User talk:UseTheCommandLine/Archive 1

Welcome!
Hello, UseTheCommandLine, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place  before the question on your talk page.
 * Quick introduction to Wikipedia
 * How to write a great article
 * Ten Simple Rules for Editing Wikipedia, an essay from PLoS
 * Identifying reliable sources for medicine-related articles (general advice)
 * Wikipedia's Manual of Style for medicine-related articles (general style guide)

''If you are interested in medicine-related themes, you may want to check out the Medicine Portal. If you are interested in improving medicine-related articles, you may want to join WikiProject Medicine (sign up here or say hello here).''

Again, welcome! -- Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (please reply on my talk page) 02:58, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Changes look good
Replacing primary references with secondary ones per WP:MEDRS is exactly what needs to be done. Thus keep up the good work. :-) Drop me a note anytime if you have questions. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your talk page please reply on mine) 20:49, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Here to help as well
If I can ever help you here on Wikipedia please let me know. Keep up the great work! ---My Core Competency is Competency (talk) 18:19, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Oregon
Thanks for coming today! Feel free to join if you are interested. Until next time! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 02:19, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Compromise (TWiiNS album)
Hello UseTheCommandLine. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Compromise (TWiiNS album), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. Salvio Let's talk about it! 15:35, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Re: Assistance requested with education project
Unfortunately, my previous e-mail address was compromised so I have created a new account. Would you mind re-sending your last e-mail to me at my new address? If you cannot do so through Wikipedia for whatever reason, just let me know and I will provide additional information. Thanks and sorry for the inconvenience! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 02:58, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Check again. Same username but at gmail -- thanks for reminding me to update my page! -- Another Believer  ( Talk ) 03:10, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we request your participation in the discussion to help find a resolution. The thread is "Dispute resolution noticeboard. Thank you! --Guy Macon (talk) 11:18, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

meta:Wikimedia Medicine
Thank you for your interest in meta:Wikimedia Medicine. We hope to create a non profit corporation to promote the aims of the Wikimedia Movement within the topic domain of medicine. This means we plan to promote the creation and release of "health care information in all languages" under an open license. This will be done primarily via speaking and collaborating with both individuals and organizations who share our goal. We are working on anumber of collaborations already and are open to more ideas. Documents of incorporation have been submitted and we hope to be officially "off the ground" by mid Dec 2012. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 15:35, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Love your username
little green rosetta $central scrutinizer (talk)$ 03:18, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or  located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 03:19, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Wiki Med
Hi I'm contacting you because, as a participant at Wikiproject Medicine, you may be interested in a new non-profit organization we're forming at m:WikiMed. Our purpose is to help improve the range and quality of free online medical content, and we'll be working with like-minded organizations, such as the World Health Organization, professional and scholarly societies, medical schools, governments and NGOs - including Translators Without Borders. Hope to see you there! Anthonyhcole (talk) 05:22, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

I went and looked (again)
at what I had written to TheAmericanCritic and might have been a little hard on him (given the content of what was going on, I am pretty sure that this is a "him"), but not much. I do apologize if my interaction with him somewhat cut into your much more gracious welcome. (You are probably thinking "I can feel a 'BUT' coming", and you would be right). But I am one of those editors who feels that as often as not, pointing folks to the appropriate rules is not the best way to interact in a way that benefits wikipedia. I feel that I pointed out the issue involved in a fairly clear and reasonably polite manner and that this is the best way to proceed. I look forward to your perspective, your place or mine, doesn't matter which. Both is okay too. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 20:16, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Like you seem to be, I am a firm believer that assumptions are best avoided. However (a lot like "BUT") in English we typically have three choices when writing about a third party, male, female or plural.  I dislike the plural choice, so usually take my best guess and proceed.  If/when I turn out to be wrong, I just change. Should this edit be by a woman I will (1) eat my hat and (2) start referring to that person as "she." Carptrash (talk) 20:56, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia edit-thon: Saturday, February 9, 2013
Hope to see you there! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 16:56, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Glad you signed up! See you tomorrow. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 20:00, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * How is the OHSU pilot project going? I never saw any follow-up apart from your introductory e-mail.  Maybe let me know how I can help? Feel free to send an e-mail, if you prefer; my address can be found on my profile page. -- Another Believer  ( Talk ) 20:19, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!
Just a quick note to apologize for my foul-up on Nursing that you were able to revert. I was trying to revert some unproductive edits that had just occurred in a five-minute flurry, but I must have clicked on the wrong line when looking at the history. I actually restored a problematic edit that had just been appropriately removed by another user. Anyway, I just wanted to thank you for taking care of it. I promise I'm not some idiot who wants to reinsert useless drivel back into an article. :) EricEnfermero  Howdy! 01:55, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Huey P. Newton Article Assessment
I have reviewed the assessment request you submitted to WikiProject Biography for the Huey P. Newton article, and determined that the article has already been assessed as B-class, the highest assessment usually given to articles submitted on that page. If you would like to try and have the article assessed higher than B-class, I would recommend submitting it to Good article nominations. --TommyBoy (talk) 00:33, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Great
Maybe you should post at WP:ENB. Sounds great. Anything I can do to help? Biosthmors (talk) 01:00, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Nevermind about that part, you did! Biosthmors (talk) 01:02, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

