User talk:Acroterion/Archive Q1 2016

2016

	Happy New Year 2016!
	Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unneccessary blisters.    – Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:44, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, from me and the lawn gnomes! Acroterion (talk) 17:44, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Slave reparations

I made an honest mistake and didn't realize that the sample text there was a given example, and not actual spam. Forgive me. CatcherStorm ^talk 17:55, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Certainly, don't worry about it. Acroterion (talk) 17:56, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Hi Acroterion, To wish you a happy New Year and thank you for your help and advice in 2015. Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 22:42, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

And a belated Happy New Year to you! Acroterion (talk) 00:57, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you!

7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it. To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Thanks for cleaning up at Munising, Michigan 7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:32, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, much appreciated! Acroterion (talk) 00:57, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

talk on skilled group

hang on, why can i not do it in talk then, Skilled will be affected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ugutuy (talk • contribs)

Your comment "Hopefully this inquiry will cut these labour hire mobs down including Skilled group" on the talkpage isn't a discussion of how to improve the article, it is an inappropriate use of the talkpage to disparage the subject, and it indicates that you shouldn't be editing on that topic if you can't edit neutrally. That article has been the subject of sustained abuse, so edits are subject to more than usual levels of review. Acroterion (talk) 03:17, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

OK i have thought about it and this should fit the correct criteria ?

Ugutuy (talk) 03:56, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Replied at the talkpage (perhaps you should move it to ts own section), but given the general nature of the announcement it's not really useful for an article on a single company in the field. Acroterion (talk) 04:16, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

All i did was include a link to an inquiry into labour hire of which Skilled is one that is going to be inquired into

(sorry i did not write the news)....

05:05, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

That UK Lincoln/Titanic editor...

I went and looked up the actual letter that Maunsell Bradhurst FIELD wrote to the NY Times and this is what the letter actually states:

Death in this case was a mere cessation of breathing.The fact had not been ascertained one minute when Dr. GURLEY offered up a prayer. The few persons in the room were all profoundly effected. The President's eyes after death were not, particularly the right one, entirely closed. I closed them myself with my fingers, and one the surgeons brought pennies and placed them on the eyes, and subsequently substituted for them silver half-dollars. In a very short time the jaw commenced slightly falling, although the body was still warm. I called attention to this, and had it immediately tied up with a pocket handkerchief. The expression immediately after death was purely negative, but in fifteen minutes here came over the mouth, the nostrils, and the chin, a smile that seemed almost an effort of life. I had never seen upon the President's face an expression more genial and pleasing.

So... Our UK "friend" gets it all wrong

• NAME of the person they are allegedly quoting is incorrect. The man's name was Maunsell Bradhurst Field. And look at that - he even has a Wikipedia article!
• the alleged "quote" is cleverly edited to make it appear that at the moment of death or that when Lincoln was dying that he somehow had a conscious smile on his face. Ummmm...no. 15 minutes after dying, during the process of the body transitioning into rigor mortis, the muscles of the man's face had the mere appearance of a "smile".

Anyway, thought you might find it interesting. And thanks for being on top of this editor's obsessive POV-editing. Shearonink (talk) 16:44, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

During my research, I also found the same misapprehensions (missing last name, clever editing of the original quoted material) at the Simple WP's article on the assassination. Field's actual letter to the NY Times can be found in its entirety at The House Divided Project at Dickinson College: "Maunsell Bradhurst Field to Editor New York Times, Letter accounting the Passing of President Abraham Lincoln, April 16, 1865". Shearonink (talk) 16:50, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Edit warring at Malheur National Wildlife Refuge

Hi Acroterion, a little while ago you warned IP 108.26.39.208 about edit warring at Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, where the IP has been trying to insert the same off-topic opinion, cited to an editorial, for the past few days. I just wanted to let you know that they have inserted the material once more - this is the fifth time now. This info has been removed by three different editors, including myself and you. I do not wish to remove this most recent instance as I have removed it twice myself, and do not want to run afoul of 3RR. Would you be able to take a look at this? Thank you! Antepenultimate (talk) 19:04, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

To be fair, they've added some additional citations this time, some which may not be outright opinion columns, but it doesn't matter - criticism of the government's response to a standoff in Nevada last year is far, far from directly relevant to this Oregon refuge. Undoubtedly the IP is choosing to make their stand at the MNWR page because the main standoff page is edit protected. Antepenultimate (talk) 19:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Reported at WP:AN3. As I've reverted, it's bad form for me to take admin action on anything other than vandalism or defamation. Acroterion (talk) 20:30, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! I appreciate your help with this. Antepenultimate (talk) 20:56, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Edit war Creationism

You have reverted my POV dispute, although there is an active NPOV discussion on the page's talk section. Why are you doing this, exactly? What exactly needs to happen for a page to be disputed without someone like yourself coming and undoing a legitimate dispute flag?

Exactly: your POV dispute. You are edit-warring to advance your agenda and using the POV tag to further that agenda. Tag-bombing evolution and creationism articles is disruptive and almost always rejected by the community. Please stop. You've been blocked before for this. POV tags are to be used where a broadly legitimate concern exists on the part a a number of editors, or to flag little-trafficked articles that need attention, rather than as a mark of one editor's disagreement. Acroterion (talk) 19:02, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Acroterion. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 15:59, 11 January 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

David J Johnson (talk) 15:59, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Grammar & Spelling

Certainly! I beg your pardon. As long as you're aware the grammar used was incorrect, or at least bad form! :-) (Are you able to direct me to the WP page that says this is disallowed or discouraged? I'm unable to find it.) But please do be very careful of spelling errors when editing WP pages, vis-à-vis A_Christmas_Carol_(2004_film). All the best, Mathygrammar (talk) 22:51, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

The guidelines is at WP:TPO. While your edit wasn't problematic, it's better that you leave other comments alone, warts and all, short of egregious personal attacks or vandalism. Things can quickly go wrong if one edits other editors' comments. Acroterion (talk) 01:03, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

This makes a lot of sense and I truly apologize. I hope you can see past this uncharacteristic and seemingly rude act. Mathygrammar (talk) 01:09, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, happy editing! Acroterion (talk) 01:44, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Page Deletion

Hi This is my first article and I was actually reading the guidelines before unfortunately I submitted the draft article, I got some ideas from the community and now I drafting another article. Please if you have time take a look into it. Will make sone good information on the internet and I am interested in contributing more. Lemurian.in (talk) 17:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

I have created a Sample Article here, Can you please guide me in healthy way whether I have created the article properly here. Lemurian.in (talk) 17:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

While the article in The Hindu is a start, the article lacks substantiation of notability. In order to be notable, a company should have been discussed in some depth, rather than as a mention or a source of quotes in an article on fashion. See WP:CORP. In addition, the article reads as advertising more than an encyclopedia article, bulked out with tangential discussions of fashion. Apart from The Hindu, the sources don't add anything about the core subject, or are from inadmissible sources like blogs. I don't see the topic being able to sustain notability. Acroterion (talk) 16:11, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. I will try to get some more reliable resources and improve the article. Lemurian.in (talk) 17:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Restore

Could you restore XTees.com and move it to draft space for me to work on? Cheers, Dat Guy^Talk_Contribs 16:15, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Done. Material from Lemurian.in's userpage draft might be useful there. Acroterion (talk) 16:22, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

The Magical Circle School

Does the ineligibility of educational institutions for A7 only apply to "proper" or offline ones? Adam9007 (talk) 22:33, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

