User talk:C.Fred/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Please block that editor

Hi, first thanks for reverting the trash on my talk page. That editor is a banned editor called SkagitRiverQueen. Would you please block the account already. If you look at the history of my page you will see that she has been harrassing me now for a couple of days. This is the second account she has set up to do this. I don't know what has her harrassing me lately since I haven't been too active but I would appreciate not having her near me. Thanks in advance, --CrohnieGal^Talk 17:36, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

While there was nothing on the surface to link the edits to the banned user, it was pretty clear that the account was editing with the sole purpose of harassing you, so I blocked it as a disruption-only account. I agree that there's probably an agenda behind it, so I've left the suspected sockpuppet tag on the account (but moved it to the user page).

I've added your user talk page to my watchlist—hopefully there won't be any more socks showing up for me to catch their activity, but I'll be keeping an eye out just in case. I also deleted an edit summary that I thought went way over the line. —C.Fred (talk) 17:46, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. I know it's her because this is not the first time she has left this kind of message for me and since my orange bar is lit up, it's probably not the last time either. I don't know what cause this to start up in the past few days, this account is the second one that has left that message to me. Thanks again and I really do appreciate you watching over my talk page now. --CrohnieGal^Talk 17:52, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Question

I am new to wikipedia but added a page in standard format similar to many other pages accepted on wikipedia. For some reason my page was deleted by user: dferg. I don't understand why this occured as the page was informational and was not a spam page. Is is a policy to accept some pages in a verifiable format and not others? I would appreciate any enlightenment you might be able to provide.

````vacuvent1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vacuvent1 (talk • contribs) 17:55, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

New article

Dear C.Fred,

I would like to ask for an advice regarding Innovation Circle Network article. It was deleted several times, mostly for the reason of not being important or being commercially oriented. This is not a commercial organization. Moreover, it is the only organization which helps develop rural areas and youth activities in Baltic region. I would be grateful if you point what did I do wrong, so that I can edit and share information about Innovation Circle with wikipedia readers.

Thank you very for you help. Pavel Cherkasov

P.cherkasov (talk) 18:17, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Total Drama Kids

You have erased my Total Drama Kids Live Action Page. You erased it because there wasn't any info and thought it might be fake. I was going to add more info but my computer froze. So please read the page after I have edited it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TotalDramaFan01 (talk • contribs) 05:29, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

C.Fred

C.Fred, sorry about this - i'm a bit confused - almost none of the information on my page is correct/verifiable - but theres nothing i can cite as a source for the correct information such as my age/birthdate/place, the fact i havent signed a record deal, Chrysalis is not my distributor, and i was never in a band with my brothers etc - should i just remove what is plain incorrect, and just try to provide as much correct info as possible without a source? hope you can help, cheers Jai R. Paul (talk) 06:56, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Woo

That was fast and appropriately done. Good job! — Legolas <sup>(talk2me)</sup> 17:54, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

O'Neal

Understood. Thanks for the explanation. Since I wrote all the content for the website, it would difficult to re-create the same information without an obvious similarity. I'll re-visit the guidelines and see if there may be an acceptable approach. Floridaeta (talk) 22:21, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Zamora

Hi, I have published the artist's biography using my own words without removing facts like "He has released several instrumental albums, or he has published several books", so can you tell me what is the problem now?

Angel2021 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:36, 19 December 2010 (UTC).

Since the comment was also made there, I've replied on your talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 03:39, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Lady Gaga

Administrative intervention is required at the continuous irrelevan additions of a user in the talk page. I had asked a number of times to cease such discussion, and lastly told that I will personally archive it, if such additions are not ceased. Well I did, since my requests fell on deaf ears. However the user in question is reverting me now, and I dnt wanna have a 3RR on this. Can you intervene for sometime Fred? — Legolas <sup>(talk2me)</sup> 07:54, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Tina Brooks (wrestler)

Is there anyway this can be create protected it seems that the same user keeps recreating it.--SteamIron 01:38, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

 Done Tina Brooks (wrestler) has been SALTed, and Jolina2010 (talk · contribs) has been blocked for a week. —C.Fred (talk) 04:19, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Sweet thanks--SteamIron 04:59, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of my first Wiki entry

Hi, I created my article about "Clark Priftis Art" and it was tagged as spam. I retitled the article as it was written about the owner, Ann Clark Priftis. You just marked it as possible spam...why and how do I make this not spam? Do I simply need more citations? Thanks! Baggers98 (talk) 05:56, 21 December 2010 (UTC)Baggers98

Yes, you need more citations and a clear claim for how she's a notable person. See Talk:Ann Clark Priftis. —C.Fred (talk) 05:57, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

In RE:: Baggers98

Hi, I noticed you removed my final vandalism warning from user Baggins98's talk page. Why is that? Thanks! Bped1985 (talk) 06:09, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Rather, user "Baggers98" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bped1985 (talk • contribs) 06:12, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Two reasons. First, it escalated way too quickly, skipping levels 1 and 3, and it appeared that some of the edits were attempts to improve the article and possible edit conflicts as opposed to deliberate removals of the tag with no other editing. Second, because it was, in my opinion, too WP:BITEy of a warning to give to a new account. In this case, I think I guessed right—the user has joined discussion on the talk page and understands what needs to be done to the article—and has left the speedy deletion tag in place. —C.Fred (talk) 06:24, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

I see. I didn't have a problem with it, I just wanted to know the reasoning. I skipped 1 and 3 in order to try and get his attention, however unorthodox it may be. I would not have carried through with reporting him that quickly. But all is good. Thanks for the explanation and cheers to you sir. Bped1985 (talk) 06:30, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

And that's the other thing: level 4 wedges you into the corner of having to follow through with a block (report) on the next offence. Level 3 says a block is a possible outcome and gives some wiggle room. Also, remember that the templates are just standardized text; there's nothing wrong with a custom message like "Please don't remove the tag; if you think the article shouldn't be deleted, put a {{hangon}} tag on the article and explain why on the talk page." —C.Fred (talk) 06:36, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Well lets not kid ourselves here. Another post wouldn't automatically trigger a block report. I would still have an option, even if it does involve bending the rules a tad. I had posted multiple custom messages with the tags, specifying exactly what was done wrong, and he continued to do it again. That gives me no reason to believe that either the lower-level warnings nor the custom messages were doing the job. I needed to get his attention. Furthermore, we both know that a number of repeated speedy deletion removal tags would catch the eye of an Admin. They tend to be very WP:BITEy. And his account most likely would have been blocked. Again, I needed to get his attention before this happened. Bped1985 (talk) 23:07, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

All India Law Students' Association

Can i know the reasons why this page is being removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suresh ttb (talk • contribs) 20:31, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

It isn't. It has a maintenance tag for the formatting to be improved, but it's not currently proposed, nominated, or otherwise tagged for deletion. —C.Fred (talk) 20:34, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. Do suggest me ways to make it better. And i am unable to uplaod any pictures, logos etc. When will i be able to do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suresh ttb (talk • contribs) 20:40, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Any pictures that you have taken personally and are free content may be uploaded at Wikimedia Commons instead of here. There's a delay of about four days before you can upload logos and other non-free content that can't be hosted on Commons to the English Wikipedia. —C.Fred (talk) 20:43, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

why do i see this message after editing : Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{Reflist}} template or a <references/> tag; see the help page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suresh ttb (talk • contribs)

I'm looking into that right now. Probably somebody added a reference after the reflist template. —C.Fred (talk) 20:47, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't currently see the error, so I can't say what's causing it on any changes you're previewing. —C.Fred (talk) 20:48, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

But something is definitely wrong here! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suresh ttb (talk • contribs) 20:49, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Alexandra Powers

In the Alexandra Powers article I created I found a website that says she is in Scientology. Here's the website: http://www.truthaboutscientology.com/stats/by-name/a/alexandra-powers.html Should this be used as a reference in the article? Please let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neptunekh2 (talk • contribs) 16:12, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Already addresses at reliable source noticeboard; I don't have anything more to add. —C.Fred (talk) 20:31, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit notice

Could you add an edit notice to Victorious to not add characters' middle names without a reliable source, or they will be reverted? This is a big problem. Thanks. --Confession0791 <sup>talk</sup> 02:21, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't see a history of it, so I'm not going to jump straight to an edit notice. I'd suggest you start discussion of the matter on Talk:Victorious and, if you think it is an ongoing problem, add a comment to the article section with the character names reminding editors not to add unsourced middle names. I've added the page to my watchlist, so I'll see if it's an ongoing problem. —C.Fred (talk) 02:26, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't know much about Wikipedia

But I'm guessing that since the children of IT executive Perry Rotella are not relevant, Remy Ravitz, the daughter of entrepreneur and philanthropist Stanley Ravitz, the founder of the Ravitz Family Foundation (http://www.ravitzfamilyfoundation.org/about/) of which Remy Ravitz (born c. 1985-1990?) is a member, is not a notable alumna either? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.46.109.63 (talk) 04:06, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm just trying to add to the information available but I do not know a lot about editing Wikipedia. Also, I didn't mean to delete the section, I did it by accident (I'm not very good with computers) and I didn't know how to recover it so thank you for fixing it! --68.46.109.63 (talk) 04:10, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Not a problem. Given that it came on the heels of an edit that you had undone, it looked that way. The unintended consequence happens; remember that if you view the history of the article (look for a link at the top), you should see a list of all edits made to the article and a link to undo the edit that you just made. —C.Fred (talk) 04:14, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Beginning Questions

Thank you for the warm welcoming. I just have a few questions. If I happen to catch vandalism to an article, how do I find out which user it was so I can alert them? Also, what do the ==, |, and {(())} mean for creating articles? Thanks! Mallen22 (talk) 17:52, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

To find out what users have edited a page, click the "View history" tab at the top of the page. It will show which editors have changed the page, when, and a description (the edit summary) of their edits.