The Tea Leaf - Issue Seven
Hello again! We have some neat updates about the Teahouse:
 * We’ve added badges! Teahouse awards is a pilot project to learn how acknowledgement impacts engagement and retention in Teahouse and Wikipedia.


 * We’ve got a new WikiLove Badge script that makes giving badges quick and easy. Add it here.  You can give out badges to thank helpful hosts, welcome guests, acknowledge great questions and more.


 * Come join the experiment and let us know what you think!


 * And...for all of your great work and all of the progress that you've helped the Teahouse make, we hereby award you the Host Badge:


 * You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here

Thanks again! Ocaasi 01:57, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Hi- this is not repeat NOT a slap across the face with a gauntlet followed by pistols at dawn! (More like: "nice cup of tea?") But you do say "Questions? discuss on talk page" so there I am. Not a big fight really but would just like to discuss it more. Thanks! LBN (talk) 07:50, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Can I just check something? Do you actually think/suspect that I am some sort of unethical commercial bastard? I was slightly alarmed by your summary statement at WP:MED which I (perhaps with heightened sensitivity) read as making me sound a bit awful. I'm honestly not - it's what it says on the tin. My primary interest is in improving the encyclopaedia. Cheers LBN (talk) 09:18, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Gosh! Thank you SO much. No-one has ever done that before. I shall cherish it! (I hope it's OK with my dog! Though actually she's more likely to be frightened of it ...) Cheers LBN (talk) 10:47, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

A new sig?
I hear you have a new signature. Is this bit of news true? If so, maybe you could respond in the affirmative and show it off! Biosthmors (talk) 22:34, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
 * It is on my User page as well. -- [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ] #_ 22:36, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Theories of Humor Edit
Hey, you recently gave my book a one star review because of a wikipedia edit. I understand that what I did was wrong, and I don't plan on doing it again, but can you please remove the one-star review? My sales have stopped because of your review.

I'll never put a wikipedia edit again, and if I do, you can always give me another bad review. Just please, remove the last one. 24.146.243.103 (talk) 16:44, 23 February 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.146.243.103 (talk) 16:41, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
 * You've got the wrong person. I made a comment about it, that's all. Sorry to hear about your sales, I'm sure you're a very nice person. -- [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ] #_ 20:08, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

The Teahouse Turns One!
It's been an exciting year for the Teahouse and you were a part of it. Thanks so much for visiting, asking questions, sharing answers, being friendly and helpful, and just keeping Teahouse an awesome place. You can read more about the impact we're having and the reflections of other guests and hosts like you. Please come by the Teahouse to celebrate with us, and enjoy this sparkly cupcake badge as our way of saying thank you. And, Happy Birthday!


 * --Ocaasi and the rest of the Teahouse Team 22:37, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Revdel vs Oversight
Regarding our convo on my talk page about the problematic edit to that talk page, I just wanted to clarify: WP:RFO and WP:REVDEL are two different things. The first is normally used in cases of substantial libel or defamation, insults, etc. directed at a subject, on a page related to the subject, that could result in Wikipedia and/or the Foundation being held legally liable. The second is more routine, and just sort of "hides" the revision. So in this case, let's say that the comment in question had been made on Jodi Foster's bio, then it could have possibly merited oversight. But because it was in another, unrelated location, then revdel is usually enough. Which is what ended up happening in this case. Also, "oversight" is a specific permission/group in the Wiki platform, so only a few people can do it or look at revisions suppressed with it. But any admin can do revdel. Cheers! § FreeRangeFrog croak 01:29, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Rollback
I have granted rollback rights to your account. After a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see New admin school/Rollback and Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, contact me and I will remove it. Good luck and thanks. Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 03:43, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Social issue
I wholly agree with your taking Social issue to AfD. Unfortunately, whilst editing out some of the more untenable contributions to the article, I also edited out the AfD tag in error. Apologies for that, but thankfully a bot has now replaced the tag! Regards  Velella  Velella Talk 12:20, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Question on dispute resolution - Pharmaceutical Industry
Hi,