It's an unremarkable website that bills itself as a school. Acroterion (talk) 23:18, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Anthony Messere

Why did you put a deletion tag on this page? How is it not significant? Rileyschneider (talk) 02:04, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Third place in one race doesn't indicate that the subject is sufficiently notable for inclusion in a global encyclopedia. A tour or series championship would be closer to the mark. Acroterion (talk) 02:06, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks and FYI

Thanks for the block of Trainsfan6 (talk · contribs). He is likely a sock of Bigshowandkane64 (talk · contribs) and I have filed a new SPI which you will probably have seen since I pinged you there. The last few socks wound up needing the talk page access removed due to the nature of the personal attacks placed there. The current message is fairly tame compared to the last time but you might keep an eye on it in case things get worse. Thanks for your time. MarnetteD|Talk 03:36, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Well thanks for the removal that you performed while I was typing here. Enjoy the rest of your weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 03:38, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

I'll revoke talkpage access if it happens again. Wikipedia seems to be plagued with editors who obsessively create sockpuppets to edit children's entertainment subjects. Acroterion (talk) 03:41, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

You are right about that. This one is a few months short of four years since the first SPI. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 03:47, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Revision not yet hidden

It appears that you forgot to hide the content for revision ID 700428969, but it contains offensive material in the lead section. Eyesnore 14:38, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Sorry about that, had to go to work. Another admin got it. Acroterion (talk) 02:49, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Pacific View Charter School page deletion

Can you please restore Pacific View Charter School?

I do not see why this entry was deleted. Searching San Diego Charter School on Wikipedia pulls up a lot of schools with similar entry. This page does not have a single promotional line. Its all facts about their teaching philosophy for parents to use while deciding which San Diego North county charter school to place their children in.

All the content is original and in does not violate any copyrights.

If there is something specific, please let me know and I would be happy to update the entry. Thank you. Harold — Preceding unsigned comment added by SanDiegoWordPressDeveloper (talk • contribs) 19:57, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Please review the link I gave you on your talkpage. The article as written was composed as if Wikipedia was a webhosting provider, not an encyclopedia. The net effect was content that appeared to be promoting the school with projected outcomes and slogans, rather than a concise factual discussion of the school, sourced to independent resources that allow us to verify notability. Much of the content appears to have been copied from public relations material, or else is inappropriately boosterish. I am willing to restore the core sections of the content (minus the buzzwords, slogans and predictions of success) to a sandbox where you can work it into an encyclopedia article. You may wish to read our conflict of interest policy as well, since you seem to be closely associated with the subject. Let me know if you'd like material placed in your sandbox. Acroterion (talk) 02:47, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

More List of Law Enfocement Agencies in ... Excitement

Take a gander at the latest edits at List of law enforcement agencies in Illinois. Some anonymous someone is removing cites that have been there forever. I have certainly abstained from adding (many) more cites so as to be polite and not antagonize other editors. But gosh darn it, I feel as if these people are building a list without cites, and making up a rule about which cites are legit. I suspect there needs to be a discussion about this. Where ought I to take my concerns. Or alternatively, ought I just give it a rest and admit I am wrong?

As always I value your adult guidance. Paul, in Saudi (talk) 09:38, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

I tend to agree that news articles mentioning the agency in reference to a crime that they are investigating aren't very useful. I don't see it as a significant issue. Ideally they would be replaced with a reference to an in-depth article on the subject, but those tend not to exist. Given that the cited article is usually about a trivial event involving a non-notable perpetrator, there are elements of WP:BLPCRIME in play, which would tend to be a determinant in favor of deleting the reference, something that's rooted in established policy. Acroterion (talk) 02:07, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

I take this to be your very diplomatic way of telling me to chill. I hear and I obey. (And I thank you.) Paul, in Saudi (talk) 04:40, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Gonew

I do not appreciate you vandalizing my page and am requesting it to be put back in full order. I correctly followed the guidlines and explained it's relevance in an encyclopedia. If not restored, further actions will be taken.

Thanks, Esc2020 (talk) 03:13, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

It's not "your" page, it's Wikipedia's. Please see your talkpage. You are welcome to work on an article in your sandbox so that you can bring it into conformance with Wikipedia guidelines. Acroterion (talk) 03:14, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Edit wars

What are you talking about being involved in "Edit Wars"? I corrected several mistakes on the British Isles page which included the Republic of Ireland. The Irish Government states it is NOT part of the British Isles.

Also you may want to read Question # 9 on the official website of the British Monarchy "Frequently Asked Questions" http://www.royal.gov.uk/FrequentlyAskedQuestions/20%20most%20asked%20questions.aspx

"please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted" I reverted ONE change that "Jim1138" made and you call it and "Edit War"? Oh please get a life.

FredRed2 (talk) 05:26, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

As Antandrus has told you, you are confusing politics with geography. Wikipedia takes a dim view of those who import political disputes and who disrupt articles to make a point. If you continue your disruption, you will be blocked. Please note that edits concerning Ireland can be subject to sanctions, per long-standing arbitration decisions. Acroterion (talk) 12:10, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

rev del request

Can the comment "Izzy Wright" on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Burdines be deleted? And perhaps action taken (permanent blocking) against the poster Izanator241 -thanks. 1305cj (talk) 14:20, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. One more thing if I can ask. On https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Fort_Lauderdale the comment icon las olas wasn't signed and is just a link to a personal real estate website. This would be posting personal details and using talk pages for promotional means, both against Wikipedia talk page guidelines. While not as harmful as "Izzy Wright", this post should still be removed and the poster blocked for violations. 1305cj (talk) 21:39, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Removed. You could do that too, it's not an admin-only thing. I haven't blocked or warned the account, the edit is five years old and the account has learned since then and is a significant good-faith contributor of long standing Acroterion (talk) 21:47, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I thought of removing it myself but didn't know if I should or it should be an admin. 1305cj (talk) 22:57, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Disruptive IP

The IP you blocked today and later unblocked again is this guy, and he is community banned. He is edit-warring here [1], and here [2], and that's just since you unblocked him. The 2013 block on that IP was against the same guy. Another editor posted on the IP's talk page to make you aware of his identity, but the IP deleted it. [3] Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:55, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

I thought my intuition was correct. Well, at least they were given an opportunity to prove me wrong. Blocked six months. Acroterion (talk) 20:18, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes, you were right the first time. He does it a lot; pretending he's just a hard-working IP who has been mistreated by some wicked editor, and many an admin has taken him at face value. One or two admins still do! He will pop up again with another IP very soon, but that's the cross we have to bear...! Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:28, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

In fairness, I didn't do a very good job this morning of investigating, but it was clear that there was something fishy. Getting ready for work and wrangling dogs took my attention away at a crucial moment. The apocalyptic east coast blizzard has started here and I was preparing to be snowed in for a couple of days, making a list of everything I'd need from the office. Acroterion (talk) 20:35, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Sounds like it's fair to say you had other things on your mind! Good luck with that weather; we've even heard about it over here in the UK and it sounds like it's going to affect an enormous number of people. I hope everyone stays safe. Britain grinds to a halt if it snows for five minutes... Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:43, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

75 million people is the estimate, from Memphis to New York. We're expected to get at least two feet of snow, maybe three. My wife's been laying in provisions, so we won't starve until March, and it's just beginning. As long as the power stays on we're fine, and we have a generator if it doesn't. Acroterion (talk) 20:53, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

