:53, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Retired?
Wow, seriously? I can understand taking a break, but "no more"? Sorry to hear... --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 17:04, 1 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure how long this retirement will last I frankly am already having second thoughts :/. I hate being wishy washy but i really do like this damn place for what it is supposed to be. I may just need a long break. Despite my best intentions I can't leave just yet from the ARB case that i started. I really want to but I need to follow it through. Depending on my burnout level after all this I'll figure out how long that will be. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 11:43, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Case Opened: Banning Policy
You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Banning Policy. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Banning Policy/Evidence. Please add your evidence by September 16, 2014, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Banning Policy/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Seddon talk 12:19, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to let you know that I removed some extra ['s amd ]'s from diff links. Wasn't sure if they were intention but nothing has been materially changed. Seddon talk 12:29, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

ANI and AE
HIB, Sandstein says your AE request is incomprehensible, and I agree. If you want to complain about all the stuff you described on ANI, maybe you should write some version of your ANI section on AE? This section. Not just this post by Neotarf that you linked to, because that doesn't say much about what your issue is unless the reader has happened to see the ANI section. Mind you, I don't personally think you have much of a case for either ANI or AE. Nobody's going to take the Tutelary thing seriously, IMO. That said, I do understand how annoying the repeated complaints about your username must be. Neotarf, you should stop dragging that around the boards, it's over. Bishonen &#124; talk 11:35, 26 September 2014 (UTC).


 * User:Bishonen, I thought it was over too but it's not over []? I also corrected it so it was less confusing if you see this edit [] .Hell in a Bucket (talk) 11:44, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
 * HIB, I've seen . I wasn't telling you it's over, sorry if that was unclear. I was asking Neotarf to back off because the issue of your username is over; it has already been repeatedly discussed and it doesn't look like the community has a problem with it. (If ever there was a real issue with it; I think it's trumped-up, myself. Neotarf, please drop it unless you're prepared to complain that the scary username Bishzilla does something bad to the dinosaur part of your brain.) Bishonen &#124; talk 11:57, 26 September 2014 (UTC).
 * I thought maybe if I just kept their name out of my mouth they would do the same, thanks Bishonen. I'll let you guys look at my amended filing at AE and let things go from there but I won't be dragging it anywhere else 8) Hell in a Bucket (talk) 12:04, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
 * 2 ice hockey sticks.jpg hi Bishonen, I see I'm late to the party; I've been off collecting diffs for the arbs. Six hours it took me, including snacks.  Now, this swearing business would never have come up if this Mr. Bucket person had kept to editing Pokemon articles, but as you can see he has been tearing through Jimbo's talk page, and a few other places as well.  I suppose in Sweden you don't take this business seriously, but where I come from it's fanskap. We usually refer to The Hot Place as ["H-E-Double toothpicks"]--in the north they say "double hockey sticks".  Anyhow, the clerks closed down that page already, so at this point it's up to ArbCom.  But I see everyone has now run off to yet another forum.  You can bet that's not how I'm gonna be spending MY weekend.  Skål. —Neotarf (talk) 15:06, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Just drop the stick and stop flogging a dead horse. If your beliefs or whatever don't allow you to write HELL then don't, copy and paste instead, the few times there's actually any need for you to enter HiaB's username, as opposed to going looking for a reason to do it. Because this is just silly. Thomas.W talk 15:21, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * So do you defend this as an adequate explanation of his user name? And while you're at it, take a look at the history for the Banning Policy arbitration case workshop page. I just spend 6 hours finding all the diffs for Mr. Bucket's swear words--just the ones he wrote in the case itself.  So much profanity! He types more swear words than a 12-year-old.  This isn't just a user name thing, otherwise we could talk about the Panda's user name.  Something else is going on here. —Neotarf (talk) 00:51, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Neotarf, I'm surprised you posted this nonsense, after I took the time to explain to you in detail that "Hell in a Bucket" is a ~150 year-old variation of the American idiom Hell in a Handbasket, and predates its use by the Grateful Dead. Based on these facts, why are you persisting in this nonsense?  BTW, "hell" doesn't exist, it's a fictional, mythical concept used by religion to control its believers through the threat of a punishment in the afterlife, much like parents control their children by threatening to withhold dessert. It's a bit frightening that in the year 2014, the world is still obsessed with prehistoric memes. Isn't it ironic that the people who believe in the concept of "hell" the most, are actively trying to create it on Earth? I hope this helps. Viriditas (talk) 00:57, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Hells-countrystore.jpgHell_norway_sign.jpg Just claim that it's a reference to either Hell, Michigan, or Hell, Norway, which are both small enough to fit in a bucket. Thomas.W talk 10:47, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with your user name
Please contact me if anyone claims there is a problem. "Hell in a Bucket" is a ~150 year-old variation of the American idiom "To hell in a handbasket". It doesn't matter if the Grateful Dead used it or not. Anyone who claims there is a problem, has a problem. Viriditas (talk) 01:12, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Suggestion
Re your recent comment on Wales's talk page -- I suggest ignoring Neotarf re User:NE_Ent/Unilateral_interaction_ban. It's the simplest way to go. No one with any wiki-sense believes anything on a dispute resolute board that's not backed by a diff. Additionally, Wikipedia just doesn't do justice (see WP:NOJUSTICE) so trying to get Neotarf in hot water for a single misphrasing isn't going to fly.