The special characters are various Wikipedia formatting characters. Equal signs are section headings, such as ==Beginning Questions== at the top of this section. Braces are used for templates—sort of like functions–with pipe characters/vertical bars being used to separate parameters. You'll see a {{talkback}} template on your talk page right after I finish this reply. —C.Fred (talk) 18:01, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Deleted article regarding Dance Informa

Hi, Today you deleted an article about Dance Informa dance publication. It is an article about the history of the magazine, which is the leading dance magazine in Australia. It is not a promotional article, but an informative article about a legitimate and wide read publication. Please un-delete the article. There are articles about other dance magazines, for example the US based "Dance Magazine". Therefore, an article about Dance Informa should be allowed. Thank you for re-considering this deletion. Best Regards, Deborah —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.49.100.133 (talk) 23:49, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

 Not done The text in the article was clearly promotional: it read like it was copied from the magazine's web site. A neutral article can be re-created, but there's no need for the spam one to be restored. —C.Fred (talk) 01:59, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Further, the creating account, DanceInforma (talk · contribs), has been blocked by another administrator as a spam-only account. —C.Fred (talk) 01:59, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Open Wireless Architecture (OWA)

B3G belongs to Delson Group, pls see: cwc.us/owa.htm or b3g.org/owa.htm. Please see the bottome notice of Delson Group.

We are the owner of Delson Group and I am working for prof. Willie W. Lu.

So why you deleted our page (Open Wireless Architecture (OWA)?

OWAtech (talk) 04:17, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. The issue is that they have not given the text away. —C.Fred (talk) 04:32, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Prose

Yes.[1] I think the routes can be listed in a single article, though, then the Metlink wikilinked, the routes included as prose or a list without the huge template and external links, and all the routes listed in the primary article with information, also. In addition, there are bus company articles, and these probably could have full lists of routes, although not all linked to the exterior schedule. --Kleopatra (talk) 06:12, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Dancing with the Stars (US)

Hi C.Fred, could you please block IP's and new users from Dancing with the Stars (U.S. TV series) and the page for its 12th season? Too many predictions and even advertising. These should be blocked for maybe two months or so. Thanks!! TDI19 (talk) 01:11, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

 Watching... I don't see an acute problem right now that warrants immediate page protection. If a pattern emerges, I'm willing to protect it. —C.Fred (talk) 02:03, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

OK! Thanks!! TDI19 (talk) 17:20, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

User:Lcm7712/To what extent is 'The Prince of Egypt' faithful to the Biblical account of Moses?

I took this to be a notification to a class of the correct answers to their set work - hence the names given in the 'who was Moses?' section. I think this might be a breach of WP:NOTWEBSPACE. Peridon (talk) 23:19, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

I've pointed that guideline out to the user and asked him to explain what he's using the page for. —C.Fred (talk) 01:50, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Please tell us

Dear Sir

Can you please tell us how can we generate a wiki page of our company

Luke Lombard — Preceding unsigned comment added by Runmapglobal (talk • contribs) 09:01, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

If you think your company warrants an article, I'd suggest making a request at WP:Requested articles. However, I'd suggest that you read the notability guidelines for corporations to make sure your company is notable before requesting the article: if the company is not (yet) notable, it may not have an article.

I strongly suggest against attempting to create an article about the company yourself, because of your conflict of interest with it.

I also replied on your talk page, so there's a record there of this discussion. —C.Fred (talk) 16:38, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

AN3 case

WP:AN3#User:Danjel reported by User:TreasuryTag (Result: ). It's good that you made an offer to User:Danjel, but he did not accept it. In my opinion you could proceed to a block. Even though talk page revert wars are silly, we should not grant unlimited slack to fussy people. Unfortunately Pdfpdf might fall under that as well. Danjel's argument that boxing up comments is vandalism is not correct. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 20:19, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Citations

How do I cite a source for added information onto an article? Mallen22 (talk) 22:37, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Place the source at the end of the sentence, inside <ref></ref> tags. As long as a link to the online source is provided, or the title of the magazine/book/newspaper is clear, other editors can tweak the formatting. —C.Fred (talk) 22:41, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Xavier College

Hi. I've only just noticed this edit of yours! (I wish I had noticed it before I'd posted to AN3. Oh well. C'est la vie.)

I agree with just about everything you say, but I would appreciate it if you could clarify for me why highlighting off-topic material, without making any changes to it, is "refactoring"?

In principle, I'm happy to remove the section, but as I have argued at AN3, I feel that if you are going to remove that section, you should also remove the other off topic material. (And if you intend to do that, you should probably seek HiLo48's feedback first.)

However, I'm open to your suggestions and advice. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 01:25, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Per WP:REFACTOR, hiding text from view is part of pruning text. Since collapsing removes the text from ready view, I'd argue that yes, it's within the scope of refactoring. Also, unless I missed some text on the talk page, my offer to Danjel included collapsing the discussion in question.

Then again, rather than just saying it's off-topic, I proposed a collapse message that got specific, saying that the conversation turned from improving the article to specific editors at that point. —C.Fred (talk) 01:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

(Refactor) Thanks.

(Removal) I'm a confused by your reply. Are you suggesting: hiding "The Last Post", or having me delete it, or having you delete it, or are you suggesting a 4th course of action that I haven't identified.

(BTW: To repeat/clarify: I agree with your assessment/categorisation of "The Last Post".)

Thanks for the prompt reply. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 01:43, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Had Danjel accepted my offer, I would have deleted it. If you want to delete it (i.e., withdraw the comment), I think that would be perfect. —C.Fred (talk) 01:48, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm. I'm not happy to have it completely deleted. I have refactored it to remove my "attacking the person" comments. Thanks for your help and advice. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 02:35, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

How to keep a page about my organization without an Admin deleting it?

I had recently made a Wiki Page for my non profit organization on my other account, SergeantLunsford, but was removed by an admin. When I looked on his talk page, people were complaining about how he was deleting their pages. Is this a delete happy admin, because I am very serious about making a Wiki for my organization and my community.

If you can help me with advice, that would be great! Thanks!

COPE Ministries (talk) 01:25, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

First, the deletion was valid: the article is about a non-notable organization. Second, you'll need to return to your other account; I'm blocking the COPE Ministries account for violation of the username policy. —C.Fred (talk) 01:28, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

RE: Roger Bumpass

I understand that IMDB is not factual, but T.V. profiles state that Jennette McCurdy was born in Los Angeles and that Roger Bumpass was born on 1/2/1938. How do I prove this? I am not lying, and if I can will prove it. Mallen22 (talk) 01:59, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

What's T.V. profiles, and is it a reliable source? If it's online, provide a link; that way, other editors can assess the site. If you mean TV documentaries about McCurdy and Bumpass, please specify which ones. —C.Fred (talk) 02:15, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

It can be accessed through a smart search on certain DVRs of a television. I do not know if any online links connect to it. Mallen22 (talk) 02:22, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

The underlying question is, then, where do they get their data? If they're pulling from IMDB, no; if the profiles are written by TV Guide or a similar service with an editorial board, then yes. —C.Fred (talk) 02:31, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

That is true, but I think this for two reasons: First, it is not a channel you go to, to read about profiles. It is a system locked onto the DVR. Second, it is T.V., and is linked to commercials, shows, movies, etc. that that actor/actress is in. And obviously, the television itself rules over all other sources. They most likely ask the actor/actress profile information, because not all profiles include personal information, such as birthdate and birthplace. Another question is this: Where can Wikipedia article creators prove their point? They use websites that do not include personal information for the most part. So by all means, you can think you are right, but are wrong. If this still does not settle, I can personally get Directv and other actors/actresses to contact you with the truth. Mallen22 (talk) 03:26, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm familiar with Tivo's smart search service. I don't recall where they pull the actor data from. It would not be unprecedented for them to use IMDB (or even Wikipedia!) to source the data. And that's my point: it's hard to evaluate. At this point, I'd suggest taking the issue to the reliable source noticeboard. This is probably not the first time the issue has come up. And if the actors want to contact with the truth, they can just published the information on their official websites. Self-published sources are allowable for basic information like that. —C.Fred (talk) 03:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Let's Get Real

Hi there,

I just made an article and was creating it when you deleted saying i didnt have valid reasons. Let's Get Real is a notable company and I thought to add it. Please Reinstate. Businessgurunorthampton (talk) 04:25, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

If you can indicate which parts of WP:CORP or WP:WEB that Let's Get Real meets, or multiple reliable sources to satisfy the general notability guideline, I'll be glad to restore the article (though it was just an infobox). —C.Fred (talk) 04:26, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Business has received a lot of media attention in the press, it is nationwide and provides a unique service. I had put up infobox and was about to write the page. Businessgurunorthampton (talk) 04:29, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Have you got links? —C.Fred (talk) 04:31, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

You only had to google them to see them but company archives them here - http://www.letsgetreal.co.uk/media.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Businessgurunorthampton (talk • contribs) 04:33, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry I will recreate Businessgurunorthampton (talk) 04:54, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Recent reversion

Note: I just reverted some trolling edits to your talk page by accident. However, because they included a large removal of content from your talk page, I am not reverting myself. This note is to let you know what I did. --Kleopatra (talk) 08:17, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Edits on my talk page

Stop it or your going to be blocked! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.38.126.156 (talk • contribs) 17:22, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Do you really want to go there? Especially given that part of my revert is the removal of the crude joke you keep adding to the top of the talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 17:23, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

IT'S MINE, NOT YOURS FOR THE LAST TIME! 99.38.126.156 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:25, 8 January 2011 (UTC).