That's more people than in the whole of the UK. Madness. Sounds like you're well prepared though, and in a sense I could imagine it being quite exciting. But I'm sure that feeling would wear off pretty quickly if it lasts for weeks/months! We'll be keeping an eye on it from over here, and again, good luck! Bretonbanquet (talk) 21:02, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Roads should be plowed on Sunday if all goes well, I have no scheduled events on Monday, and I have everything I need to work at home if the roads aren't passable. The main problem will be where to put all of the snow. We're sort of looking forward to it to be honest, winter hasn't been very wintry until now, which is why this is such a strong storm. The Atlantic is warm for this time of year, lots of moisture being blown into the cold Arctic air. The UK's had more than its share of winter so far, now it's our turn.Acroterion (talk) 21:17, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

That's true, we've had lots and lots of rain and flooding, and it's affected a lot of people pretty badly (16,000 homes flooded out). We're building houses pretty much everywhere these days because we don't have much space, and inevitably some are built in the wrong places, or all the extra concreting causes flooding elsewhere when the rain is bad. At least the snow hasn't been too serious. It just shows that even with our advanced technologies, nature can still wreck everything overnight if it takes the fancy. Bretonbanquet (talk) 21:48, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Raid on a page

Hello, there's a current raid by néonazis who want to push their nazi agenda on the "white genocide" page, please alert the admins. Cf this link : http://boards.5chan.org/pol/thread/61759510/white-genocide-wikirewrite-aka-gas-the-kikes-with [[ ]] NB: change 5 for 4 in url

Thanks, already semi-protected and keeping an eye on it. It was linked from an article in Slate so I'd already seen some chan-like activity. Acroterion (talk) 23:24, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

REMOVE "Acroterion" as WIKIPEDIA ADMINISTRATOR

This is regarding the deliberate edits made by Acroterion on the Wikipage of Sulaiman al Fahim (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulaiman_Al-Fahim) that purported wrong information about the person. When Acroterion's mistakes were corrected the person deliberately blocked the persons who contributed with their edicts. This makes one posit that Acroterion must have accrued financial gains but promoting a person on wikipedia which has become a power information tool. The proposition gets strength by the fact that when the points were raised about the recent edits made on Sulaiman Al Fahim, Acroterion chose to sacrifice truth rather than correct the information, and blocking the person who raised the valid points. This throws light on the personality of Acroterion. I will not be surprised to know that Acroterion did not go to Ivy League when anyone who is a citizen or resident of the US, can avail the opportunity which is available to all. People like Acroterion neither drink nor gargle from the fountain of knowledge but pass miles away from it. The result is that the truth becomes a victim of their straw like intelligence. Therefore it is requested to the authorities at Wikipedia to remove Acroterion as an administrator on an immediate basis so that neither the truth nor correct information is compromised. A person who is not endowed with intellectual faculties that enable him to discern between pictures of the person is good for nothing, unless the person is blind. Wikipedia cannot be a platform to give vanity to clowns who are unable to interpret facts and information, and thereby making truth a victim in the whole process.

That's seriously epic. I wish I'd get some quality rants this one; I'm feeling left out. By the way, enjoy the snow! :) Antandrus (talk) 03:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, it's a masterpiece of its kind, too good to revert. And they're right, I have in fact neither drunk nor gargled from the fountain of knowledge, though I did sip from the Fountain of Youth. It's equally true that I didn't go to an Ivy League school, merely the North Avenue Trade School. It's a handicap that I try to bear. Acroterion (talk) 03:31, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

I'd love to know the back-story to "drink nor gargle"; it's a grand expression. MarkBernstein (talk) 04:11, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm saving that baby for a rainy day. I just passed it on to a chum who challenges his colleagues to use a florid phrase during their bi-weekly faculty meeting. We public school folk (I made it all the way to the California State Normal School) must live with out little shortcomings. Not sure, but I think they keep the fountain of knowledge up north, and away from we of the Southern branch. Sigh... --Drmargi (talk) 18:38, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

"victim of their straw-like intelligence" is appealing as well. Acroterion (talk) 19:02, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Well, at least we can't accuse the anonymous poster of self-promotion. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 00:17, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Indeed.

The whole prose composition reminds me just a bit of some of the more colorful poetry of the DPRK, a literary organization with talented wordsmiths. They're always a pleasure to read, but not for the reasons they think. Antandrus (talk) 00:53, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Some years ago I used to check the Korean Central News Agency almost daily to appreciate its prose style. One writer really liked the word "canter," presumably assuming it to be a word in daily use in the West. "Let us canter toward victory while we cherish the memory of the Great Leader" was in at least weekly use. Acroterion (talk) 01:13, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

This is just awesome. The "gargle" part is funny, but what is really hilarious is there are supposedly Wikipedia "authorities". XD! - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:08, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Or the idea that posting your rant on the talk page of the person you're angry with will get the attention of the authorities. But they don't know probably what is required to actually carry out what they are requesting. It's also worth noting that the edits to Sulaiman Al-Fahim they are upset about occurred in June 2013. That's quite a delayed reaction. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:23, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

It's Jageshwar (talk · contribs) who appears to have some kind of axe to grind with al Fahim and some Italians associated with a program to use Spirulina (dietary supplement). They've been active for a couple of weeks recently, following about six months of socking in 2013. Acroterion (talk) 01:36, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

@NH: Three feet of snow here, I think you've got it a little worse. I had to shovel paths through the snow for the dogs - and they're 120 lb each. I still haven't gotten to the end of the driveway, but the road is plowed. It's just that the plowed snowbank is 5' high. Let us canter to a snow-plowed future together! Acroterion (talk) 01:19, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Acroterion: About three here too. It was up to my waist about 3:30p (and I'm 5'9") when I attempted to walk to the store. I didn't make it far.

Dad checked with a tape measurer about 10:30p, when he let the dog out, and it was between 34" and 36" depending on where he checked in the yard. We have a 10 pound, 3/4 Shih Tzu, 1/4 Pomeranian (110% bad) named Dozer (as in Bulldozer). He had fun living up to his name dozin' through the snow in the backyard. :)

Unfortunately, you will be cantering much sooner than I will. We really are the last street to be plowed. I'm not kidding. Doesn't matter if it's one inch or one foot, we are always the very last street to be plowed and I live about a 1/4 of a mile from a VDOT Center. :) Stay safe, stay warm, and canter on! :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:34, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Puppeteer & his Socks

Hello Acreterion - Thank you for reverting our last sock's vandalism at Vel d'Hiv Roundup. However, I believe that the "attach/link" to his SockpuppetMeister should be mentioned, as BLueUndigo2 is one of the many socks of [4] who has been at work as a vandal for many months. I believe there is a file on him with his many sock names, and it should be kept updated in order not to lose track of Who is Who in the Vandal World.

Best regards, --Blue Indigo (talk) 15:10, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

I mentioned you gratefully at WP:ANI#Repeated reverts by Aubmn socks as having blocked previous socks. NebY (talk) 19:17, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Pulling a Beyoncé

Beyoncé's surprise release of her fifth album created a Harvard study and reconstruction of global music releases, as well as broke numerous records and inspired well known musicians to release the exact same way. Why am I not able to create a Wikipedia page about it? --Gaknowitall

Because you've clearly coined the phrase and are trying to promote it. You've also created an article composed almost entirely of promotional quotes. At most (and only if the phrase actually is notable and can so proven) it merits a line in the article on the album. Acroterion (talk) 04:22, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

A simple Google search of "pulling a Beyoncé" is more than enough creditable sources to confirm I did not "coin the phrase".