Might I also suggest a reply to anyone complaining about your username? Simply say, "The community has endorsed my username, if you have an issue with you're welcome to file a request at WP:RFCN." NE Ent 23:27, 27 September 2014 (UTC)


 * We've tried that too and it hasn't worked. I understand Neotarf won't be penalized for this, that part I admit. I do think that if they are genuine in their crusade they will see that what they said is imminently offensive according to GLAAD. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 23:38, 27 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Additionally I sent a private email asking for advise and solutions. I sent this to User:Newyorkbrad and was ignored so I took it to a place where people can comment.

"I'm curious to know how this isn't a useful question. I've been and have continued to be accused of mysogny and things that are demeaning to other editors and it's no where near as insulting as telling someone who is transgender they are only claiming to be a woman. If Tarc is being admonished for offensive behavior for similar comments that seems to be a double-standard. Seriously I mean this legitimately to understand where I am wrong, I'm not trying to hang myself but simply letting people paint an incorrect picture of me makes me feel like I should defend myself because someone else is doing the hanging and in a half-cocked manner. I would appreciate any advice how to extricate myself from this shit, I've disengaged with the others but these accusation about me are extremely personal and in ways that are offensive because my flaws aside I don't discriminate against woman and any of the other groups mentioned. I am only asking here because honestly I really can't deal with the whole choir that clouds what is said and how and could use a calm response." Hell in a Bucket (talk) 23:47, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * HIAB, New York Brad is not going to answer your emails because he is an arbitrator and you currently have a case in front of the arbitration committee. If he answers you, he will have to recuse himself from the case. You are getting way too excited, this is not that important.  Why don't you check your mail. —Neotarf (talk) 01:04, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
 * That was interesting. I had heard various rumblings about that site in different comments recently but I never bothered to really look at it. I don't think I will registering there anytime soon (i'm sure there are plenty of folks will be happy on that score) I think I'll just keep my wiki stuff here. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 01:42, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

it bugs me we even need to have an interaction ban but I understand your point, i just hate to think that in the cacophony what actually happened and context is important. I hope it's not missed. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 03:08, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
 * @HiaB: There is nothing wrong with your user name and you should take NE Ent's above advice. You are letting a severely misguided editor get under your skin when all you have to do is shut up and let them dig their own hole. Arbs are not as dumb as you appear to think—they do not need the obvious spelled out, and they are quite capable of working out who is causing disruption and needs to be quietened. Johnuniq (talk) 02:58, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Neotarf
User:Neotarf, I am responding to your email here, sorry with all this fun stuff going on and seeing how crazy people actually get over this site I don't know if I ever want to email with people on this site ever again! The blog itself was quite disturbing, if even half of the allegations are correct it's defintely something I wouldn't have imagined. I grew up with respect shown to women or at least I was never exposed to violence or emotional abuse towards women either thank god. If those things are really happening I can certainly understand why women are upset. Honestly when I thought about it I thought society had gotten past that troublesome view and things were improving. I still think you are clouding the issue though. I am not the poster boy of misogny, racism or anything even close. The closest things to that is stubborn, not politically correct and at times confrontationaly defensive. There was a reason when I posted the comment the way I did. words only have the power you give them. I attempted several times to explain in varying ways that I knew it wouldn't be totally understood but it was an attempt for people to see past the words. Words are only words, I wanted to show people that if you focus on words you miss the message. Some people curse, I do but if you notice for the most part I don't curse at people. I try not to make personal comments like you are dumb or retarded unless I'm making a joke with a friend offline but on wikipedia I try and keep what I say within policies set here. You originally came to my page telling me that my comment was demeaning and offensive to other editors and demanding that I remove the comment. I declined. I offered at one point to allow the comment to be hatted but overall I felt that it was within guidelines of the website. This degenerated partly because of my own stubborness after I got peeved but you've played a role as well. If you notice after you stopped focusing on me it got all quiet which I'm sure you enjoyed as well. I want to go back to the quiet, there is no reason we have to interact anymore, please let this all die down. I made that comment two months ago, I can't remove it and honestly you've posted it around in so many places it wouldn't matter if I did. I'm sick of the back and forth and the need to read that I'm a terrible person, my username is the root of that evil or any of the other things you've infered. I know you would be happy to not hear passive aggressive all the time and the community would be less likely to want to strangle us both. Let it go please, enough is enough I can't cgange the past and it's easy enough to ignore me we managed to not run accross each other for the 4 years before this I've been here. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 08:45, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Bucket. Sheesh.  What a wall of text that is.  Surely you don't expect anyone to read that on a weekend.  Do me a favor and go outside.  Get some fresh air.  Get some exercise.  Then look at something about paragraphs.  Even if you can't identify main ideas and topics, you should try to break up the text into arbitrary paragraphs so that it looks organized. I will try to make some sense of this after the weekend. —Neotarf (talk) 13:51, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!
Tutelary (talk) 18:27, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Hell in a Bucket, be careful if you choose to open any email from this person. He has a known history of sending RAT trojans to take over 'slave' PCs. I would not open anything from this user, if I didn't have the malware protection. Dave Dial (talk) 18:50, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Dave Dial, would you stop it with the baseless, unsubstantiated and absolutely offensive accusations for once? Tutelary (talk) 19:09, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Several considerations
I have been considering the current situation, and here are my thoughts:

1) It's probably a good idea not to email with people. There are probably some people who wish now that they had decided not to do it.

2) It's encouraging that you don't want people to consider you "the poster boy of misogyny, racism, or anything even close". I hate to say this, but I think you already know that you look really like a nasty person, so I'm glad to hear you say that.  Have you thought about Jimmy's statement here:

You might even want to make such a statement in the current ArbCom case. If that's what you want to do, you should do it soon, because they were supposed to put up the Proposed Decision today, and you want to make any statement before they post that, so they can consider it in their decision. I notice you asked how much time you had to make a reply, and then removed your question. So what's up with that? If you want to make a statement, I would be willing to make a statement asking them to wait.

3) The second part of that is what to do about people who talk that way. I don't agree with your statement that "words only have the power you give them" or that "words are only words". If you talk to people who were abused as children, they will tell you that the abusive words hurt them more than the beatings. And more importantly, it makes people dread coming to Wikipedia.  There are three levels of people hurt in this exchange: the bullies, the ones who are bullied, and the ones who have to witness the bullying.  You might give some thought to Martin Niemöller's "First they came ..." statement. There is most certainly some level of trolling that has to be ignored.  We have WP:DNFTT for a reason, because it is the most effective tactic.  But for something beyond simple trolling, you then have to make a decision.  Will you ignore the abusers, will you enable them by saying it's not a problem, or will you try to do something to stop them. For myself, I have decided on the last action, which is why I said so much at the ArbCom case workshop.

4) Why I asked you not to post on my talk page: I don't want to have a bunch of ugly hate speech on my page for people to see when they come to visit me. And I don't want to have to read it somewhere else.  That's all.

5) About your user name. If you recall your answer to me, "Assuming my username is inappropriate when a person can easily search it on wikipedia and see where it is from is another example of poor judgement. I really have nothing more to say on this" --this is not very good public relations. You might consider the case of the admin Dangerous Panda, whose alternate account is EatsShootsAndLeaves, which some people found threatening, but is a play on the Lynn Truss book about commas.  He now has a story about the name on his user page.  If people knew your username was about the Grateful Dead, who knows, they might have a little sympathy for the devil, ha ha. Again, if you want to do something like that, you probably want to do it before they post the Proposed Decision.

6) You still have a request open at Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment It isn't going anywhere. Are you going to withdraw it?

Regards, —Neotarf (talk) 08:14, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Neotarf, Hell in a Bucket doesn't post on your page, other than required formal notices. Apparently you asked him not to. Please leave him alone on his. Was the above supposed to be a helpful comment? Trust me, telling somebody "I think you already know that you look really like a nasty person" helps nothing and nobody. Attacking and undercutting people in nice polite words and with "regards" is no better than doing it with curses. And I have already asked you to stop going on and on and on about his username. You must have noticed that upsets him — no wait, how about I put it like this: "I think you already know that you look really like somebody trying to drive somebody else off Wikipedia". See? How did that feel? Just cut it out. Bishonen &#124; talk 09:22, 1 October 2014 (UTC).