As you were previously told, WP:BLANKING forbids the removal of certain content from your talk page, including whois templates. —C.Fred (talk) 17:27, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

The Fugitive

I apologize for my actions. I previously reported the IP for persistent removal of info from the page and warned him several times, but continues to ignore me and continue removing not only the info, but each of my warnings. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 19:11 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Then, since it's not clear-cut vandalism, leave his fourth revert in place (or don't commit a fourth revert yourself) and report it to WP:AN3. Also, I'd like to hear a content-based reason on why the text should remain in the article. —C.Fred (talk) 23:14, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Already put a notice up. In the episode My Friend The Doctor, J.D. is watching The Fugitive when he notices that the Transit Cop (Neil Flynn) is The Janitor at the hospital. The creators knew this, so they used this to their advantage and made Janitor the actor who played the cop. Link to a full episode recap. [2]. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 19:20 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I am not vandalizing anything. This user has been informed in the past that the info they are trying to insert is not relevant to the article. I asked him to explain it on the talk page and instead he called me a troll and XXXX'd out my comment. 174.27.28.59 (talk) 23:28, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Will do. Thanks for helping sort this out. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 19:52 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Bashan 125R

A note that Bashan 125R has substantial differences between it and the prior version, particularly references; I would advise taking it to AfD if you still support its removal. Regards, Ironholds (talk) 00:25, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

I've relisted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bashan 125R (2nd nomination). —C.Fred (talk) 00:35, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Gotcha; I'll try to swing by in a couple of days and see what's occurring. Thanks, Ironholds (talk) 00:38, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Dörrie and Lit

C.Fred, My adding information and a reference to an article I wrote on Dörrie is a difficult case. Nobody else has published (in English) on Dörrie's literary texts, unless I am mistaken. Go ahead and delete the section if that is a problem. It's kind of difficult for the experts on a topic not to cite their own work every now and then, esp. if they are the only ones who have written about that aspect of sb.'s bio. But I understand the principle according to which you question my addition. Cheers, Utziputz (talk) 01:08, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Transbian

Grrrr ... this is why I wish I had my mop back. Agreed, off to AfD with it ... hopefully we can snow this so it can be G4'd in short order if it appears again. Blueboy96 02:42, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations

...on being mentioned on NPR's interview with Jimmy Wales on Wikipedia's 10th anniversary! Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 02:55, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Deleted - my bad

I guess I need to read a bit further before posting information. I read through the article on BestBuy and got some good ideas. The Pro Sound Depot is pretty new in comparison to BestBuy so I hope I can write an article on it that has some value. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gledsome1997 (talk • contribs) 21:19, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, you probably want to read the Your first article guidelines. There were a number of problems with the article, including the fact that it was copied from the store's website—so it was both copyright infringement and spam. —C.Fred (talk) 21:21, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Winter 2010 USRD newsletter

Volume 4, Issue 1 • Winter 2011 • About the Newsletter
Departments Assessment roundup Portal selected articles and pictures	Features The Year in Review Royal Award Conferred USRD busy at work at FAC	State and national updates Project reports for CA MI MN NE NJ UT WA
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

—

JCbot (talk) 01:01, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Blood Service edit

C.Fred: Oops, jumped in without reading the manual. Yes the update to the Blood Service was done in good faith. We'll regroup, do som,e reading and edit via a personal login rather than a org-name. Redcrossbloodau (talk) 05:38, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Sydney Unit for History and Philosophy of Science

Hello, C.Fred. You have new messages at Talk:Sydney Unit for History and Philosophy of Science.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

BETHUSYD (talk) 01:11, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Snail

Do you realize you just reverted an edit where your revert added the following back into the article?

Slugs are sort of like snails but not as good. See, the naim snale comes from the Egyption word for nail, but with an "s" on the front of it. Slugs's name however, is totally different and derives from no known language. With this information, we can infer that snails mated with aliens and named their babey after the alein father, Blochnoster Sluggliestermoinerham. A few differences between snails and slugs are that for one, snails dont have mind controlling poweres, while slugs do. Slugs actually have tiny tiny little capes that they where to protect them, while snails have none. Even so, the snails have some advantages. For instince, snails can avoid shrivling up when you pour salt on them. Some commonly asked questions asked about snails are 1. where do snails and slugs poop out of? The answer is, they dont poop at all. The reason that snails and slugs dont live very long is because the fecal matter builds up inside them until they explode. Question number 2. Why do they be slimey up in here, yo? The answer is, the aliens that mated with snails and birthed slugs gave the slime to them so that the aliens could follow the slime trails to find them. ~MW

I think that was a goodfaith edit you reverted.--v/r - TP 01:11, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

My revert removed that text from the article. Clear vandalism revert. —C.Fred (talk) 01:13, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Apology, I mean the Snail article with this diff.--v/r - TP 01:14, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

D'oh! I hit the revert button and didn't check what changed on that one. My bad. —C.Fred (talk) 01:15, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Meh, well you're right, it wasn't a good faith edit. I think the vandal was trying to trick you and I misinterpreted it as a good faith edit. My bad too.--v/r - TP 01:17, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

The more I look at it, the named account and the IP are hitting the same articles, so it's probably the same person behind both. —C.Fred (talk) 01:18, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

User:Mskhogg Student Edits

Thank you for your advice and concern re: student articles. We're working in a second language, and sometimes things get missed in translation. I'm trying to see that their content meets WP guidelines, but things slip through occasionally. I'll try to keep a closer eye on them. Mskhogg (talk) 06:33, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

"The Verizon vandal"

I just noticed this reversion by you at Princess Protection Program. The IP you reverted is a persistent IP hopping sneaky vandal that I reported at ANI. To date it has made 232 similar edits under a range of IPs. There's more information at User:AussieLegend/Project 04#The Verizon vandal, along with a link to the now archived discussion at ANI. KrakatoaKatie has been protecting the pages it's been vandalising and one of the IP ranges has been rangeblocked. You can expect to see it again. Cheers. --AussieLegend (talk) 06:50, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I note that you've reverted a number of edits by User:729gabby today. The edits by this user seem eerily similar to the Verizon vandal. The random wikilinking is the most obvious similarity but this edit set off alarm bells. Changing names to "Chanel" is a long-term trait of the Verizon vandal, although the name isn't always Chanel. This is typical too. This edit, changing "things turn cold when she refuses" to "things turn go down on a love thermometer when she refuses" is also the sort of thing that the Verizon vandal does. There are a few other edits that seem familiar but those I've listed make me hear ducks quacking. --AussieLegend (talk) 13:21, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Was there ever a named account used by the Verizon vandal? I'm seeing the pattern too, and I've specifically warned the user about overlinking. However, I've got a feeling they'll do it again despite the warning, and I wondered whether there was a named account to note that they're a sock of. —C.Fred (talk) 15:20, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

No, they've always only ever used IPs. This appears to be the first named account that has been created, although they did disappear off my radar, as you can see by looking at User:AussieLegend/Project 04#The Verizon vandal. --AussieLegend (talk) 15:26, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Pyrelord3

Please do not make statements attacking people or groups of people. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ttonyb (talk) 05:12, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

That's an amusing overlap. I had just userfied the page; it appeared to be somebody attempting to write about himself. I'll re-evaluate and see if User:Pyrelord3 now needs speedied G10. —C.Fred (talk) 05:13, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Very interesting how the tag was applied, sorry it hit you instead of the author. Thanks and my best to you. ttonyb (talk) 05:16, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

How to edit itDolor285 (talk) 05:47, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Keithswinneymusic

It's a clearly promotional username, you probably shouldn't have bothered welcoming them; they're just getting tagged and bagged anyway. HalfShadow 04:35, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Request for access to deleted article

Hi, this is Emitevoba. i would like to request access to my Article on HonaJark Productions. I understand its content is not suitable for wikipedia, but can i please get it back for a moment, so i can copy and paste its content to my computer? I would really appreciate it if you let me recover my work. Emitevoba (talk) 06:21, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

 Done Userfied to User:Emitevoba/HonaJark Productions. —C.Fred (talk) 06:25, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! Emitevoba (talk) 06:31, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

{{subst:movereq}}

Eureka, Wisconsin → Town of Eureka, Wisconsin — This page should be retitled to Town of Eureka, Wisconsin. See reference: http://geonames.usgs.gov/pls/gnispublic/f?p=154:3:3619208266072106::NO:3:P3_FID,P3_TITLE:1583176%2CTown%20of%20Eureka.