Lost in the clutter of praise it appears that several sources have used the term. See your talkpage for advice, though, it's not an excuse to create a quotefarm that leaves encyclopedia readers bludgeoned by the subject's magnificence. Write it in a sandbox and then we can talk. Acroterion (talk) 04:32, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXVIII, January 2016

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D on Jefferson Davis; Hawkeye7 on Australia's war in Vietnam Op-ed: TomStar81 discusses British World War I conscription Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:23, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Bambifan101

Regarding the page you just deleted ("Bambifan102"), I have reason to believe that the creator is a sock of Bambifan101. GAB^Hello! 01:23, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

So do I. That's why I blocked them. Let me know if they pop up again, thanks for the note. Acroterion (talk) 01:25, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Message

Apparently intended for you. [5] General Ization ^Talk 03:55, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Yeah. We don't have to block the world's IPs, just Brazil's. Meh. It's way easier to block people than it is to get a new IP all the time, so the expenditure of effort is a bit asymmetrical, and we end up collecting data points. Acroterion (talk) 03:57, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

And another. [6] General Ization ^Talk 03:59, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

[7] General Ization ^Talk 04:02, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

AFC U-23 Championship

Hello, there is no content dispute between us. I see it very unjust to not block this user when he clearly breached the three-revert rule on AFC U-23 Championship after reverting 4 times.--Opdire657 (talk) 18:22, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Protection is an alternative to blocking both of you. Neither of you has attempted a civil discussion. If you use the talkpage and agree on the edits the protection can be lifted. Acroterion (talk) 18:24, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Ok, what if I does not know the reason behind the edit war he started. While other users can freely edit AFC U-23 Championship and 2016 AFC U-23 Championship without any disturbances by Boyconga278.--Opdire657 (talk) 18:29, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

What part of "use the talkpage to discuss your edits" did you miss? If the other editor refuses to provide justification for edits, that would affect the resolution. You don't know until you try. In the meantime you're fighting about formatting, which is particularly tiresome. Acroterion (talk) 18:32, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I saw the article you have just stepped on my first visit and where vandalism should not surprise me you're updating just conflicts of two articles, I disturb you post embarrassing too! Boyconga278 (talk) 18:34, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Last warning. I will block you if you claim vandalism again. Your ability to work in English appears to be part of the problem, the message above makes no sense in English. Acroterion (talk) 18:35, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

I'll check in after a few hours have elapsed to see what progress has been made and proceed accordingly. Acroterion (talk) 18:46, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

You should probably be made aware of this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Boyconga278_and_competence --Tarage (talk) 22:20, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

loz

man... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iliev2 (talk • contribs) 04:49, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Stop attacking me

Don't know who you are but your pestering is massively unwelcome. Stop. 82.151.49.225 (talk) 22:34, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm an administrator, and I see someone who's having a tantrum. Please stop picking fights with everybody. Acroterion (talk) 22:36, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Look elsewhere. Your imagination is playing tricks on you. 82.151.49.225 (talk) 22:39, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

As I mentioned, some time away from the keyboard contemplating something pleasant may be in order, rather than pursuing what is starting to look like a vendetta. Someone is always wrong on the Internet, and it's not worth all the bluster. Acroterion (talk) 22:41, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Eruption of Mount Vesuvius in 79

What's the point of removing their name if in your edit summary it says the users name anyway? Anarchyte (work | talk) 04:12, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Good point. The tools we have aren't quite what we'd like them to be. Acroterion (talk) 04:13, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi

Hello. I want see Ottoman Empire newspapers but i can't see category for Ottoman Newspapers. So, can you make a template and category for this?

(I have a pic for template:1)

78.184.45.244 (talk) 04:14, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

I think you'll have to work your way up the category tree farther. Use a similar topic where such a structure already exists as a prototype and then descend from Category:Newspapers and Category:Ottoman Empire to get there. It's easy if you can find equivalents as models. Acroterion (talk) 04:17, 31 January 2016 (UTC)her. You'll have to

I have not permission for start new template. 78.184.45.244 (talk) 04:27, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

IPs can't start new templates. Please register an account and make edits in other areas for a while to get autoconfirmed status so you can, because I can't make a template for you without knowing what you want there, and I'm not good at templates anyway. Acroterion (talk) 04:35, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sock

Might want to take a look at this, I don't entirely understand what's going on. Thanks, GAB^Hello! 01:48, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Whatever is going on, it's not helping the encyclopedia. Acroterion (talk) 01:55, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Possibly another. GAB^Hello! 21:14, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Page deletion help

Hello,

I am writing in regards the page deletion of Arlon Graphics and would like to know how to retrieve the information I contributed back. Could you please (specifically) tell me how I can get this article back on wikipedia? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AFlex 200 (talk • contribs) 00:33, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

I can put the deleted content in a sandbox in your userspace for you to develop. For it to become an article you will need to provide two or three examples of in-depth coverage in major independent media that provide appropriate third-party sourcing and evidence of notability. See WP:CORP for notability guidelines for companies. Acroterion (talk) 04:06, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes could you please do so? Also, could you please provide examples I can see so I know exactly what to look for when I recreate my article? Thank you. --AFlex 200 (talk) 19:32, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

86.124.250.110

FYI - 86.124.250.110 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) just spawned this fella. I've blocked it, don't know if you want to re-evaluate your original block. Best, m.o.p 02:23, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

I suppose I could scale them back to a couple of hours, but given the absence of any previous activity I'll, let them run their course. Acroterion (talk) 04:00, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Deletion of page

Hello,

I submitted a contestation but it was already deleted. Could you consider my reason? The name of the page was ChaiChalk 02:45, 6 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashrafhameed13 (talk • contribs) 02:43, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

The article did not make an assertion that the subject was notable. See WP:ORG for guidelines on notability for companies. The youlinmagazine article is a good start, as is the Mid-Day. I think there is some potential there, but it will need to be written to reflect the coverage it has received. Because I think you've got some decent sourcing I'm going to restore it, but it will still need some work to sustain notability - the organization's only a month old. Acroterion (talk) 02:53, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Acroterion, thank you so much for restoring it. I admit, I am new to this. But I really want to include my national heroes, whatever forms they come in, to be on Wikipedia. I will re-write the whole thing in a way where it is more aligned with Wikipedia's guidelines. I admit, that a certain bias will naturally sift so I will make a vigilant attempt to be more neutral in order to sustain notability. The company officially launched in October 2015, and has been around as far as August. While I make no claim that it is a very old company, it is doing a significant amount of work which is driving a significant amount of social impact. Thank you for restoring it. I shall be returning soon and working on the page. In the meanwhile, if you have any ideas about how I can re-write it, it would be much appreciated.

Thanks Ashrafhameed13 (talk) 03:05, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

I made a couple of technical adjustments and I'll make a couple of others. You should sift the references to use only the best, and use them to directly support the content of the article. A discussion of how the organization is viewed by independent media would help with notability. I don't really see much promotional language. Acroterion (talk) 03:09, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Deoxyrebornicleic

It's back again, and only marginally improved from when you speedied it. Meters (talk) 22:50, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Never mind, I see you got it. Meters (talk) 22:50, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

<ec> Already gone and salted. There are a mass of meatpuppets who may need to be dealt with. I'm getting ready to go to the airport, so I doubt I'll be able to give it much more attention. Acroterion (talk) 22:52, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

tumblr user deoxyrebornicleic allegedly hasn't sleep in over two weeks. that's why people have been editing the randy gardner page since their fans believe they are telling the truth. i don't know what to believe actually. but if it's true, it's stupid of them to not make a doctor visit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.84.47.229 (talk) 00:25, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Would this be a viable reason to delete an edit from the history?