 * Meh, thanks Bishonen. I just figure either way in a few days one way or another it will be over. I'm done debating and arguing over this. I have other things to focus on if my time is numbered but I'm not going to rise up to it, I'm just going to do me ;). To be fair Neotarf was just replying to this [ [[User:Hell in a Bucket|Hell in a Bucket]] (talk) 09:27, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Indeed, Bishonen, that was a response to HIAB's "Neotarf" posting, which I told him I would respond to after the weekend. It was really nice of you to use your admin superpowers to get him out of WP:AE (and myself as well)--no one deserves to be thrown under that bus, but at this point you are being a bit overprotective.  Really, we do appreciate it, but also some things need to be worked out.  Are you aware of HIAB's arbitration case?  I just spent a lot of time finding all the diffs they asked me for, and in the meantime the workshop phase closed without HIAB having a chance to respond.  Maybe he is too busy, I don't know, but I think he should have a chance to make some statement if he wants to, particularly since Jimbo mentioned it on his talk page. I understand how you feel about Jimbo, and I honestly don't blame you, but that was a long time ago, and HIAB's situation is different.
 * So far HIAB has dragged me off to AE, the ArbCom Clarification Requests, and Jimbo's talk page, where he made a bunch of wild and untrue accusations about me, and where I have again spent a huge amount of time posting diffs. Not to mention his talk page stalkers who trolled my talk page and kept me busy with the reverts.  So who is trying to drive off who?  But it looks now like HIAB was just defending some person named Corbett (who has been asked to stay off of Jimbo's talk page), and is actually not as reprehensible as he originally seemed.  Also, HIAB's writing seems to be improving and he isn't using a lot of bad words anymore, so I would invite him to post on my talk page again if he wants to. Regards, —Neotarf (talk) 14:18, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Actually the only person I am defending is myself, Corbett comment was only a reference point. The clarification is exactly that clarification. I accepted the decision that the report was stale as well as the information sent to me by anon editors. I don't judge that info to be true or false, not enough info but it at least gave me a little more to lean on to understand the situation. I don't intend to fight at the arbcom case whatever the evidence is, if the Arbs do a haphazard investigation or any number or other alternatives then that's their purview. If it's decided I'm not wanted here I move on, I don't stick around in cases where I'm not. thanks but for me this is done, i'm not letting it bother me anymore. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 01:44, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Arbitration/Requests/Case/Banning Policy closed
An arbitration case with regards to the Banning Policy, has now closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

For the Arbitration Committee,  → Call me  Hahc  21  17:37, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Discuss this

Clarification request closed
The request for clarification relating to the Sexology case has been archived without action For the arbitration committee -- S Philbrick (Talk)  19:52, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Original Comment
I added the changes last night but forgot to sign-in. You removed the info and put on the page that info was not needed but it is and verified with credible links such as MTV News and Billboard about the company. I don't quite understand how you say it shouldn't be added when it's reliable and part of the company. You also removed stuff previously a few weeks back some I agreed with and some I didn't. You also had the wrong information such as the "video that dissed kim kardashian". It needs to read clear on what that is. Now with research on SMH Records - I found someone who claims to be part of the company but isn't. If you want to "go after" a page here is one for you https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Bentley_(producer)

Sowhatchawant (talk) 19:23, 18 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm removing non relevant info that doesn't need to be reported in an encylopedia article. I'm also retagging it as spam and a conflict of interest as I have a suspicion based on your editing history you are directly connected to the company. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 19:31, 18 October 2014 (UTC)


 * All the info is relevant to the encylopdeia article and backed up with sources including Billboard Magazine and MTV News about the company. I'm removing your COA as it's based on "suspicions" that are completely wrong. I'm a fan of Eminem and all things related to him such as Crooked I.Sowhatchawant (talk) 19:38, 18 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Yeah that's not allowable by policy and I plan on trimming down SMH rcords by quite a bit because it is rather spammy and some of the referenced material is not actually even what is in the references., Feel free to take it up at WP:ANI but I'd suggest reading the WP:MOS, WP:GNG it might help you. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 19:40, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Who are you?
And what the hell is a "meatpuppet"?!? (I've read your comment on ANI...) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.6.30.20 (talk) 20:56, 18 October 2014 (UTC)


 * WP:MEATPUPPET. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 20:58, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring at SMH Records, and related use of inflammatory language
In connection with your editing of SMH Records, and talk page posts relating to it, I have consulted an Arbcom member. Rather than repeat the substance of my message here, I refer you to my message here. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 08:08, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

SMH Records
Can you hold off on the Speedy for a day or two, while I do a little further research? I have no connection to the label, and I don't care one way or the other if the article is kept, but, trivial as they are, most labels don't get mentions by Billboard or MTV unless they have some sort of notability. That said, I haven't really looked at it, as its late and I'm not going to, tonight. However, my interest is as a member of the WikiProject Record Labels. Thanks! 78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 06:20, 19 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Sure I can do that, please see [] and then also see the changes I'm trying to effect [], deletion isn't the desired outcome in this case but if the spam can't be controlled I'd rather see it deleted then having dishonest people on the site. If you can lend a hand keeping it up to scratch I'll happily hold off on the csd. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 06:24, 19 October 2014 (UTC)


 * It's a deal. I'll work on it tomorrow, I'm calling it a day, but I just *had* to check my watchlist one more time, and see what it gets me? Thanks for the link to the old AfD discussion.  78.26   (spin me / revolutions) 06:29, 19 October 2014 (UTC)