It doesn't have a zip code as does Eureka in Winnebago County. It is not a town/city/village that is located on a map as the TRUE Eureka is found. See reference: http://geonames.usgs.gov/pls/gnispublic/f?p=154:3:616868987935035::NO:3:P3_FID,P3_TITLE:1564708%2CEureka

Here are the GNIS search results for Eureka, Wisconsin: http://geonames.usgs.gov/pls/gnispublic/f?p=154:2:4330716965080315::NO:RP::

Note: Town of Eureka is designated Civil - A political division formed for administrative purposes (borough, county, incorporated place, municipio, parish, town, township). Distinct from Census and Populated Place. Class Code Description: Active Minor Civil Divisions. An active county subdivision that is not coextensive with an incorporated place.

Note: Eureka is designated Populated Place - Place or area with clustered or scattered buildings and a permanent human population (city, settlement, town, village). A populated place is usually not incorporated and by definition has no legal boundaries. However, a populated place may have a corresponding "civil" record, the legal boundaries of which may or may not coincide with the perceived populated place. Distinct from Census and Civil classes.

• Eureka, Winnebago County, Wisconsin → Eureka, Wisconsin

Eurekanative (talk) 19:56, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

A couple of things, looking at the situation:

1. I'm not clear that Town of Eureka is the formal styling for the town name, even on second references. It would be hard to demonstrate as, for example, I don't expect there to be a Town of Eureka High School. Accordingly, I disagree with the retitling.
2. Second, it's not clear that the Winnebago County community is the primary meaning of Eureka, Wisconsin. It's the lesser developed of the two articles, so it's not surprising that it has the secondary name.
3. The best approach might be to move the current Eureka, Wisconsin to Eureka, Polk County, Wisconsin, leaving the Eureka, Wisconsin title as a disambiguation page, pointing to the two separate articles.

In any case, I think the move is controversial, and I think starting a move discussion on Talk:Eureka, Wisconsin would be in order. —C.Fred (talk) 21:00, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Here is a link to the OFFICIAL web page for Town of Eureka: http://townofeureka.org/ They distinguish their name to be Town of Eureka. Quote: "The Town is a quiet rural setting with no incorporated villages or cities within its boundaries." They have a Town Board, a Town Garage, hold Town meetings, and have a Town Hall. Their board minutes are titled: TOWN OF EUREKA Monthly Board Meeting. Their agendas are titled: TOWN OF EUREKA Monthly Board Meeting. This clearly demonstrates they are a "township" not a village or city easily identified on a road map. St. Croix Falls, WI 54024 is where their Town Hall and Town Garage are located.

Whereas, Eureka, Winnebago County is an unincorporated village within the Town of Rushford and easily identified on a road map. The Town of Rushford does not call itself Rushford. It calls itself Town of Rushford. That is what it is. Here is its website: http://townofrushford.org/ When addressing US Mail the address of the Winnebago County Eureka is: Eureka, WI 54934. There is an official Federal Post Office called Eureka Post Office in Winnebago County. There is the Eureka Dam, the Eureka Locks, the Eureka Mill, the Eureka Cemetery, etc.

There is a clear factual distinction between the two locations and they should be labeled appropriately. I don't see the controversy. There is ONE Eureka, Wisconsin and ONE Town of Eureka, Wisconsin.

Eurekanative (talk) 22:17, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

However, the Town of Eureka website refers to the "Eureka Farmer's Market," not the "Town of Eureka Farmer's Market." Based on that, I don't think it's clear that Town of Eureka is the name for all second references. Accordingly, it still appears to be Eureka for naming purposes. —C.Fred (talk) 22:37, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

The government of the community calls itself by its legal name, Town of Eureka. The Eureka Farmer's Market is not a government entity. When I look things up, I want to know the truthful facts. It shouldn't matter that one page has more content than another. The content should be correct, not on the second reference, but on the first. Is this Wikipedia concerned with more content versus truth? Here is the Wisconsin statute: http://legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/Stat0060.pdf See: Subchapter II Legal Status; Organization 60.01 Legal status; general powers. (1) A town is a body corporate and politic, with those powers granted by law. A town shall be designated in all actions and proceedings by its name, as “Town of ....”. Eurekanative (talk) 00:08, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi-I notice this discussion about renaming the Eureka, Wisconsin article. This would be impractical in that all of the articles of the Wisconsin towns would be renamed also. This could affect other articles involving municipalities in other states. I agree with C. Fred the disambiguation is the best solution. Thank you-RFD (talk) 00:32, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm disappointed that the focus of the Wikipedia is not on truthfulness and facts based on the law.

If there is to be a disambiguous solution, then possibly a compromise of C.Fred's suggestion is appropriate. I would not argue with having the Eureka, Wisconsin article point to two separate articles with nothing else on that page. I would still, however, argue that those two linking articles be titled properly... Eureka, Winnebago County, Wisconsin and Town of Eureka, Polk County, Wisconsin. All references to Eureka in the Polk County article need to be accurately changed to Town of Eureka. To have anything less is unsatisfactory.

Most townships are adjacent to cities with the same name in Wisconsin. Town of Neenah is adjacent to Neenah. Town of Oshkosh is adjacent to Oshkosh, etc. To most people in those locations, there isn't much need to show differentiation. In this case, however, Eureka and Town of Eureka are hundreds of miles apart. My friends look up Eureka, Wisconsin on Wikipedia and think I live near the Minnesota border, when I actually live on the east side of Wisconsin closer to Lake Michigan. Thank you! Eurekanative (talk) 01:54, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Pardon a 3rd party butting in here, but I think I see part of the problem. A Wisconsin "Town" is roughly equivalent to what is known as a Township (United States) elsewhere. However I fail to find any Wisconsin "Town" articles titled in the manner of "Town of Foo" (Foo being a generic name). I did find a few articles where a town shared the same name as another municipality, and these were titled Brookfield (town), Wisconsin, Germantown, Washington County, Wisconsin, Winter (town), Wisconsin, etc, with the "(town)" disambiguator being used where the 2 entities coexisted in the same location (with either the town or city/village containing the other), and the "__,Foo County, __" disambiguator used where the 2 entities were geographically separated. In this case, with the (Wikipedia) precedents noted above, the obvious solution to me would be exactly as described by C.Fred above, by "(moving) the current Eureka, Wisconsin to Eureka, Polk County, Wisconsin, leaving the Eureka, Wisconsin title as a disambiguation page, pointing to the two separate articles." I also feel this discussion should be moved to the articles talk page, instead of continuing to being discussed in "back channels" here. WuhWuzDat 05:25, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

As requested, moved conversation here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Eureka,_Wisconsin I apologize for taking up space in this location. I did not understand how to implement this move. Thanks! Eurekanative (talk) 07:27, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Undoing page blanking

I'm not sure what is common in this situation, but your revert [3] of a page blanking was a page blanking by the creator of the article, which was double-prodded. I might interpret that as a request to delete, but again, I have no experience in this stuff. Best. RobHar (talk) 01:55, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

The problem is, there were enough intervening edits that it wasn't clear that he was the only contributor to the article. That's why I restored, but I wouldn't fault anybody for pointing to that edit and deleting the article G7, if the edit history bore out that he was the only contributor. Compounding the matter is that he created a new article with a similar title, so it seemed like a bit of trying to hide the history of the first behind the new creation. —C.Fred (talk) 02:45, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

NPR

http://www.npr.org/2011/01/10/132810933/wikipedia-turns-10-eyes-developing-world Listen to the story, starting at 3:52. Not sure if you already heard, it's a week old by now, but I didn't see a section here. :)
Cheers, Amalthea 12:48, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I found out about it via Facebook—where I use my real name rather than the C.Fred handle. Go figure. :) (Some of my Facebook friends know about the C.Fred username, so I'm not surprised they made the connection.) I've also mentioned it on my user page at User:C.Fred#Fifteen minutes of fame. Thank you for pointing it out, though! —C.Fred (talk) 17:17, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

User:YoungBasedGodSplitTheCabbage

Hi Fred! I would like to ask you to reconsider the 48-hour block of User:YoungBasedGodSplitTheCabbage. A review of his contribs shows that he has not made a single non-vandalizing edit in article namespace. They have all been vandalizing. Also, if one were to look at this edit and this edit, one would see that he has stated that he has no intention of stopping. I would like to propose an indefinite block as a vandalism-only account. I understand this to be the norm in such instances. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 06:49, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

 Done I thought I had seen a constructive edit in the mix when I blocked him the first time. On looking back, there isn't one. There were a bunch of death hoax edits, though, so I agree that an indefinite block is in order. If he really wants to edit constructively, he can appeal. —C.Fred (talk) 15:16, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Fred. I hope you didn’t mind my intrusion. I saw his taunting comment on Gfoley4’s talk page and decided to have a look at the fellow’s contribs. Thanks again! — SpikeToronto 20:17, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

First You Get the Sugar

Hey! I saw that you deleted my article for First You Get the Sugar. I respect the guidelines of Wikipedia, but I was wondering if you could help me get this article published. This band has a very big following in Montreal, and are about to release their debut album with international distribution. Thank you! Gsonin (talk) 05:53, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

First, the impending release was not mentioned in the article. Second, the article cited no reliable sources. In addition to WP:BAND, you might want to take a look at the general notability guidelines. If the band has received substantial coverage in some newspapers, that would show that it's achieved some notability.