On Clan, an I.P. user made an edit where they added an external link to an affiliate program. I reverted the edit but is this a good enough reason to completely delete that edit? If so, could you do it? I don't know where to request something like this. Anarchyte (work | talk) 07:15, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

In my opinion, yes, and I've done so. Affiliate spam is particularly disruptive and should be removed aggressively, at least as far as I'm concerned. Acroterion (talk) 13:05, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Your deletion of my Wiki post "Kingdom of Reddosia"

(This probably isn't the correct place to discuss this, but I'm new here, sorry. You deleted my recent wikipedia entry entitled "Kingdom of Reddosia" labeling it a blatant hoax. Although Reddosia is hardly known of, even throughout Western France, that does not mean it did not exist. It was a real fiefdom existing in late medieval France. Please restore my page. Sorry that it's pretty empty, I just don't have sources ready to cite at this moment, so I couldn't fill that much of it out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awgreen1 (talk • contribs) 04:44, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Considering it got zero results via Google and hasn't appeared anywhere in French history until now, and given your previous editing history, it's best to keep it deleted. Provide a verifiable source and I'll reconsider. Acroterion (talk) 04:46, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Blocked page

Hello,

Can you unblock my page. At least you ought to have given me a chance to edit the page before deletion — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tolulope Sina-Olulana (talk • contribs) 23:10, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Please do not use Wikipedia for promotion, and please confine your edits to a single account. Acroterion (talk) 23:16, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thanks for blocking my favorite detractor. It's a shame people can't handle dissent, especially over something so trivial, with more maturity. --Drmargi (talk) 02:12, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

The lower the stakes, the higher the dudgeon. I've seen it again and again in volunteer organizations. It'd never be tolerated where lives or real money are at stake. Acroterion (talk) 02:14, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Very true. I've never quite gotten my head around what dudgeon is, but it's a very vivid word. --Drmargi (talk) 08:08, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

"Self-righteous outrage" seems to me to be a good summary. I like dudgeon better, it has a nice punch. "Bathos" is another good one. Acroterion (talk) 12:23, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

That's about what I thought. It fits the description of Mr. Collins after Elizabth refuses him in Pride and Prejudice. Love bathos, along with bloviating. Nothing like a good explosive initial b to drive home a point! --Drmargi (talk) 08:15, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Happy President's day

I just wanted to say Happy President's day! JakeZX (talk) 03:08, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

What about Toodlesbrasil

You blocked Quagmire2177 for using multiple accounts but forgot the other one? ⁓ Hello71 17:49, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Often we leave the master account alone in case they learn from their experience, but I thought they were already blocked. I'll look at them more closely. Acroterion (talk) 18:05, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Talk:KSI (entertainer)

Hi, I believe an edit violated the WP:BLP guidelines, adding offensive material about the subject to the talk page of KSI (entertainer). Can you please remove the history? I keep asking you to remove it from the history because I know nobody else who has the power, do all admins have this ability? Anarchyte (work | talk) 09:35, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Done. Any admin can remove individual entries from the history. Acroterion (talk) 12:51, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Requesting for Article Re-creation

Hi,

You deleted an article in April 2015 named as "Stuart Matthew (HC)", I'm recreating that article and I want that you please approve it! Cause the singer is already hand-picked by MTV as an Artist and he is now nominated for Best Pop Artist in Radio City Freedom Awards.

Thank You — Preceding unsigned comment added by JBLsasd (talk • contribs) 12:30, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

It looks more or less OK in general apart from a lack of sufficient sourcing and the presence (which I've removed) of inappropriate spammy links to videos. Notability is asserted, but barely (what does hand-picked mean? Are other artists not "hand-picked"?) Admins don't "approve" anything, nor does my review mean it must stay. It needs appropriate third-party sources. Also, the parenthetical HC is cryptic, we would normaly just use the plain name or HC unless it's specifically part of the persona. Acroterion (talk) 12:59, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Another one

Hello A. This This is finger lickin good (talk · contribs) just popped up on the Ref Desk/Science. Thanks for all that you are doing to prevent this. MarnetteD|Talk 20:19, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

@MarnetteD: Check out WP:SPI/Soft skin EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:23, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Or Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Soft_skin... EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:25, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks EvergreenFir. I was aware of the problem but I did not know who it started with. I've added the SPI to my watchlist so I can add new ones there in the future. MarnetteD|Talk 20:28, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Just learned of it last night myself. Very persistent one it seems. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:30, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Your link - well the second one :-) - lead me to this Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Ref Desk Antisemitic Troll. You might have already seen it but I wanted to mention it in case you hadn't. Thanks again to you both. MarnetteD|Talk 20:33, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Zweinstein Space

Was that a snow delete? Adam9007 (talk) 01:52, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

No, just a deletion with a custom rationale. Acroterion (talk) 01:54, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

It didn't technically meet any speedy criteria though did it? Possibly A11 but I'm not sure. Adam9007 (talk) 02:41, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

No, it was an IAR deletion of a personal essay in article space. We do that from time to time (sparingly) as appropriate. It was, of course, made up (I checked), so A11 would have worked. Acroterion (talk) 02:44, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 February 2016

Is it possible to delete all user revisions of user Enzu360 in Magic (paranormal)? I made a mistake. Enzu360 (talk) 07:46, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I've addressed it, even contacted oversight. I'm still having trouble figuring out why someone would post that information in an summary-only edit, but it's been addressed. Ian.thomson (talk) 08:01, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

User:Anarchyte

Can you please delete the edits by Jake200503 on my user page? I have asked him why he's mad and I'm waiting on a response. Anarchyte (work | talk) 05:38, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

I've deleted the disruptive comments, though it's pretty routine abuse and only marginally (at best) qualifies for deletion. I would not revdel it on a talkpage. Acroterion (talk) 12:32, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Cupid Carries a Gun

Semi-protect the page. Persistent edit warring and IP vandalism. 123.136.107.40 (talk) 05:55, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

2high4life

Im curious how we can document a companys history, 2high4life AND its huge presence on social media.

You deleted 2high4life

Bradley James Smith (talk) 16:47, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Since Wikipedia bases its guidelines for notability on coverage in major media independent of the source, then coverage in such media will be vital, not only for notability, but also to provide sourcing and verifiability in accordance with policy. Please review WP:WEB, WP:RS and WP:V for more, and please remember that Wikipedia is not a social media platform or a means of promotion. Acroterion (talk) 18:02, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXIX, February 2016

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-Class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on nuclear weapons in Britain and Nick-D on Australia's war in the Pacific Op-ed: TomStar81 looks at the Kamurun Campaign of 1914–16 Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:14, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Please follow Wiki-etiquette and review the Cosmological Arguement talk page before undoing additions. "Poor wording" is valid, and certainly not a reason for exclusion; the language is comprehensible. Or improveme the entry. Undo your revision. GESICC (talk) 15:53, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Cosmological argument

Talk page: The one reference supports the entry, as do the state of the art in physics, it is not "tangential." Theory does not contradict observation, by any standard. "Dubious" requires justification. Poorly written suggests improper grammer or language. Please provide solid rationale for your "one-word," claims or undo revision. Thank you. GESICC (talk) 16:11, 27 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GESICC (talk • contribs)