 * No Problem, if you look at the original AFD, there was not many comments although I did attempt to get help at the record labvel board, the article despite claims to the contrary is relatively the same with the exception of the promotion of the contest and the mixed tape due out later this month. They are saying it's a subsidary of Caroline records but there isn't actually a source saying that, they are trying to use the fact they offered JayZ and Lindsay Lohan and that the label raised 30 million in capital, that was the basis of the old article and the foundation that this one is being built on. If you look at the summaries I've given a reason for many of the removals but those have been completely ignored. I strongly believe that this is a paid editor just based off of their contrib history which I also reccomend you look into [] every single edit made has something to do with SMH Records. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 06:35, 19 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks 78.6. As for you Hell in a Bucket I had nothing to do with the original AFD back earlier this year. You did and it seems like you have a biased feeling towards the label. The page I created mostly contains references from the past several months like The Source Magazine, HipHopDX, XXL Magazine, Billboard Magazine, MTV News and several others. As for Caroline the SMH record label is listed on their website http://caroline.com/partners so that really can't be disputed whether they are with Caroline or not. When I created the this page in August I asked about how many sources should be listed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:SMH_Records without an answer. I felt adding too many refs would be a problem especially considering in these same credible news outlets that I sourced it said SMH and Caroline. I felt it might be too redundant to list everything. As far as you saying I'm a paid editor is unnecessary. In the last several hours you have said I was a paid editor, dishonest, a duck, a mole, a meatpuppet / sockpuppet. I haven't ignored any suggestions you've made because I haven't received any over than your attacks in which I have ignored. I created the SMH Records page and I haven't created another. I'm not required to do so. Every edit I have done over 90 days has been about SMH Records and nothing is wrong with that.Sowhatchawant (talk) 07:53, 19 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Yup it's called a SPA or a Single purpose account. It's pretty evident what you're doing. Even in your own phrasing on this page you are doing it Hell in a Bucket (talk) 07:59, 19 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry but I can't waste any more energy with this back and forth with you. I've had a wiki account for approx 90 days and only have created one article during that time period. I'm sure in the future I will do more and work on others. Right now I'm trying to figure out how it all works. It's like learning a new language that takes a lot of time, development and research. This started out as a fun thing to do during my personal downtime but has taken a weird turn with drama.Sowhatchawant (talk) 08:32, 19 October 2014 (UTC)


 * As promised, I've looked it over, and have given my thoughts at Talk:SMH Records. I hope you find it helpful.    78.26   (spin me / revolutions) 03:45, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

deletion in assumption
Please do not delete the articles based on assumptions!!!! Even not waiting 24 hrs for communication.
 * It wasn't based off assumption it was based off the previous deletion discussion. The overall tone fo the article was not appropriate and there still wasn't an evidence of actual notability. try creating it using WP:AFC. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 09:08, 20 October 2014 (UTC)


 * so, instead of suggesting improvements (i do not remember we did any discussion, did we?), there was direct deletion; that is little frustrating. Anyway, i have made request for un-delete. Hope to edit it. BTY, it was not a personal page. It belonged to the GOVERNMENT organization. Please be careful, before tagging pages for deletion. The language skill of all the planet may not be same as the "editors". (nirmal (talk) 09:29, 20 October 2014 (UTC))


 * Hours of operations, services offered and telephone numbers is a pretty universal indicator of it being promotional and it's easily possible to promote or attempt to promote government agencies, policies etc. If you have problems with your English I'm sure there are plenty of editors at Articles for Creation willing to help you. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 10:26, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Patient hotel
There is nothing new about patient hotels. In what sense is it too soon?Rathfelder (talk) 15:26, 21 October 2014 (UTC)


 * That one was a little off base apologies. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 23:08, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

AFD
I nominated this page for an AFD about 5 weeks ago https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Michael_Bentley_(producer)&action=history but the tag was removed the following day. I figured then I was in the wrong and newbie because it was immediately taken down. I didn't dispute it. Looking at it now I see it was removed by a non user and didn't go to a vote. What should I have done differently? Do you need a certain level of edits to put up a tag like that? Sowhatchawant (talk) 08:30, 21 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Well no but the way you nominated it was part of the problem. Honestly until you understand the policies I wouldn't nominate anything. If you read WP:AFD and the other WP:GNG and WP:RS it can help you get to a better level in your nominations. What I mean is if you make a mistake you will take loads and loads of abuse and upset people. Starting the deletion processes is very complicated, and missing one small thing can make some bigger problems. That being said they should not have removed your nomination, I will renominate it using your rationale and go through the sources, it's doubtful the person meets the GNG but I won't know that until I check each source. This is actually where a lot of my work actually happens, the deletion process, I'm what we call a deletionist here. A deletionist goes thorugh and tends to go to the deletion side of the spectrum of things when things aren't up to scratch. The flipside is that there are inclusionists and they get as frustrated with us as we do with them I readded my userpage partly because of the issue we had, go over and look at it the top part should help a little when you have problems and maybe it will help make me more approachable. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 09:47, 21 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Did you misunderstand the label he works for? One fo the sources id it as "Slam House Music Group" Or SHM which is close to SMH? Hell in a Bucket (talk) 10:05, 21 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you for doing that. I got the name from one of the websites I found online and crossed reference with a linkedin page.Sowhatchawant (talk) 13:35, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Sadly I made a jackass out of myself in part of that. Bit embarassing really lol, was trying to do the right thing and failed miserably. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 09:53, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Draft article: National Wellness Institute
Hi there Hell in a Bucket. I left a note on the Articles for Creation page as you suggested but thought I'd drop you a note on your page in case you didn't get a notification automatically. Cheers Fbell2 (talk) 09:07, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