My request for dispute resolution was "quick closed for lack of sufficient discussion on the article talk page". This issue has been the subject of 7 exchanges totalling some 1700 or so words on the Article Talk page (under the subtitles "Some researchers who have tried to reveal ethical issues with clinical trials or who tried to publish papers that show harmful effects of new drugs or cheaper alternatives have been threatened by drug companies with lawsuits" and "Source query", and an additional 6 exchanges on my user talk page. I realize that the latter should have been on the article Talk page, but this does not change the fact that we seem to be at an impasse.

I just wanted to check to be clear that you had seen all of these exchanges, as the request was not as clear on this as it should have been. Iff so, what additional requirements are needed before we can get assistance with this? At this point, I think the interactions have become completely unproductive and I'm not quite sure what to do. There was a comment that we should seek a third opinion, but given the distance between our positions at this point, I'm very skeptical that we can agree on who would be a neutral third party.

Thanks,

Alfred Bertheim (talk) 05:27, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: The Cancer Conspiracy
Hello UseTheCommandLine. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of The Cancer Conspiracy, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''There is quite a lot of coverage out there, e.g. http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/music/cellars/documents/02123472.htm which suggests the band is notable. The article doesn't make it clear why, but I don't want to delete an article about a notable band.''' Thank you. SmartSE (talk) 20:42, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment
Hey UseTheCommandLine; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:02, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Foundation for Defense of Democracies
I believe your edit here is the correct one per WP:V and WP:RS, and that you are correct in your view that "neoconservative" is not a pejorative term. The WP:SPA who reverted you has issues with WP:COI, WP:OWN, WP:PROMO and WP:NPOV. I've restored your original edit. Thank you for the careful editing you've done to the article! Qworty (talk) 19:20, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Edit Warring
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Mike V •  Talk  21:39, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Juki


A tag has been placed on Juki requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Way 2 veers 07:34, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Janome
Hello UseTheCommandLine, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Janome, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply - "leading - worldwide" is a credible assertion of importance. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you.  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  11:19, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Why did you delete that (meat and pharma industry), you rogue?
You are interested in hiding truths from people, you scoundrel? Rogue! -59.95.6.207 (talk) 20:13, 31 March 2013 (UTC)


 * ok, sorry for calling you a rogue and a scoundrel! My apologies. But don't hide truths. Where is an encyclopedia where anything can be written?-59.95.6.207 (talk) 20:21, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * don't you personally agree that the pharma industries are scoundrels? -59.95.6.207 (talk) 20:27, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Michael Greiner 21:39, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I've replied again. --Michael Greiner 02:05, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Bernina International
I had on my "to do" list for today a cull of the worst of the promotional excesses from that article. Thanks for relieving me of that unpleasant task, as reading such content make me feel distinctly nauseous. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:36, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

White Privilege, Again
You've reverted from a version that has been up for some time now. The wording of that version was uncontroversial and should be acceptable to us all. White privilege is a set of advantages that whites are argued to benefit from - we can all agree on that. Wikipedia is not a place to fight political wars; you believe the argument of white privilege, but you must recognize that stating it as a fact on the encyclopedia is POV pushing. I don't want to get into an edit war with you over this. Please revert back. -Thucydides411 (talk) 19:17, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