Unframboise

Thanks for the revert on my talk page. I first told him to stay off in August 2015, but he won't honor my request. I've been through more accusations and personal attacks from him recently. Anything you can do to get him to back off would be appreciated. Two previous blocks have had zero effect on his behavior. It's just getting worse. --Drmargi (talk) 03:14, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Not to be too big a nuisance, but I wanted to draw your attention to the following comment, which reads to me as continuing to make accusations, with the addition of nationalism: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ACSI%3A_Crime_Scene_Investigation&type=revision&diff=707380216&oldid=707379540. This is typical; he won't let go, even after being warned, and will continue to push. --Drmargi (talk) 15:10, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

You literally stated because I don't live in America I can't comment on what goes into a CSI article. Nationalism is defined as "an extreme form of patriotism marked by a feeling of superiority over other countries". Am I missing something? --Unframboise (talk) 15:13, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

OMG, I said nothing of the sort. I said I was in the U.S. and had seen a broadcast you insisted was one length, but that was in actuality another. That's all. Just once, try to WP:AGF, as you've been asked to do time and again, and try not to put the worst possible spin on anything that doesn't conform with your views. --Drmargi (talk) 15:18, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

This is not the first time this has happened [8]. Another user also felt that Drmargi was using my being from the UK as reason to discount my views, and equally found it insulting. That user took it to ANI [9]. --Unframboise (talk) 15:31, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Oh, and again [10] --Unframboise (talk) 15:34, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

After last night's incident, I decided to note how Drmargi has been going out of her way to force interaction between us by editing the pages I contribute to immediately after I have edited them. Can something be done about this? Examples include:

• I edited Henry Andrews at 01:55 on Feb. 28., Drmargi then edited the page at 01:04 that same day. This is the first and only time she had edited up until this point ([11]). Drmargi has since continued to edit only moments after I have (most recently, I edited at 19:09, she edited at 19:19)
• I edited Greg Sanders at 00:23 on Feb. 28., Drmargi then edited the page at 01:16 that same day. This her first edit to the page in six months ([12]). Drmargi has since continued to edit only moments after I have (most recently, I edited at 02:19, she edited at 02:27)
• I edited David Hodges at 01:27 on Feb. 28., Drmargi then edited the page at 01:57 that same day. This her first edit to the page in six months ([13]). Drmargi has since continued to edit only moments after I have (most recently, I edited at 01:57, she edited at 02:13)
• I edited Morgan Brody at 00:40 on Feb. 28., Drmargi then edited the page at 01:47 that same day. This her first edit to the page in six months ([14])
• I edited David Phillips at 01:30 on Feb. 28., Drmargi then edited the page at 01:32 that same day. This her first edit to the page in six months ([15]). Drmargi has since continued to edit only moments after I have (most recently, I edited at 01:40, she edited at 01:45)
• I edited Jim Brass at 00:31 on Feb. 28., Drmargi then edited the page at 01:15 that same day. This her first ever edit to that page ([16])
• I edited Sara Sidle at 23:05 on Feb. 27., Drmargi then edited the page at 00:03 the following day. This her first edit to the page in six months (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sara_Sidle&offset=&limit=500&action=history).
• I edited Gil Grissom at 21:26 on Feb. 27., Drmargi then edited the page at 23:56 that same day. This her first edit to the page in six months (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gil_Grissom&offset=&limit=500&action=history).
• I edited Dana Scully, specifically re: her qualifications, at 20:08 on Feb. 25., Drmargi edited to a similar end three days later. While less proof than other articles listed, it should be noted that this is the only edit made by the user to the page, ever. ([17])

I'd like to stress that my issue isn't with the users edits, but with how she seems to be patrolling my contributions (some of these edits are only minutes apart). This is begging for some sort of negative interaction, and then she seems to play Drmartyr. --Unframboise (talk) 20:00, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

1) Stop calling names.

2) I agree that Drmargi should resist the urge to edit right after you've edited something, whether it's right, wrong or indifferent. Please do likewise.

3) As with the spurious "racism" accusation, please drop the "nationalism." Parochialism it may be, but not nationalism.

4) I think you both need to avoid CSI-related topics for a while and let other editors work there. The ping-pong match isn't helping the articles. Acroterion (talk) 02:14, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Edit war at Duck family (Disney), again

Hi, Acroterion. Unfortunately, after the page protection of Duck family (Disney) expired on 13 February, the ip continued to re-add the deleted text again without discussing it on the talk page or explaining the edit in the summary: I already had to revert it three times. --Newblackwhite (talk) 21:35, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

I've blocked the IP for three months. It appears to be stable, so that should take care of the problem for a while. Acroterion (talk) 02:17, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunately the block didn't work, as it's a dynamic ip, so I had to rollback him another time. --Newblackwhite (talk) 12:31, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Update: since my last message I had to do other two reverts. --Newblackwhite (talk) 08:06, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

My Page

Hello, why have you removed our company page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.254.27.97 (talk) 03:35, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Because it does not appear to meet Wikipedia's guidelines for the inclusion of corporations in a global encyclopedia. See WP:CORP for those standards, It was also substantially promotional in nature. Since you mention "our" company, please also review WP:COI for advice on editing with a conflict of interest. Acroterion (talk) 03:45, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Honestly, I wasn't aware of these rules. Now that I know, I would like to request you to please unblock my account. I have posted it where you have requested too.

Unblocked - sorry, I missed your last post on your talkpage. Acroterion (talk) 12:46, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey I Had A Few Questions!!!

Please Delete This Message After Replying or Seeing This Message!!!

I'm Sorry I Am New To This Wikipedia!!! I Did Not Know That That Was The Rule!! I Just Was Creating This Account!!! This Is The First Time To Know I Was Creating An Illegal Page!!! And I Never Read The Agreement!!! I'm Sorry I Was Going To Write If This Is Illegal Don't Report Me, Please Let Me Know So I Can Delete It!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by UnknownUser1945802335 (talk • contribs) 02:13, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Don't create articles that disparage people or which allege criminal activity. Please read the biographies of living persons policy. Wikipedia isn't a place where you can post anything you want. Acroterion (talk) 02:16, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

I Promise It Wan't Happen Again. Is This A Warning Or Am I Going To Have To Delete My Account : UnknownUser1945802335

Just don't do that again and you're fine. Happy editing! Acroterion (talk) 02:28, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia email re Newspapers.com signup

Hello, Acroterion. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

HazelAB (talk) 15:12, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Nessie

Thanks for letting me know. Where exactly is the talk page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gigantopithecusman (talk • contribs) 18:13, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

In this case, it's at Talk:Loch Ness Monster. Please take the concerns of other editors seriously. Acroterion (talk) 18:15, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

IP:82.2.223.50

Hello Acroterion and trust you are well. Could I please bring to your attention the activities of 82.2.223.50 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) on The Daily Telegraph and The Guardian articles. This IP keeps changing the Political alignment of these newspapers without any new references our sources. I have asked that they stop, or give reliable sources, but this has been ignored and they have again reverted a third time. This seems to be a one-issue account, with no knowledge of Wikipedia conventions. Do you think a short block would be in order? Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 22:58, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Since they haven't edited after your last warning, I'll keep an eye on them. Acroterion (talk) 03:21, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks for your help. Best, David, David J Johnson (talk) 10:13, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello Acroterion, regret to say the same IP has again made the same "edit", only to be reversed yet again by another editor that makes four reverts by this IP in 24 Hours - without any reason at all and a refusal to state any reason either on the article or Talk page. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 16:05, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