November 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=631991695 your edit] to Marcel Paquet may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:26, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
 * on "The difference between the thought of Kant and Hegel on the question of the essence of art" La différence des pensées de Kant et de Hegel dans la question de l’essence de l’art ''

AfC: Marcel Paquet
Hello,

I am a trifle bemused by your comment that my proposed page "does not have enough content". It seems to me it has plenty of content and moreover it is more or less a translation from the article on the French Wikipedia which has been there for several months.

Regarding merging it with the existing article, as I already pointed out on the talk page this "existing article" is in fact just a redirect to another page. It concerns a different person (a candidate at a Canadian election who received a very small share of the vote in one election), who is of no notability at all. Marcel Paquet being the author of numerous books and articles some of which are standard reference in their field clearly in my view merits an article.

I would be grateful if you could have another look as perhaps there is some misunderstanding.

Kind regardsFbunny (talk) 21:11, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

You have rejected Articles for creation: eXosip (November 1)
Hi! You just have rejected my page for no clear evidence of notability. I do not understand why because I have added 6 secondary reliable sources showing usage in academic research as well as 5 secondary reliable sources being citations from books.

Thanks Aymoizard (talk) 14:15, 1 November 2014 (UTC)


 * We need substantial indepth coverage. I'm by no means the last word on this if you think I'm wrong you're absolutely free to resubmit and another person may review it. Have you considered asking a person with that wikiproject ifi they have ideas? Hell in a Bucket (talk) 07:26, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Request for arbitration
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Arbitration/Requests/Case and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
 * Arbitration/Requests;
 * Arbitration guide.

Thanks, BengaliHindu (talk) 17:44, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

17:10:34, 6 November 2014 review of submission by Kimvale1025
Hello. I am not requesting a re-review but rather seeking advice. You recently declined a biography that I submitted about Lawrence F. Jindra. Thank you for taking the time to review it and provide your feedback. I am working to address the issues that you raised. Namely, removing "Dr." throughout the biography, removing any peacock terms and making the biography more concise. Apart from this, are there other things I can do to improve the article? One of your comments was that the biography lacked a "formal" tone. I have read the manual of style for biographies as well as other accepted biographies and thought that the tone was appropriate. Apart from the changes that I am in the process of making, how can I make it more formal?Kimvale1025 (talk) 17:10, 6 November 2014 (UTC) Kimvale1025 (talk) 17:10, 6 November 2014 (UTC)


 * By only including notable things. Telling us a lot of the little details of how many procedures etc unless reported on in depth in reliable and importantly separate coverage it will help. It's not one issue, honestly and I don't mean this badly if I had came across that published I would have nominated it as a spam article. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 01:40, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Qualified Flying Instructor (India)
Hello Hell in a Bucket. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Qualified Flying Instructor (India), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: G11: Not unambiguously promotional - it describes a qualification from an Air Force, rather than a company; if you still think this should be deleted, go via the Articles for Deletion route (A PROD would be inappropriate, as there is an objection to this already!). Thank you.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 13:00, 7 November 2014 (UTC)


 * The sad part is this has been deleted before for the exact same thing. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 13:27, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

List of restaurants in Lagos
Hi, Hell in a Bucket. This is to draw your attention to your nomination of List of restaurants in Lagos for deletion. With Rhododentrites's help, I have made significant improvements to the list. Issues warranting nomination for deletion has been addressed. As a result, the list is no longer a directory. Therefore, can we reach a consensus? I'll be grateful! Eruditescholar (talk) 03:18, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
 * As the relisting editor, I apologize if I mis-characterized your position in my relisting comment as "vacillating", which if not intentionally judgmental, certainly can be argued to appear judgmental, and so is a poor choice of words on my part. IMHO, relisting editors should not call attention to themselves. On the other hand, I'm impressed when any AfD nominator can take a step back and look at their own initial views, reassessing as the process expands, and then make a statement asking for a larger audience, in case the best interest of the pedia might be served by an alternate outcome. For this simple call for additional time on a deletion process you commenced, you have earned my respect and admiration. It is a mature wikipedian who is willing to admit he or she may not remain fully committed to their initial assertion. Those who rigidly "stick to their guns" in the face of contrary views and sourcing may find themselves occasionally handicapped by their obstinacy, IMHO. (Darn, now I've angered the gun lobby...) BusterD (talk) 18:12, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks I really appreciate it, unfortunately I have to fight the urge to stick to my guns sometimes lol. Wish I could say that was different but either way I really appreciate it. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 20:38, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