I must agree with Thucydides411 on this issue. You have made yourself an obnoxious presence on this article and others, stubborn and intractable (all take, no give) despite a cooperative approach by others. Apostle12 (talk) 20:49, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Juki, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SMT (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 21:37, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Prostate cancer
Screening for prostate cancer is controversial. Most of us who actually work in cancer research are strongly convinced, based on years of experience, that PSA screening has both benefits and harms, and specifically that it does save lives. A single meta-analysis based in large part on a deeply flawed trial (the PLCO) cannot be allowed to stand as the final word on the subject. Likewise, there are many, many critical flaws in the USPSTF evidence review and statement, and theirs should not be presented as the only perspective on the controversy. You may be striving for an "encyclopedic" tone, but you are presenting as facts statements which are in fact opinion, and I am very disturbed by the evident censorship of differing opinions. Drcoop (talk) 23:52, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Oncolytic virus
Hi, could you please review oncolytic virus and see if you'd like to remove the tags you added, I have improved the referencing greatly, and there shouldn't be many uncited claims. If there is anything left that still concerns you please make it clear where. I am still working on it but it is mostly done. Thanks! Viraltonic (talk) 23:51, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.
This message is being sent to you let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You do not need to participate however, you are invited to help find a resolution. The thread is "Male Privilege". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot   operator  /  talk 22:39, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I have closed this case as there is a discussion about this issue underway at WP:ANI -- Cameron11598  (Converse) 06:23, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

White privilege at WP:DRN
Hello, I'm Cameron11598 a DRN volunteer and I have closed the white privilege discussion at WP:DRN as you appear to be on an extended wiki break. The article is also under discussion at WP:ANI. You may refile with out prejudice when you are back and the WP:ANI thread is closed. -- Cameron11598  (Converse) 21:54, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Request for Arbitration
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Arbitration/Requests 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, -- [ UseTheCommandLine  ~/ talk  ] # _  17:50, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
I misjudged you before. Enjoy your time here. Don't let the trolls get to you like they do me. I had hoped to work with you on Male Privilege because I think it would have been an interesting article. I can see that you have put in a lot of effort to stay neutral and bridge gaps I admire that sort of resolve. I've been an editor here for many years and loved it until I touched social sciences about a month ago. I'm going to be scrambling my password and changing my email; maybe I'll make a new account at some point and steer clear of these articles, but probably not. Adios. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rgambord (talk • contribs) 22:02, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I hope that it was not us, as far as I can tell, the last editors to interact with User:Rgambord, that drove him over the edge and seemingly out of wikipedia. Carptrash (talk) 22:30, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem, I understand retained history. His personal stuff is the same stuff that all the mens right's guys claim to have lived through, only he didn't have his only child torn out of his arms by our feminist controled judicial system. My stuff was no secret.  I don't think.  Thank you for the note.  Einar aka  Carptrash (talk) 22:34, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I have what I term the "43 Rules I live My Life By". They are not recorded anywhere and the number varies from time to time,, but Rule 31 (today) is, "I will believe anything anyone tells me until it matters." With this fellow it did not matter so I could believe him. it sounds as if it did matter to you, so you get to make choices.  And finding an editor to help debrief is a long standing wikitradition. We all take turns being at both the giving and receiving ends - though I am not quite sure which end is which. Carptrash (talk) 23:09, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Arbitration case "Race and politics" opened
An arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and politics. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and politics/Evidence. Please add your evidence by May 21, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and politics/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Ks0stm  (T•C•G•E) 01:48, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback (Ks0stm)
Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 00:27, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Your Arbitration evidence is too long
Hello, UseTheCommandLine. Thank you for your recent submission of evidence for the Race and politics Arbitration case. As you may be aware, the Arbitration Committee asks that users submitting evidence in cases adhere to limits regarding the length of their submissions. These limits, currently at 1000 words and 100 diffs for parties and 500 words and 50 diffs for all others, are in place to ensure that the Arbitration Committee receives only the most important information relevant to the case, and is able to determine an appropriate course of action in a reasonable amount of time. The evidence you have submitted currently exceeds at least one of these limits, and is presently at 1552 words and 57 diffs. Please try to reduce the length of your submission to fit within these limits; this guide may be able to provide some help in doing so. If the length of your evidence is not reduced soon, it may be refactored or removed by a human clerk within a few days. Thank you! If you have any questions or concerns regarding the case, please contact the drafting Arbitrator or case clerk (who are listed on the case pages); if you have any questions or concerns about this bot, please contact the operator. On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Hers fold ArbClerkBOT(talk) 08:00, 16 May 2013 (UTC)


 * You can remove the quote of my earlier post; I will place it in my evidence section. This will get you under the word count (I.e., more room for more stuff). — ArtifexMayhem (talk) 11:19, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Motion regarding Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and politics
Resolved by motion:

"In his evidence submission to this case, stated he is immediately retiring from editing Wikipedia:

Apostle12's conduct was a substantial part of the present arbitration case (Race and politics) and hearing this case in Apostle12's absence would serve no purpose. The committee therefore resolves that:
 * 1) The present arbitration case is suspended for two months (from the date this motion passes).
 * 2) If Apostle12 returns while this case is suspended, arbitration proceedings will resume.
 * 3) If Apostle12 does not return to editing before two months have elapsed: he will be indefinitely prohibited from editing any page relating to "race and politics", broadly construed; and this case will be un-suspended and closed.
 * 4) Apostle12 is directed to inform the Arbitration Committee if he returns to editing the English Wikipedia using any account.

Apostle12 (and all of his accounts, if he has created one or more others at that time) may be indefinitely blocked by any uninvolved administrator if he violates the prohibitions in points 3 or 4 of this motion."

For the Arbitration Committee, Ks0stm  (T•C•G•E) 02:28, 26 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Discuss this

Looking for some help
Since you seem to be fairly experienced and knowledgeable about the rules of this place, I was hoping you could help me with a article that I think is off, but I'm having difficulty explaining why, the page is Oscar López Rivera. It might just be me and the page is fine, so I was hoping for a second opinion. Neosiber (talk) 00:29, 5 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm not exactly new, I just don't edit a lot. Thank you, I think I'll leave it alone, I'll let someone more experienced deal with it. Neosiber (talk) 03:03, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library now offering accounts from Cochrane Collaboration (sign up!)
The Wikipedia Library gets Wikipedia editors free access to reliable sources that are behind paywalls. Because you are signed on as a medical editor, I thought you'd want to know about our most recent donation from Cochrane Collaboration. Cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 20:27, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Cochrane Collaboration is an independent medical nonprofit organization that conducts systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials of health-care interventions, which it then publishes in the Cochrane Library.
 * Cochrane has generously agreed to give free, full-access accounts to 100 medical editors. Individual access would otherwise cost between $300 and $800 per account.
 * If you are still active as a medical editor, come and sign up :)

2013 Portland Wiknic!
Hope you are able to attend! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 17:15, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and politics closed
The suspended arbitration case regarding Race and politics has now closed in accordance with the motion for suspension and closure. The following remedies have been enacted:
 * 1) Apostle12 is indefinitely prohibited from editing any page relating to "race and politics", broadly construed.
 * 2) Apostle12 is directed to inform the Arbitration Committee if he returns to editing the English Wikipedia using any account.
 * 3) Apostle12 (and all of his accounts, if he has created one or more others at that time) may be indefinitely blocked by any uninvolved administrator if he violates these prohibitions.

For the Arbitration Committee, Ks0stm  (T•C•G•E) 20:18, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Genital wart, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Specificity (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:42, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

BRSP
Dear User, You have recently tagged the article of Balochistan Rural Support Programme, your tagging is well justified and i have tried to minimize extent the tags to some extent, please go through the article and tell me how can i remove all those tags and improve the article.

As far as notability is concerned, BRSP is the largest non profit organization working in province of balochistan in Pakistan, and one of the largest NGO in Pakistan. So i do not think that the article's notability should be challenged.

Thanks

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 17:11, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

I am sharing some of the references about BRSP, BRSP coverage of 2010 Balochistan Floods, BRSP contributions in 2010 floods in collaboration with UNHCR, BRSP food items distribution in 2010 floods in collaboration with USAID. It is a fact that you will not find much references about BRSP, as here in Pakistan the local / Non-profit organizations do not advertise their coverage / show visibility due to security reasons, as the NGO's are very vulnerable specifically here in Balochistan and tends to remain low profile during their projects work in vulnerable areas of Pakistan. However in past NGO's do advertise but as a result some incidents of kidnappings and ransom has been occurred and BRSP was one of them.

So it is a bit problem here which is not making BRSP a notable organization on net. But i can provide its Annual reports and some data which endows its contributions to the vulnerable poor people.

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 08:07, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

I am not saying the advertisement of BRSP as reliable source, rather i am saying that due to no visibility and the advertisement, documentaries of BRSP's operation is quite low, that is the reason that one can not find reliable sources by simple Google search. Yes i am very much enthusiastic about the page of BRSP, as it is worth to mention about BRSP in Wikipedia, to give a glimpse of BRSP's operation in Balochistan province of Pakistan, and its operation during the mentioned natural disasters in the province, in fact BRSP was the organization to have a wide coverage of relief operation activities. But sadly due to unavailability of reliable sources, i am so far not able to add them in the article, but to some extent i have added sources. Hope you understand.....