I'll be echoing the above comment at your talk page. Feel free continue the discussion there and ask any questions about reliability of sources, what constitutes substantial coverage, etc. —C.Fred (talk) 06:20, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

User talk:Crohnie Vandalism

Hi, C. Fred! The case with this editor being harassed has been going on for some time, and it's either a certain banned editor or an "imposter" of that banned editor: it really doesn't matter. I would respectfully request that you WP:RD2 the edit per WP:DENY and the fact it's the same disgusting crap from this very sick individual. Thank you for your quick response there! Cheers... Doc talk 21:41, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Doc talk 21:58, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

 Done I went for WP:RD3, "grossly inappropriate threats or attacks." Six of one, half-dozen of the other, and thank you for reminding me to revdel it. Unfortunately, it's because of this nonsense that I've had to add that user's talk page to my watchlist. I hope it doesn't become habit to rollback, block, revdel, but as long as the banned editor feels the need to waste my time cleaning up his nonsense, I'll keep doing it. —C.Fred (talk) 22:00, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again! And it's a "her" that is the culprit: decidedly "unlady-like". Cheers :> Doc talk 22:03, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

She's still at it - could we get another block/revdel and IP page protection? These attacks are just ridiculous. Doc talk 00:08, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

(ec Hi Doc) Hi, first thanks for dealing with the trash on my talk page. Would you mind revdel this too that Doc removed? Also, would you mind semi protecting my talk page for a few weeks to a month for me? I am going through a major emotion in RL and don't want to have to deal with the trash Skag is harassing me with. We had a young family member violently murdered and I would like to be able to come here for a way to get a way for a bit from the reality of real life. Thanks in advance, --CrohnieGal<sup>Talk</sup> 00:12, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

The latest sock is blocked; because it's a dynamic IP, it's only a 24-hour block. I've semi-protected your talk page for a month. I'm sorry for what your family is having to go through. If there's anything I can do on Wikipedia to help you out, please let me know. —C.Fred (talk) 00:16, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Also, even though I've revision-deleted the latest edits, I did not request oversight. They're still in the database and can be viewed by administrators, if necessary for followup to her ISP. —C.Fred (talk) 00:21, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your quick response. I appreciate the help more than you will know. I will keep you in mind if I need help but with my pages both protected she has no way to attack me like she is. I have to admit that it's like I need to retire from here to stop her from all of this. Yes, no reason to bother oversight over this, thanks. They need to figure out a better way to stop trolls like her. In time, and when I am able to get the tears going I should be better. Thanks again, I'm going to bed now, thank you, --CrohnieGal<sup>Talk</sup> 00:25, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

1911 IFA SHIELD

I thought it was a copyvio, but I couldn't find it. Corvus cornix<sub>talk</sub> 06:49, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Sometimes they make us work to find it, sometimes they don't. This was one of the latter: the infringed text was one of the external links. —C.Fred (talk) 06:50, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Ha. I didn't even check that.  :) Corvus cornix<sub>talk</sub> 06:54, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello, C.Fred. 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.

- Not urgent Nil Einne (talk) 19:08, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Harold Frank

How do I prove that I wrote the text on www.knathangallery.com? My name is Keith N. Kelman. Nathan is my middle name. I own K. Nathan Gallery. I own www.knathangallery.com. Our gallery has been named representative of the Harold Frank estate. Since Wikipedia doesn't have a thing printed on Mr. Frank, I thought that it might be a good idea that it does. Harold Frank is an important American abstract expressionist who was highly regarded during his lifetime. He won many major national awards and was exhibited internationally. I have met and talked to several people who knew him. Many of his major works are just coming on the market through my gallery. I just ran a full page ad in Art & Antiques magazine. We are re-introducing him to the American public. I got my information from the book, Harold Frank, Abstract Expressionist by Sandie Stern, 2001. It is listed as my source in the article. It is the only book printed on Mr. Frank. Ms. Stern is the owner of the Harold Frank estate. I have the auction catalog from Phillips in 1989 where Frank's work was sold along with works by DeKooning, Stamos, Calder, etc. I don't care who uses the information from the article. What do you want to do? Go to Sandie's home to look at her source materials? If I took my writeup down from the K. Nathan Gallery website would there still be an objection to my providing the same information to Wikipedia? If Wikipedia doesn't want to list Mr. Frank, don't. Seemed like a good idea at the time. But, since Wikipedia doesn't seem to want information on this American artist, don't print it. I'm not going to jump through hoops for you, though. Keith Kelman January 23, 2011 Keiththeklam (talk) 08:03, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

A longer reply is at your talk page, but the key points are: Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials has instructions for putting your text under a free license. All articles are subject to all Wikipedia guidelines, including WP:N and WP:RS. You and your major source have conflicts of interest with Harold Frank, and that will put the article under intense scrutiny from a large portion of the Wikipedia community. Yes, it feels like a lot of hurdles, but the guidelines apply to all articles, and I'm willing to help.

Procedural note: please reply at your talk page. I'm watching that page. —C.Fred (talk) 20:37, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Fake Episodes on iCarly season four

User 79.228.223.187 (talk) has been posting fake episodes of iCarly on [[4]] from an unreliable source, can you change the protection level of that page so people without usernames can't edit that page. Jon23812 (talk) 23:28, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

 Not done It only appears to be a single IP involved on the page. I just gave them a warning for violating 3RR, but since there's not a swarm of IPs involved, it doesn't warrant protection. —C.Fred (talk) 23:33, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

You just beat me

to that "riven" "driven" undo. Which is a good thing, I'm sure. Einar aka

it's a fact that the man is what i said of him. sorry wikipedia doesn't like the truth —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.65.194.181 (talk) 23:34, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Umm, no, that was hardly an objective assessment of Black. —C.Fred (talk) 00:03, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

deleting article

hello, You have delete an article 22 Jan 2011 Maria Maragkoudaki. I have make a copyright donation after you make the deletion. i send them e-mail for the donation but the have not answer yet to my e-mail. what i will do now? Maragkoudakis (talk) 17:50, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Emails are handled by the Volunteer Response Team. As far as I know, all emails go into a queue there, so they're handled first-come, first-served—though it's possible that your email may have to get handed off to a team that deals specifically with licensing issues. I'm not a member of that team, so I can't assess whether there is a backlog. At this point, I'd suggest waiting; I'm sure they'll reply with an email one way or the other. —C.Fred (talk) 18:03, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

ok, thank you. Maragkoudakis (talk) 18:12, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Total Drama Reloaded

Yeah I know, these guys can get really annoying on situations like this. I was only removing the elimination table because it was getting way too much speculation and everyone was just messing with it. It's too early to be adding the elimination table right now due to the very limited amount of sources we got on Total Drama Reloaded. I am just gonna wait a few more months before we decide to bring back some of the information I deleted. Giggett (talk) 18:42, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

This guy 189.90.106.76 just can't stop bringing back that table. I think you should block him. He might be that other guy we saw earlier today, but with a different I-P address. Maybe he went to his friend's house just to continue reverting the table back after he got all those warnings on his 71.95.186.249 account. I believe it's the same person, do we block him? Giggett (talk) 21:33, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Welcome

Thanks for the advice. You're right, templates are often modified and I'll definitely follow what you told me. I've already used it twice and it's working. Greetings! -- Joaquin008 <sup>(talk)</sup> 17:27, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

laurie simmons page

Thank you for helping me with the page. I was adding a lot to the page because we are a fast paced studio and things need to be done quickly. I appreciate the feedback and I will continue trying to update (hopefully without screwing up too much).