11:40:09, 11 November 2014 review of submission by Burtolio
Hi Hell in a Bucket,

I was just writing to request more information as to why my article submission (Independent Connection Provider) was declined. I created the article due to the fact that I felt this was a term in common usage within the energy industry in the UK whose meaning was hard to ascertain online. So, where better for web users to obtain this information than Wikipedia? I used the best sources of information I could find online for the definition and subsequent explanation. Was the article declined because I used a limited company as a source? If so, this was simply because their site held the clearest, most concise definition of the term and is no way an endorsement of that company.

Please let me know what I can do to ensure that this article is accepted upon revision as I do feel it is of real value.

Many thanks,

Burtolio

Burtolio (talk) 11:40, 11 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I appreciate you dropped a line here, the big reason I went ahead and declined was the accreditation section. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 13:08, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

18:32:32, 11 November 2014 review of submission by Trogladette17
Hi Hell in a Bucket,

Thank you for reviewing my article "Quatuor Bozzini", your feedback is appreciated. Can you give me a few pointers on how to make the language more formal? I have some inclinations, but an example or two would make sure that I am on the right track.

Thanks, Trogladette17 Trogladette17 (talk) 18:32, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Trogladette17 (talk) 18:32, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Request for Arbitration declined
This is a courtesy notice to inform you that a request for arbitration, which named you as a party, has been Feel free to see  for potential suggestions on moving forward.

For the Arbitration Committee,  → Call me  Hahc  21  15:37, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm Swpb. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Simprint, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. —Swpbtalk 15:56, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Memories
I wonder if you remember writing this?

Quite a good sentiment I would say.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 01:30, 18 November 2014 (UTC).


 * I do and the reason for my involvement thereafter was the explicit mention of the circumstances regarding me and some of those things for accurate background. I can't call myself innocent in the whole thing but I definitely didn't want to sit by and watch the manipulation that would inevitably have ensued. Got a bit of a WP:STICK issue here as you can see damn thing is ducktaped to my hand. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 02:01, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Copyright checks when performing AfC reviews
Hello. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular. The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered. If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.) If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with. Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors. I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC). Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

02:26:08, 20 November 2014 review of submission by SerDunk
SerDunk (talk) 02:26, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm writing to better understand why was my article declined. It just says "This submission is not suitable for Wikipedia." I don't see how it's not, it's basically the same thing as these other articles from which I took ideas for the format: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Street_Fighter_characters, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Soul_characters, and others, minus the descriptions for the characters, which can be added collaboratively by all users. Is there something else I need to do in order to get it approved? It was very time consuming to compile this list to have it go to waste.

Thank you very much.


 * Feel free to resubmit. I'm a bit draconian in the regard that I don't think that an encyclopedia should actually cover it but I may have w clicked the wrong option because it's mainly a sourcing issue. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 03:31, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

16:04:38, 23 November 2014 review of submission by 103.250.138.60
1.The associates ppl are the key ppl who has brought him in the business so its needed to be there..

2. there are many more sources then vishvesh parmar's blog. tHe list includes the all leading newspaper and website articles.

3. the language of the article had made neutral after contacting and guidance from the live chat help.

4, i had live chat with wiki ppl time to time make the page better for the approval.

I am not challenging your knowledge or working skills, but personally i don't see any valid point to reject it.yet if you feel its not worthy , show me how to do it..

Thanks 103.250.138.60 (talk) 16:04, 23 November 2014 (UTC)


 * You did very well at your attempt,. reduce the external links we honestly don't need them, make sure the article is written in a WP:NPOV manner. I'm not saying the person isn't notable but that the article should be tweaked to have more formal language is all. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 16:35, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Request on 23:29:20, 24 November 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Da Degrees
Hi,

I was wondering why Big Lean's draft was declined. I listed all of the sources correctly.

How could I improve it?

Da Degrees (talk) 23:29, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Request on 23:30:53, 24 November 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Da Degrees
Hi,

I was wondering why Big Lean's draft was declined. I listed all of the sources correctly.

How could I improve it?