And yet again; making five reverts, without reason, in the last day. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 16:36, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Even more unreferenced edits. This IP seem to be suggesting that The Daily Telegraph is "right wing" Conservative, without any references. No-one denies that this a Conservative newspaper and there is a reliable source for this. However, these "edits" appear to have a political agenda, rather than Wikipedia neutral point of view, and no notice is taken of editors advice and warnings. Best, David, David J Johnson (talk) 16:59, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Please help me

A user named ClueBot NG reverted my edits on the chupacabra page, deleting an important chupacabra sighting. Please help me deal with this. Gigantopithecusman (talk) 08:35, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

You're reverting an anti-vandal bot. While your edit wasn't, strictly speaking, vandalism, it was inappropriate poorly sourced commentary. Few TV shows of the kind you mention meet Wikipedia's reliable sourcing policy. See the reliable sourcing policy and the verifiability policy. Please stop adding your own thoughts to Wikipedia. Acroterion (talk) 11:54, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks I will never, ever do It again, but how can I edit articles without some robot reporting me as a vandal? Gigantopithecusman (talk) 13:11, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

The bot flagged common phrases and terms used by new editors who have added similar content to articles like that. You should use the article talkpage to propose appropriately sourced edits, and gain a consensus of other users that your edits will improve the article. You are editing an encyclopedia, and current Wikipedia standards expect editors to sourcing similar to that expected in collegiate study. That standard is enforced to varying degrees: medical articles expect citations to college post-graduate levels, articles on popular culture have to make do with less. Pseudoscience topics such as the ones you've been editing are watched closely, as they attract unfortunately enthusiasts who tend to be lax with sourcing and attribution. Acroterion (talk) 17:13, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Gods of War MC

You deleted the page, I followed the instructions & went to click the contest button.. but there is no button as it had already been all removed..

I do contest this!!..

I've donate funds to Wikipedia in the past, glad I am not any more with this sort of behaviour!!

JamesT5723 (talk) 07:28, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

please contact me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JamesT5723 (talk • contribs) 07:23, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

If you have sources in major independent media that support the content of the article and which verify that the club is notable, you are welcome to re-create the content. If you wish, I will place the deleted content into a sandbox in your userspace for you to develo with sourcing. Acroterion (talk) 12:32, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Please put it in my sandbox.. I still have an issue, there are pages for God of war or gods of war for all things.. such as a computer game.. how are these any more specifically notable than this MC.. In fact "Gods of War Live" just has a 1 line entry & the list of songs on the CD, that's it!!.. how is this 1 line saying when it was released Notable!!!

This MC is a Military based one, run BY Military FOR Military, & uses a Military structure & titleing compaired to other MC's who use a traditional structure & that title.. that ALONE makes it notable & unique!!!

JamesT5723 (talk) 08:37, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Question

How can I create a new article? And can I create one on the Pukehina Predator?Gigantopithecusman (talk) 13:15, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

You figured it out, but you ignored the extensive warnings I posted on your talkpage about copyright violations. If you do that again, you can expect to be blocked. Please use sources to write an encyclopedic article in your own words in accordance with Wikipedia policy, using the sources as references. This is something you'll need to learn how to do anyway for college. But first you need to read and understand what we've posted for you on your userpage. You may also want to read some advice on your first article. Acroterion (talk) 18:53, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

SharkSSL Advert Entire Page Tag

Reference: The advert tag is for articles that are directly trying to sell a product to our readers. Don't add this tag simply because the material in the article shows a company or a product in an overall positive light or because it provides an encyclopedic summary of a product's features.

Please be more specific regarding where edits are needed given I spent an extreme amount of time using outside references to validate each statement on the page. Likewise I took time to review all SSL/TLS implementations as referenced at Comparison of TLS implementations.

I'm new to Wikipedia and appreciate any guidance you can offer. If the marking is in haste please consider to remove it.

Thanks Sorisen Sorisen (talk) 03:42, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

The tag is there because the article is written in a strongly promotional tone. It is just short of deletable advertisement. Please edit the article for neutrality and avoidance of promotion. If you have a conflict of interest in this matter it may be difficult for you to achieve sufficient editorial distance from the subject, and you must declare such a conflict. See WP:COI for best practices in such instances. I note that another experienced editor has made substantial changes to make the article more neutral in character. Acroterion (talk) 03:46, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

I've trimmed and consolidated some more of the article so that it no longer reads as a marketing release, or at least is less so. Having done that, I've removed the advertising tag. Please remember that even a hint of promotion is regarded with extreme disfavor, and articles that talk in superlatives of "industry-leading products" attract attention and edits. Acroterion (talk) 04:12, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your help. I really found new enjoyment creating this page and hope to make additional pages in the future (with the new advise and without the mistakes), I appreciate the time you took to help modify. Sorisen (talk) 04:26, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Happy to help. It could do with more rewriting. I tried to scale back the extensive repetition of gthe product name, though there are now too many sentences that start with "it." You might want to look at converting the references from base URLs to standard reference formatting. Acroterion (talk)

Added Permission the the Image File you marked for deletion. Are you able to now remove the deletion request? Sorisen (talk) 00:11, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for this. Xender Lourdes (talk) 04:35, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. If I had known copyright would be THAT serious, I would have written it in my own words. Can I create Pukehina Predator again? If you have any problems with it, or if there is copyright, please block me for a month Gigantopithecusman (talk) 14:58, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Pukehina Predator prototype: In August, 2014, a terrifying creature washed up on Pukehina Beach, fueling speculation about sea monsters, Mesozoic marine reptiles in particular. The carcass was found by a group of tourists equipped with four wheelers, who had come to the beach to relax, and were enjoying the idyllic view, until one eagle-eyed women spotted the giant sea monster lying in the foreground.

According to a few eyewitnesses, one of which posted a video of the terrifying creature, the sea monster had two rudimentary flippers, terrifying, crooked teeth, and a vaguely reptile shape. They could not positively identify the creature, as the tail was clearly dissected by something, but before they requested help on Youtube, they made intelligent guesses of the genus of the creature, based solely on the head and teeth, which both were extremely detailed.

One of the witnesses posted a video of the monster on Youtube, requesting help with identification and providing useful information, which were extremely detailed.

The comments suggested anything from a "Saltwater crocodile" to a "Giant moray eel" Despite that, a marine mammal expert, Anton van Halden, after inspecting all the news and photographs, suggested that the Pukehina Predator might actually be a mutilated orca, based on the structure of the teeth, which actually were similar in shape, but slightly bigger in size, and were buried down more into the jaws.

Also an interesting fact is that during one moment of the video, the jaws of the fearsome predator were moving! Of course, that easily could have been a hoax, but if genuine, then that means that a small part of the brain was still alive, thus suggesting that a proper DNA analysis would positively identify the creature, though the monster was lost the day after the discovery.

What follows is a list of the two best candidates for the Pukehina Predator: 1) Killer Whale, based on an intelligent guess of Anton van Halden 2) Tylosaurus Proriger, based on the structure of the jaw and teeth, and also the fact that they were around 12 meters, and the Pukehina Predator had no tail, makes this Cretaceous predator a strong possibility.