Lsimmonsstudio (talk) 19:52, 27 January 2011 (UTC)lsimmonsstudio

Quick (humorous) note

I have to admit, when I saw this edit summary on my watchlist, I kind of did a double take because I thought I had tagged a user page with A1. I'm usually better than that. Anyway, I didn't (obviously) and I had a little laugh. elektrikSHOOS 06:41, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Eh, A1 vs. A7, it was a valid tag and deletable either way. Bear in mind that I moved it from mainspace to user space before removing the tag. —C.Fred (talk) 06:43, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I was aware it had been moved after a moment, it just took me a second. Well, anywho, happy editing. elektrikSHOOS 06:44, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

MJ Perkins Article

RevengeOfTheRobots (talk) 04:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)== Moses J Perkins Article ==

Well I resub under the WT section. I'm trying to find out what I need to ad to the article. I mean I would think if someone acts in two nationally televised TV shows and also did at least from what I found two national print ads. One for Ray Ban and the other for California Milk it would marked as notable. Here is the page, maybe you can have a lookey. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/MJ_Perkins RevengeOfTheRobots (talk) 04:40, 29 January 2011 (UTC)Revenge of the RobotsRevengeOfTheRobots (talk) 04:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Revenge of RobotsRevengeOfTheRobots (talk) 04:38, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Careful

For Giffords' article, you just did a mass, mindless revert. If you read the talk page, there was caution not to do that because there's an improper text there. That part is about doctors who never saw her or reviewed her records who are making a prediction of the recovery time (based on other patients in general.) This is a Wikipedia no-no.

Just as Michael Douglas has cancer, we can't say that Douglas has 6-18 months to live (which is true of the kind of cancer that he has). If you don't believe me, insert it into the Douglas article and see what kind of trouble you will stir up. Madrid 2020 (talk) 02:27, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Another vandal heads up

Regarding this edit at Wizards of Waverly Place: The Movie, I just thought I'd point out that this is another sneaky vandal, apparently a cousin of "The Verizon vandal". This one uses BellSouth so I've named it "The Bell boy" and the MO is simple. It just changes names. See User:AussieLegend/Project 04#The Bell boy for more. --AussieLegend (talk) 06:31, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Gary Hunt

Regarding your tone tag on this article. I have removed the offending sentence or inserted refs where necessary. How can I get this tone warning thing removed? Cas84 utd (talk) 20:21, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

I still see a lot of cases where the article is interpreting the reasons for Hunt's actions. I'd like to leave the tag up until another set of eyes has had a look at the article. —C.Fred (talk) 20:26, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Opinion

Hi, C.Fred since you helped by giving your opinion in my deletion nomination of Wayne R. Bennett. I was wondering if you could access another article here and comment on the deletion proposal here. Aaaccc (talk), 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Chokra

I saw you were the deleting admin for this article. I'm not sure if you've had a look at the talk page of the editor Bbchokra who created the article. The article's been speedy deleted for copyright reasons several times and every time it's deleted he recreates it. I'm not sure he understands the issue as his talk page is littered with warnings about copyright. Not sure what can be done but thought I'd let you know know. Thanks. freshacconci talktalk 06:01, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Never mind--I see that you're on top of it. Cheers. freshacconci talktalk 06:02, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

(ec) He's recreated it, but the new version does not appear to infringe as the old one did. Based on the username, I'm wondering whether there's a conflict of interest in play. —C.Fred (talk) 06:03, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

It would appear to be the case, given his eagerness to recreate the article. Seems like it might pass the notability test but I haven't looked at the refs to confirm anything. freshacconci talktalk 06:05, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Adding content to stub Rajasthan Cricket Association

Dear Fred, The majority material was taken from the Rajasthan Cricket Association website cricketrajasthan.in and I have obtained their permission to use the information. If you need it to reload the content, I can mail it to your e-mail address. My email address is [deleted]. Best regards, Azad Hind Fauz Azad Hind Fauz (talk) 08:19, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

First, don't email it to me. You'll need to send it to WP:OTRS. It will also need to show that the website has donated the material and placed it under a free license—meaning it's free for anybody to re-use, including commercial re-use.

Second, bear in mind that even if they have donated the text, it will still be subject to heavy editing to make it encyclopedic, so don't be surprised if it's cut down substantially. —C.Fred (talk) 19:23, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Funkmaster Flex

C.Fred, I was trying to post a video of Funkmaster Flex's Biography from SPIKE TV which Monica Taylor Enterprise did see the link http://monicataylorenterprise.com/ - click on see full portfolio and the video appears. The youtube video was simply a better source. Here is the reference I would like to use <ref>Taylor, Monica. ''Ride with Funkmaster Flex Filmography/Biography''. Spike TV, 2003</ref> Would you like to see the http://monicataylorenterprise.com/ version or the youtube with reference.

Looks like I need to reference first before I post. I will work in smaller bits as I go.

Average Car Guy — Preceding unsigned comment added by AverageCarGuy (talk • contribs) 22:25, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

It's probably better to use the monicataylorenterprise.com link rather than the direct link to the YouTube video, especially if the video is prominent on the page. Just make sure the site is a reliable source. —C.Fred (talk) 22:42, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I really hate dantherocker1

He's an impostor. he keeps trying to make me look bad by constantly vandalizing wikipedia. He is pretending to be me. he is such a n00b. thank you for destroying his account and restoring peace to the galaxy.

Love, dantherocker2 A true Wikipedian XOXOXO <3

If he's an imposter, whose username was created before yours, why does your userpage say, "My last two accounts (dantherocker1, PeeOnFavorian) got banned for vandalism"? --AussieLegend (talk) 23:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

But you gave me a warning Gabriel Easteron —Preceding undated comment added 02:31, 4 February 2011 (UTC).

Steak & Bj day article

The previous versions of this page were highly biased, provided little information, and were created for the sake of comedy. The website designated to this holiday is not professional and can be seen as politically incorrect. I wrote this article as a source for proper unbiased information. I believe it is in Wikipedia's interest to host a source of professional information on this topic. There are other examples of less notarial content hosted by Wikipedia which has received little to no scrutiny. If Wikipedia wishes, i would be more than happy to work on the wording of the content to meet their guidelines more efficiently. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Funkyd04 (talk • contribs) 18:10, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Re: Username concerns for Udhammaloka

Hi Fred thanks, would like to change my name to Terelton, it's not in use. BrianUdhammaloka (talk) 16:10, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

The directions for how to request the change can be found at WP:CHU. —C.Fred (talk) 04:55, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Dave Arcari

Hi C.Fred

Just been having a look round Wikipedia and was surprised there was no Dave Arcari (touring musician/songwriter based in Scotland – http://www.davearcari.com ) page. I was about to try and set one up but noticed that one had been deleted in 2007 - the Wikipedia website suggested contacting the 'deleting administrator' before proceeding. I'm hoping I'm contacting the right person?

Can you advise me on what I should do?

Thanking you in anticipation.

Margaret McDonald

Mgtmcd (talk) 21:54, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

The Dave Arcari article was speedy deleted under criterion A7 for failing to make an assertion of the significance or importance of the subject. Looking at Arcari's website, I don't see any immediate indicator that he's achieved notability over the last three years and change.

If you're thinking about creating a page on him, I strongly suggest reviewing WP:BAND to see if he meets the notability criteria for musicians; don't create an article if he doesn't meet the criteria, as the article will likely be deleted. Also, review the guidelines on reliable sources. Make sure you have some reliable sources that are independent of Arcari to document his notability.

Hope that helps. —C.Fred (talk) 22:47, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Sorry

Hey C Fred. Sorry for the confusion on the Total Drama World Tour article. I am half asleep tonight and believed that the user before me had deleted the note, and I was reinstating it. Once again, I apologize and thanks for reverting the edit back. Whitestorm17 (talk) 01:21, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

We need to talk

Hello C Fred. Sorry for making some mistakes on Southern Polytechnic State University article. I just want you know that I'm a student on this campus. I am a Exchange student from China, This is my first year in America.So my English is not very well. I didn't mean to add some tendentious article. I apologize for what I did. But maybe I need to keep editing this page cuz that is my assignment on one of my classes. If I do something wrong again please tell me immidietly, please don't blocking my editing function.My very sincere apologies again.Xichen4 (talk) 03:44, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

(Duplicate of message left at user's talk page) Thank you for making me aware that you are editing as part of a class assignment. While that doesn't release you from any of the editing guidelines, it does reassure me that your intent is not to advertise/promote the campus dining service. Please pass on to your instructor a reminder that Wikipedia is a functioning encyclopedia, so students' edits may be changed, reverted, embellished, spelling-corrected, or edited in any number of ways. Hopefully he/she knows is on Wikipedia himself/herself and knows about the WikiProject for classroom assignments. If not, he/she can contact me—via either my talk page or the E-mail this user link on it—and I'll be happy to give him/her some more information. —C.Fred (talk) 05:09, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of "People who have gone back in time"

I was wondering why my "people who have gone back in time" page was deleted under the justification that it constituted a 'hoax'. Personally, I believe that this page would be a useful catalogue of fictional characters involved in the theme of time travel. There are many "people who have/are..." pages on wikipedia that are utilized on a daily basis by the community. The information in my article was factual, useful, and highly specific. Poconnor82803 (talk) 06:42, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

A list of fictional characters who went back in time would be a different matter, though it might be deleted via deletion discussion (or might have been in a prior one). The problem is it's a very open-ended list, and that might run afoul of WP:LISTS. It's also prone to be a long list: Star Trek and Doctor Who characters alone will take up large sections of real estate.