Da Degrees (talk) 23:30, 24 November 2014 (UTC)


 * It wasn't a sourcing issue it is the tone of the article, the main reason is phrases like "just to name a few" it comes off as promotional, the external links seems to be over kill and I'm not totally satisfied the musician passes WP:MUSICBIO. If you are crtain I'm wrong you can always resubmit but I'd at least tweak the verbage a bit. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 23:35, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Untitled comment
Hello, am writing regarding the review of my first article on Portfolio Depositary Receipts. Your review referenced WP:synth. Can you please point out the section that think that applies to please? My first article so any other comments are appreciated too. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesanyc (talk • contribs) 02:35, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: I moved this comment down from the top of the page to here and gave it a title and a signature. demize  (t · c) 03:24, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you Demize. James statement like "The basis for accelerating the approval was most likely because the similar American Stock Exchange rule change received no comments, and that Nasdaq was already trading portfolio depositary receipts on an unlisted trading privileges basis despite not having established standards for PDRs." is a synth or original research. we can't insert what we think our what the sources add up to. Everything should be able to be sourced to something that explicitly states what we write here. The far bigger issue is the formatting, please see WP:MOS and try to make your article match up to that and you might have better success. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 12:53, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Request on 13:00:07, 26 November 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Arthurpguinness
Hi, Please help us to get TutorCruncher's wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:TutorCruncher_(2)) approved. I provided many articles, reviews and info pages about the organisation but clearly it wasn't enough.

Please could you provide me with some advice on how we can make sure the page goes up? should I list all of the stories about the company? list the awards we've won? List features of the software more thoroughly? or just solely provide more information about operations and the industry? This is genuine information about a company that people are often looking for content about.

any help would be much appreciated.

Many thanks, Arthur

Arthurpguinness (talk) 13:00, 26 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I was making this determination as the sourcing should be indepth and not trivial, award listing is just trivia here. I would suggest anything that can improve the profile of notability will improve your chances of success. I'd also note I'm hardly the last word if you are convinced I'm wrong you can always resubmit and another editor an review it. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 13:05, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

hi
I'm filing a new and unique ANI against another editor. Out of respect to ArtW I don't want to derail his own ANI against me with a different, and more serious, topic. BlueSalix (talk) 00:06, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Don't be, it's called WP:BOOMERANG and this is the area to do it. I'd suggest just letting well enough alone, what you said wasn't problematic and they have been told about the comments of two other editors about comment removal. this thread will be closed no action unless one of you melts down. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 00:09, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I would like my comments reinstated in the AfD but do not want to do it myself as I am absolutely certain another UFO enthusiast will report me for edit-warring (and, yes, of course it won't stick, but that's beside the point). The fact is, since I'm getting hit with 2-3 ANIs a day by the fringe theories editors, eventually one is going to stick - I'll be away from WP for a few days and unable to defend myself, or just get exhausted. I've been on WP for awhile; I understand how it works in theory and how it actually works in practice. Deleting another editors comments is unheard of; for my own safety and security I need to have this addressed on its own merits. Thanks for your understanding. BlueSalix (talk) 00:15, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I know you feel that way but honestly it isn't as huge a deal as you seem to think. It happens here but often only by new editors. I'll reinstate them and leave a warning but barring that editor continuing no action will be taken. Trust me on this I'vbe been here a long time and I've seen this many many times. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 00:19, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
 * So, yeah, this is why I was so desperate to have the issue of my arguments being edited/deleted dealt with as a separate ANI and so adamant about not reverting those edits myself. I'm about to be indefinitely blocked for the ArtW thing [you know what they say, "four ANIs are a charm" ;)] ... so it did turn out to be a pretty gigantically huge deal for me. I've dealt with the fringe theories editors for a long time and I know their M.O. Even I have to admit it's a masterful stroke to edit/delete another user's comments and then wrap it up by getting the other user indeffed. Anyway, thanks for your help the last couple days, I guess this will be sayonara, though. Best - BlueSalix (talk) 18:34, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Seems reasonable. Andrevan@ 00:26, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

JW
That was a misclick by me, hence my self-revert. I've no understanding of what the issue is in that particular war but it looks like it might be best to leave it to the admins. - Sitush (talk) 02:56, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Who wouldn't want a kitten?

Robbie0630 (talk) 03:13, 29 November 2014 (UTC) 


 * I live with two cats and two dogs so I won't ocmplain!. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 03:14, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

You know ...
Sometimes I find some editors' post so far "out there" they border on self-parody. Have confidence in the community, especially the committee -- the voters just don't elect idiots to that group. There's not always a need to frame everything and it can add to clutter (you reply, so then they reply, and so on). NE Ent 16:43, 29 November 2014 (UTC)


 * (watching) What do the voters elect? Not idiots, yes. I asked the candidates questions in 2013, (including: "Imagine further that after said arb voted to ban the editor, and an equal number of arbs voted against it, it's your turn to cast the one and final vote that will ban or not. Assuming you lean towards it (or will you never?): will you?"). They looked better at facts than the sitting arbs. Did the elected ones act like they answered? - I asked a simple question this year and voted for the nine whose answers I liked best. We'll see if they get elected, and if elected, how they will act. All filed under no foul. play on. by my favourite arb who doesn't serve any more. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:09, 29 November 2014 (UTC)