Thanks Nabil rais2008 (talk) 09:55, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Dubai Central Library
Hello UseTheCommandLine, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Dubai Central Library, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Buildings aren't eligible for A7. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 05:19, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: The Pride (skyscraper)
Hello UseTheCommandLine, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of The Pride (skyscraper), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Buildings aren't eligible for deletion based on a lack of notability. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 05:54, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Zabeel Mall
Hello UseTheCommandLine, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Zabeel Mall, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Buildings aren't eligible for A7. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 05:56, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Genital wart, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Concordance (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 16:05, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Avenida Reforma
I have removed the prod tag from Avenida Reforma, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the prod template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Articles for deletion. Thanks! Fbryce (talk) 01:45, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

[[Dubai World Central]
I removed the prod tag; --use AfD if you must, but why not solve the problem my merging/redirecting the other articles into here. There are sure to be some sources for the planning. Even abandoned projects can be notable.  DGG ( talk ) 19:42, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

DMW, etc
Hi UseTheCommandLine. Thank you for your work on patrolling new pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I'm just letting you know that I declined your deletion request for Damon Matthew Wise, a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. Please take a moment to look at the suggested tasks for patrollers and review the criteria for speedy deletion. Particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion or proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. ''I know. It's a huge mess, and the man editor appears to exhibit the classic Asperger's symptoms, but there is something in it. Oddly, taking it to AfD might be more useful since t will force the issue one way or another. I'll still argue for retention, but it may force a spring clean'' Fiddle   Faddle  22:46, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Wow, never used that Twinkle template before Not quite what I had in mind! Rather too strong in my view, that! Fiddle   Faddle  22:47, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


 * did some google searches. no indication of notability, in my view. AfDing. -- [ UseTheCommandLine  ~/ talk  ]# &#9604; 22:49, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


 * That works fine for me. The article as it stands makes the assertion of notability which is all it has to do for CSD to be declined. AfD is far stricter. Let's see what happens. Fiddle   Faddle  22:53, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Indented line Yes the whole extended family of Damon and Karen are littered with Aspies and they have a lot of content located from Google and other search engines, which we are debating whether is appropriate or relevant. A lot of mentions of political and environmental work, and achievements, in view of professionals off-putting, so will likely leave out reference's to election counts and literature in favour of the angle of the style and content which is aimed towards Asperger's and disability work, in which he has become what some have called infamous.  Will also likely complete publications references and links (where they are found) and compile links to charities and causes he has been involved with - although most such work is already referenced and linked through pages like Charity-OnLine.ie website links to charities and fund-raising with Damon and others, [|NCPD Pages - Galway links] and to a lesser extent Damon''s campaign site.  If you look through the information being built up would appreciate if you find anything interesting and to the point.  The main purpose of raising this page is because it was requested, and profiling the work he and us have been working on for all the charities and causes.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by AspieNo1 (talk • contribs) 23:40, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments - we respond when we have consulted further on changes as google search contents are being looked at for relevance to ensure a fair and balanced representation of Damon, which everyone can agree is impartial and independent and helps to raise awareness of the work he and us all have been doing in the autism and disability fields here ... if you have any constructive suggestions from contents from search engines like https://www.google.ie/#bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&fp=b9555517afdbd11d&q=Damon+Matthew+Wise on what to add, feel free to comment on the Damon Matthew Wise talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AspieNo1 (talk • contribs) 00:30, 18 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the heads up re ANI. I think an excellent venue if we can get something positive out of it, perhaps not for the DMW article, I suspect it is too late for that, but for folk on the Asperger's Spectrum who wish to edit here and are sometimes flummoxed by Wikipedia its rules and its strangeness. As you can see I have placed a comment there. Fiddle   Faddle  08:51, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Response to your reversion of edits to Polycystic ovarian syndrome
Hi, the primary source I added supported, not contradicted, the secondary source that was already there - maybe you just had a quick glance which is why you thought it was saying the opposite? In light of that does the edit work? Here's a link to see the revision http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Polycystic_ovary_syndrome&oldid=568885076#Alternative_medicine

I don't have a ton of time to contribute to Wikipedia, so if you're still unhappy with this edit, maybe you could brush it up rather than stripping it out?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by User talk:Predecess (talk) 15:20, 18 August 2013 (UTC)


 * If there's a solid secondary source, the primary source is unnecessary. -- [ UseTheCommandLine  ~/ talk  ]# &#9604; 18:58, 18 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Why would it not be desirable to include as many sources as possible, especially if more detail is provided by specifically stating what a primary source found. Also, if later conflicting studies are found/performed and documented on Wikipedia, it would be helpful for people to be able to assess the evidence on both sides since it's not like one side can be logically proved as fact.