I wrote this myself. Please tell me if this is acceptable according to Wikipedia's Rules Gigantopithecusman (talk) 18:21, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Is it Ok if I use this particular image in Boletus Edulis? I took it with a Canon PowerShot in August 2013, in a forest near Solnechnogorsk, Russia

Gigantopithecusman (talk) 17:36, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Question

Just curious, what other accounts has this user been socking with? - ^theWOLFchild 20:06, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Moroccann (talk · contribs) looks likely, I didn't go much past that spate of disruption last fall to see what others there might be. I appreciate you keeping an eye on these articles, it can get pretty aggravating to deal with people like 109.x. Acroterion (talk) 20:23, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Dog breed vandal

Thanks for the block. I'm tempted to protect a couple of the articles, but I don't know if there's any point. Doug Weller talk 20:48, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Thank you for removing the rant of ill will on my talk page, and have something chocolatey to counter the hate. bonadea contributions talk 12:19, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks

For the block of LLK. I had opened a SPI report at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Starship9000 based on this edit. But I note that you blocked this one as a sock of User:Catcreekcitycouncil. Do you think I move my SPI there? Thanks for your time. MarnetteD|Talk 01:09, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

No, its SS9000 trolling, pretending to be CCCC. I realized that after I went through their other edits. Acroterion (talk) 02:18, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. GAB has posted an item based on their research here that may shed some light on things. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 02:28, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Well dang. I'm going to have to set aside a couple of hours to sort through all that, preferably with a glass of whiskey. A grand unified theory of Wikipedia trolls! Acroterion (talk) 02:34, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

What a good idea. There are lots of delicious ones to chose from. This one might be a good choice considering that today/tomorrow is St Pat's. Sláinte. MarnetteD|Talk 03:13, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

It goes without saying that the whiskey will be Irish, which I prefer anyway. Sláinte indeed! Acroterion (talk) 11:28, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm dissapointed

I understand gherkaboils are not a common occurrence in much of the modern world, but I urge you to repeal your deletion of my article. It only served to help people — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gherkaman (talk • contribs) 00:00, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Recreation of page you deleted

Hi, deletion log shows you previously removed this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aragon_Research, it's been recreated, I speedied it a few hours ago. Besides the notability issue, there's a WP:COI problem (notes on talk page), was hoping you could help. Thanks! JamesG5 (talk) 17:39, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the back up today. I'm trying to keep as much distance between myself and the other user, which isn't always easy. It's good to know there are a couple watchful eyes out there. --Drmargi (talk) 20:43, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

No you're not. You've been (once again) editing and reverting pages straight after I do - edits I made in accordance with your arguments on co-productions ([18], [19]), you've been using the word "nationalism" to describe Brits who object to your edits, a word I was warned against using due to its negative connotations - a warning you advocated [20]. I know the old boys club looks out for its own, but this needs to stop. You're purposely - yet subtly - confrontational, just niggling users enough to incite retaliation, and then you hide behind phrases like "I'm trying to keep as much distance". You direct users towards talk pages, such as with the "Immortality" debate over at CSI, [21], then drop out of discussions, and claim your edit is the status quo until all parties have agreed (an impossibility, clearly, since you refuse to discuss). And then, when I ask you a simple question re: the justification for co-productions, you kick up a fuss and talk about user page bans. What am I missing!? --Unframboise (talk) 23:13, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Provide diffs if you think you're being followed. I'm responding to the clear instance of you (twice) posting on a talkpage you've been asked to avoid.

I note in passing that the two diffs you did provide above indicate an odd insistence on your part that 8% of something is significant enough to make the thing a joint effort. This is an encyclopedia that provides broad summaries of subjects: insisting that a 92-8 split is significant is an excessively fine distinction and an inappropriate synthesis against apparent facts.

Finally, I'll observe that requests to avoid your talkpage don't preclude administrators from taking necessary actions and making appropriate notifications as circumstances demand. You can't avoid criticism or administrative actions by claiming that your talkpage is off limits.

I'm going to be away for at least a day on a visit to an out-of-town project site. I won't be available to respond to any issues, except as occasion permits. Acroterion (talk) 00:48, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Ricardo Cabello deleted

hi i was still working on Ricardo Cabello article who is the programmer of Three.js before it was deleted and qp2qp article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarek1984 (talk • —Preceding undated comment added 02:22, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

page deletion: Hydeblanc Diamonds

The page that you have deleted was not promotional but simply summarize a company's board and its philosophy. No other reference was written. In addition the pages of wikipedia does not serve to any promotions but only to inform. Unfortunately promotional pages are there and they are very different from the one I published myself. If you want an example, ask, and I will give you what are the promotional pages. Maybe wikipedia is not as free as it claims to be, if someone really does promotion without limits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamas77 (talk • contribs) 11:19, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Regarding IXL Innovation Olympics

HI Acrotarion! Thanks for your feedback on IXL Innovation Olympics. Based on that, I would like to ask for your help. Could you tell me what would make article about IXL Innovation Olympics to be considered as notable one? As from my perspective, that is a great opportunity for many students from all over the world to know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.30.112.37 (talk) 18:42, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Subjects become sufficiently notable for inclusion on Wikipedia if they have received substantial notice in major independent media. In other words, subjects are notable if people outside Wikipedia have found the subject notable. You'l need press coverage to establish notability here. Wikipedia isn't a vehicle for promoting events or causes that haven't been documented elsewhere. Acroterion (talk) 02:45, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXX, March 2016

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-Class content Book review: Hawkeye7 discusses a Panzer general and a "mercenary mum" Op-ed: TomStar81 on the terrible battles of 1916 Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:15, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Your message is wrong

I did not add wrong information. I corrected wrong information in the article. You need to change it back to my edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.206.169.70 (talk) 00:01, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Schneerson died in 1994, he didn't "disappear." Acroterion (talk) 00:03, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

IXL Innovation Olympics

Hi Acroterion. Thank you for the explanation on IXL Innovation Olympics notability. We are referring to variety of sources now to make IXL Innovation Olympics wikipedia article notable and credible. The question is, which sources are more relevant: links to wikipedia articles or external articles? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julijakaminskaite (talk • contribs) 15:10, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Links to Wikipedia have no value for establishing notability and can't be used for references. In-depth coverage in major news outlets would be best. Acroterion (talk) 00:46, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

IXL Innovation Olympics - continued

Thanks Acroterion! Working on getting notable sources. What are the other recommendations in terms of keeping the article at Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julijakaminskaite (talk • contribs) 21:17, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

New Crop Capital and Good Food Institute pages

Hi,

I created the pages "New Crop Capital" and "The Good Food Institute," both of which you deleted - (A7: No credible indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events): G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement).

I now have several external sources which include credible information about these entities:

The Good Food Institute was prominent in a Memphis Flyer cover story about Memphis Meats and included in a piece for the Daily Mirror (large UK tabloid). It was also profiled in AgFunder News, Food Dive, Latest Vegan News, Clearly Veg, and One Green Planet.

The Wall Street Journal covers New Crop Capital’s investment in Memphis Meats: http://www.wsj.com/articles/sizzling-steaks-may-soon-be-lab-grown-1454302862?mg=id-wsj

Plus the Commercial Appeal: http://www.commercialappeal.com/business/entrepreneurs/futuristic-cultured-meat-takes-on-the-memphis-brand-2be5b44c-94c7-6d89-e053-0100007f2094-369345301.html

I would like to recreate these pages with this new source material and without copyright infringement. Please let me know if this is possible.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackamo1 (talk • contribs) 15:42, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Certainly, as long as you can show by reference to appropriate sources that the subjects are notable, and as long they are written in your words and not in copyrighted language, new articles would be fine. I haven't reviewed the sources you list above: they should provide more than passing mention of the subjects and should substantiate the proposed content. Acroterion (talk) 16:48, 31 March 2016 (UTC)