That said, a list of people who have gone back in time is problematic. No real people have gone back in time—or at least none have had their trips documented in reliable sources. —C.Fred (talk) 06:46, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Actually, a list of fictional characters who went back in time is also a bad idea. Take a look at Category:Time travel in fiction for some idea of the scope of the situation. —C.Fred (talk) 06:51, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Page Deleted

Care to explains why Certain games/music/movies ect are allowed to be added and advertised by other people/company... ect, but when i advertise a fb app is isn't allowed?JpKool (talk) 18:46, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Nobody can advertise their own game/movie/music. If it is blatant advertising, it is subject to speedy deletion under criterion G11. It is possible for people to write a neutral article about their own product, but they must edit very carefully because of the conflict of interest. They must maintain neutral point of view and should back claims up with reliable sources.

Of course, a neutral editor can write a neutral article about a product and, presuming it meets the notability criteria, the article is allowed to stay. —C.Fred (talk) 19:22, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

In the case of the article you started, Battle+Stations, some of the fatal flaws were the "Click here to try" link and the tone of the article. It was not an informative article about the game; it was an advertisement to get people to try it. Also, it presented no independent sources that had covered the game. —C.Fred (talk) 19:24, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

HI

Please explain to me why you are deleting my rough draft of social clubs and other organizqations on my college's wiki page. If you keep deleting it how will my professor see that I am at least trying to make a draft of my research, sure it is not perfect but this is my college class and these are my assignments. In the most respectful way why are you doing this and how? I am just representing the social clubs what am I doing wrong here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mlynch3 (talk • contribs) 19:41, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Please remember that you're editing in the live encyclopedia. If you want to do a draft, do it in your user space—for example, at User:Mlynch3/SPSU organizations. You can also point your instructor to the history page of the article, which will show the changes you made.

However—and your instructor should be aware of this—the encyclopedia is not a workspace for a college assignment. It is a live encyclopedia, and anybody can edit the text. That means correcting typos, fixing headings, moving text, and deleting sections if they aren't encyclopedic. If your instructor wants to see the student edits specifically, she should have assigned you to edit either in your user space or at the SPSU Wiki. —C.Fred (talk) 20:02, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Southern Polytechnic State University Edit

Hello C. Fred. Earlier I added a section to the Southern Polytechnic State University page under history and I added the progression of the programs throughout the past 20 years. My sources were from comparing the old catalogs in the registrar's office. I was hoping for maybe some suggestions that I could fix because this is for a class and we are editing the page. Please give me any feedback I would need thanks again - Mboyd0714 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mboyd0714 (talk • contribs) 20:34, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank You for Your Edits and Comments!

Hi C.Fred, I am the instructor for the class that's making changes to the Southern Polytechnic SU article. I want to thank you for your constructive advice, criticisms, and edits of my students' changes to that article. Your editorial presence has generated a good deal of positive excitement in the class. Students are exploring social media and Web 2.0 as they examine issues related to collaboration, audiences, evaluation of sources, credibility of information, etc. We just finished reading up on Wikipedia (including standards for featured, good, etc. articles). Students are also slowly learning the wiki tools they need to use to make and compare changes and to leave explanations. Students themselves selected the article for their group work, and their goal is definitely not promotion or advertising, although as you have pointed out some changes strayed into that territory. I am hoping that most of the problems with the edits will be caught before we are done, since group members will be reviewing each other’s changes, and groups will be reviewing other groups’ changes. The end result, I hope, will be acceptable improvements in the article, a better understanding of the editorial and review processes of Wikipedia, and new insights into collaboration (and other goals of the course). I have already studied the help pages and read “Wikipedia:School and university projects.” But I am eager to learn from an experienced editor. (I have made changes to articles before, but I registered for the first time for this class.) I hope we will be interacting some more with you in the various editing and discussion areas. In the meantime, please be assured that any unacceptable posts that may show up temporarily are due to unfamiliarity and that the students are very open to learning from you and other editors. Best, Iomidvar (talk) 21:55, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

School-based WP vandals

aren't necessarily students (re this), of course. Just a thought.

Cheers, Rivertorch (talk) 06:31, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

True. However, there's a difference in how I'd block an IP that's apparently a school computer v. how I'd block an IP that might be a user's home static IP. —C.Fred (talk) 06:48, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Right, I got that. I don't know how common it is for a whois search to return Comcast on a school IP. I was sort of musing aloud about the possibility of a teacher or school administrator working late and allowing their juvenile tendencies to emerge, then winding up getting their own students blocked. Rivertorch (talk) 08:21, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Tags at top of article Chris Atton

Would you be so kind as to advise how to satisfy the two tags at the top of the article Chris Atton please? Many thanks Toffin (talk) 07:40, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

One of them should have been removed by whoever added the {{wikify}} tag. I've done that. The other one—looking at the article, it seems that footnote (ref tag) placement is the big issue. I'll make a pass through the article this afternoon (US Central Standard Time) and then remove the tag. —C.Fred (talk) 19:37, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Though in the process of wikifying, a bunch of other maintenance tags have been added. —C.Fred (talk) 21:13, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks. I've satisfied the maintenance tags and generally wikified. Hope all the wikifications and verifications are acceptable. Toffin (talk) 06:17, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Katrina Steward

There are photos of her from the washington post, we just started this profile wiki on her as of an hour ago, we are loading as we go along, give us some time. this young lady is going to have various cites and recordings published soon, we are trying to get a headstart on her. cape — Preceding unsigned comment added by Capetown21 (talk • contribs) 06:53, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Mike Waters article

Hello C. Fred, I am doing this Wikipedia entry on Mike Waters (Character) for class and will be putting up more references ASAP. Can you please keep it up so I can add more references? I have them handy but just cannot add them because you have redirected it. Thank you Badhouses (talk) 19:22, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

I've replied to your help request on your talk page, offering to userfy the page. —C.Fred (talk) 19:24, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Please do so. Thanks so much!Badhouses (talk) 19:29, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Cornell, ON

I think that the you should not have deleted what i have added to this article. 1. The roads should not be deleted because there is a diffrent area of cornell which is really big and that telling the readers where the exact location is. 2. Builders plays a big role in devoleping cornell because only about 40% of cornell is developed and that the builders are still on site STILL building homes for Cornell. Thanks MapsRule (talk) 02:24, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

PP

Please, if you can, block it. The editor is over the 3RR anyway and has had plenty of warnings (I've left him a couple of notes myself). Sitush (talk) 05:56, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

They've both been 3RR'd now anyway. Surprised at Banaticus because s/he's been around a while. Sitush (talk) 06:22, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

And I've commented on the AN3 report. Banaticus probably should've filed a report around the time (s)he got to a third revert; however, I think it was an edit close enough to a vandalism revert to not warrant blocking. Sizzletimethree, on the other hand, is right at that borderline. It's like basketball: there was enough for a "That's enough, coach, no more," but not to bang them with a technical foul. But one more step out of line would do it. —C.Fred (talk) 06:25, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

I agree with that. Problem is Sizzletimethree had issues yesterday also. I've tried to give that user some advice in an attempt not to see a template bombardment leading to WP:BITE. I'm not massively hopeful, but we'll see. Sitush (talk) 06:31, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

And I agree somewhat about the template bombardment. I try to at least supplement the templates with situation-specific text whenever possible, especially if I have to warn a user two or three times. However, I didn't think the "this is a warning" was enough for 3RR. By using that template, it spelled out what constitutes a violation and that it's a blockable offence. —C.Fred (talk) 06:40, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to jump in here.. I think the user just was acting like a typical newcomer, and was perhaps even WP:DELICIOUS. The user didn't violate 3rr, they stopped, luckily for them. I'm really not convinced that it was vandalism either, looking through the edits and assuming good faith, I think you could credibly believe that they were trying to improve the article from their pov... I'm not sure what the issues were yesterday, I honestly haven't gone through and looked at their history, but I do know the user that warned her yesterday files frivolous reports so I'm probably biased against it... <sub>W</sub>M<sup>O</sup> <sub>Please leave me a wb if you reply</sub> 06:43, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm not criticising the use of templates. It's just too many of them can become self-defeating, I think. Your use of specific additional text is not something all that many ppl do in my limited experience. Anyway, it's all done and dusted (for now!). I can go back to nurturing the talents of a rather more sedate new user, CaroleHenson :) Thanks for your comments and for your assistance. - Sitush (talk) 06:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

WMO: If I thought the user were out only to disrupt the encyclopedia, I'd have already given a block. I think some poor judgment was exercised, particularly with some of the edit summaries, but I hold out hope for the user. Plus, the edit war has ceased: I'm taking that as a sign they're willing to play by the rules. —C.Fred (talk) 06:50, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Now the real reason for coming here

Thanks for your comments at 3RR, I agree and stated so on the page... I don't think the edits were vandalism per se so technically a violation (on the established user's part) especially considering neither tried to talk on the talk page, but assuming good faith, its probably fair to assume that the established user was just reverting assuming it was vandalism (you reverted the only edit that seemed to me to be obvious vandalism..). Luckily for the new user, they had exactly three edits so they probably won't be blocked for that.