Speedy deletion declined: Chartered Institute of Arbitrators
Hello UseTheCommandLine, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 15:35, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Juan Torena
ACTUALLY, it asserted significance, even notability. It even had a source. Alas, it was a copy/paste of that source with a couple of words changed. It was created in 2009! Dloh cierekim  04:52, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined
I declined your G11 speedy deletion request on Aruvikkuzhy Falls. Since the article is about a waterfall, a naturally occurring geological phenomenon, I don't understand how it can fall under G11. It is possible that merging to an article about the region/city could be more appropriate if there is not enough useful, verifiable info, but speedy deletion definitely seems wrong to me. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:46, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Kitten
Thanks, and no problem, I actually indeffed one of the Dubai editors, User:Kmprop123 as a spam user name. Some of these are a bit tricky, they may be notable, and they are getting better at toning down the spam, despite the obvious intention. Oh, well, I'll do what I can  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  07:56, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Another speedy declined
This time on Rica Seilet Hotel. This article has existed since 2005. That, in and of itself, almost disqualifies it from speedy deletion (the only possible exception I can think of would be if someone suddenly found out it was certainly a copyright violation). I know this may seem odd, because I was confused too when I started, but speedy deletion is supposed to be the exception. Furthermore, you can't just tag something under G11 just because it may not be notable--those are separate things. Articles fall under G11 when 1) they were clearly intended primarily/solely to promote a person or organization, and 2) simple editing will not fix the problem. In the case of the hotel, I did take out an unverified paragraph about nearby attractions, but even with that it I wouldn't say it was unduly promotional. Now, is the subject non-notable? Possibly--I'd have to run a WP:BEFORE search to check. Most hotels probably aren't notable, though some are; for example, that article claims there was opposition to it being built. If that were relevant enough opposition to appear in newspapers, that might just be enough to pass WP:GNG. Unlikely? Probably. But that's what AfD is for. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:54, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Continuous tagging of Articles for Deletion !
Hi ! Hope you are well, i am Nabil rais2008 (Well i have been blocked, and i am just sending you my message without being log in by using my IP address so please do not get confused)

Can you please mention recently nominated articles for deletion on Wiki Project Dubai / or other related pages for discussion and to bring more clear consensus ??? I have previously asked you to please consider holding your continuous tagging articles for deletion as i am unable to contribute (Do not take it in the sense that i will again start canvassing !) but i have not received any response from your side.

I do not think that its appropriate practice to tag loads of articles in Wikipedia for deletion, you should have a thorough review of the subject of article and have a detailed search on Google and then tag them for deletion. In my opinion this is not a solution to tag all the un sourced articles / articles lacking reliable references for deletion, rather you can contribute by adding / improving sources in articles by your self, which will result in improving the articles in Wikipedia and will at least show your productivity in Wikipedia as an active contributor rather an active "Articles Deletion Tagger" or "Articles deletion Patroller".

You have recently nominated "Ahmed Abdul Rahim Al Attar Tower" for deletion can i ask you how you have tagged this article for deletion ?? It is to bring in your kind information that this skyscraper this tower is 342 meters high (Considered as a supertall skyscraper as per CTBUH), and is one of the tallest residential building in Dubai. Is it not notable ?? So far i have failed to understand your self assumed criteria of notability, correct me if i am wrong. The article is well sourced (Emporis and CTBUH), and many other references can be added for general notability please read Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging articles for deletion.

If you want to send me any message then please send it on my talk page here; User talk:Nabil rais2008. Thanks for your understanding.

182.183.142.101 (talk) 16:56, 25 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Please do not post here. -- [ UseTheCommandLine  ~/ talk  ]# &#9604; 17:50, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia Takes Portland 2013!
-- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:24, 26 August 2013 (UTC)