Anyways, thanks for your comments. I probably shouldn't have filed that, but my tendency when I see a edit war is to just collect differences and report automatically, especially if I see they've already been warned..

<sub>W</sub>M<sup>O</sup> <sub>Please leave me a wb if you reply</sub> 06:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

As I said in closing the report, I think you filed the report in good faith. You saw an edit war, and you sought administrator intervention. It looks like the problematic edits have been headed off (at least for the night). Thank you for filing it; if nothing else, it got a few more positive suggestions to one of the editors. —C.Fred (talk) 07:05, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

True that, thanks for closing: I was going to withdraw it per the established editor (who's name I cannot remember)'s message on their talk page, but you had already marked it "no vio" when I got there. Now back to the more benign areas of wikipedia, like my sandbox. :) <sub>W</sub>M<sup>O</sup> <sub>Please leave me a wb if you reply</sub> 07:08, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Long lists

Hi, a quick question if I may. I've just fixed a broken reflist at Jean-Marie_Pelt, caused by a recent edit. The edit has added list containing an absolute ton of books written by the subject of the article. The main body of the article is only 2 - 3 sentences. Does WP:NOTDIR apply here? Or some similar policy? I know lists can get long (I bet the Rolling Stones article is one such) but in this case it also seems to be a sort of "undue weight" thing. Effectively, a biographical article of no particular merit now looks more like a shopping/reading list.

I'm not massively bothered, just curious. - Sitush (talk) 18:17, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

I think you may be hitting the nail on the head when you say "a biographical article of no particular merit." I think it is undue weight given to his list of publications. I also think that WP:AUTHOR implies that it's the quality (awards, reviews, independent coverage) of the published work and not the quantity that gives rise to notability.

Like you, I'm not overly concerned about letting this article remain in its current condition—or with a pruned bibliography. That said, there's a good chance it wouldn't survive AfD. —C.Fred (talk) 18:28, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

I would know where to start with AfD, despite the copious instructions. So it looks like it is an elderly Frenchman's lucky day. :) Thanks again for the input. I might get the hang of all these policies by the time I hit several million edits. - Sitush (talk) 18:37, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Actually, AfD does bootstrap itself a little: the {{subst:afd}} template includes directions on next steps. (Tip: right-click and open the intermediate steps in a new tab to preserve the instructions on the article for a while.) The other catch is explaining why the article should be deleted. When I nominate, it usually comes down to the article not demonstrating notability and not being verifiable to reliable sources. —C.Fred (talk) 18:48, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

I see that you have now tagged the article with multiple issues which, IMO, seems sensible. If it should end up going forward for AfD, which I think is likely, would it be possible for me to have a go? I could do with learning the process at some point and if you are supportive then this time would be as good as any. You note above has removed some of my doubts. I do realise that this sounds a bit like someone looking for an opportunity to be destructive etc, but it isn't. Gotta start somewhere. And if the requested citations etc appear then everyone is a winner. - Sitush (talk) 02:18, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Of course. And if you think that time has come and you want to run the nomination text by me, feel free. —C.Fred (talk) 03:03, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

OK. Thanks very much. - Sitush (talk) 03:04, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

You read my mind!

I was actually rewriting for a broader scope. The use of this model is probably a good way to get the ball rolling - they are at the top of google, they have been around a while and actually their operation is much better than the one I work with. It is, in short, an excellent Best Practices.

But I totally take your point that we need to be sure to not come across like we are promoting any one or locked into a local viewpoint.

I actually am not anywhere near those ones.

If you are online maybe you can add the proper work in progress template tag I forgot how it reads.

How much do I need to post up before I can rest and go without an insufficient-content Speedy Delete worry??

Also, there is no other article this is a sore deficit.

Thanks it is cool to have help so early...  गीता Brother Can You Spare A Dime - Unsparingly correcting prejudicial edits  Brothercanyouspareadime echoing on TALK page.(talk) 03:20, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Progress

It would be undue weight if the article was finished. I would have no problem fleshing out the rest of the article and other matter that needs to be in the article and then going back and extending the content.

It is cool that at least the (c) issue is laid to rest. And yes it is undue weight if that was a finished article but as you may note the article is only half an hour or so old.

I would agree that we need to presume that thousands of users may be taking the article as it is now for their eternal model of the final word of truth on the topic, so, fine, point taken, agreed:

More general content will be added before extending the subtopics.

Alternatively, as sub articles.

Um, please bear in mind that this article is pertinent to life saving measures and there may be a quantum of relaxation of wikilitigiousness for the sake of getting the content up.

I don't mind creating a more general article before unduly weighting, but if there is some imperfection in what I am able to complete in one sitting I would appreciate if the stub is not edited down to the point it is liable for deletion due to lack of content. Or, for that matter that it is not so pared down that it is essentially useless for people seeking information on the topic. Thanks   A Homeless Man Died of Hypothermia in My Town This Winter Brother Can You Brothercanyouspareadime (talk) 03:49, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not a directory, and that includes a directory of emergency services. People in need of live-saving measures should be contacting local authorities and not looking it up here. —C.Fred (talk) 03:51, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Dude you are preaching to the choir. There is nothing on order of a "directory" here; hope you didn't think that is where I was headed. Brothercanyouspareadime (talk) 03:56, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Your personal attention..

...may be warranted, see here. WuhWuzDat 06:24, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

I think that situation was handled readily (and perhaps better) by another admin. Thanks for the heads-up, though. —C.Fred (talk) 06:26, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

LosAl TV Studio 1 page questions

Hi Fred! I have taken out most of the copyright material and paraphrased the rest. What else needs to changes so that this page will not get deleted? Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Localtvproducer (talk • contribs) 06:28, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Probably the best thing for that page is to let a person who is completely independent of the station to find some coverage of it in reliable sources and start an article from scratch. That does not mean to create a(nother) new account and restart the article. —C.Fred (talk) 06:31, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Localtvproducer SPI filed, as Mcjax actually did the copyvio reduction, but Localtvproducer claimed the edits himself above. Failed duck test, as the duck quacked out of the wrong hole. WuhWuzDat 06:40, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

February 2011

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on CAPTCHA. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue.

In particular, the three-revert rule states that:

1. Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
2. Editors violating the rule will usually be blocked for 24 hours for a first incident.
3. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording, and content that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. R3ap3R.inc (talk) 19:07, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Please see WP:AN3#User:R3ap3R.inc reported by User:C.Fred (Result: ). Right after leaving this warning, you made your fourth revert. Between your violation of 3RR, your RFPP after you added the text the first time, and the tone of your edit summaries, I don't see any other option besides the AN3 report. —C.Fred (talk) 20:23, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

arkham horror/fan fiction

The article is intended as a reference source for a series of original stories, much like any source for H.P. Lovecraft's mythos, basically detailing the various facets of the entire mythos as created by the author, a reference for those stories, and how certain aspects differ from the original mythos. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MyArkhamHorror (talk • contribs) 22:24, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

And what secondary sources are you pulling on for these differences? —C.Fred (talk) 22:30, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Interpretation and examination of the original source material, as is found in the difference between the orginal author and subsequent writers, August Derleth etc — Preceding unsigned comment added by MyArkhamHorror (talk • contribs) 22:38, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Whose interpretation are you using? If you're using your own, that's original research. Wikipedia is not a repository of original research. —C.Fred (talk) 22:43, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Not sure I understand if I write a story Im not allowed to make a wiki that expalins it, say like with any writer, they write something then someone makes a wiki that details the ideas, characters, etc. Thats considered original research, and therefore not allowed, I should not that these stories of which the wiki is a reference to do not even exist at this point.

MyArkhamHorror — Preceding unsigned comment added by MyArkhamHorror (talk • contribs) 23:21, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Other writers should not start articles about their stories, either. If the stories are notable, unrelated editors will write about them.

It's absolutely inappropriate to start an encyclopedia article about stories you intend to write in the future. —C.Fred (talk) 02:01, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

FRED HELP

Fred thank goodness you're here Fred! I did exactly what you told me to do Fred but only a little picture of a life saver showed up on my page look:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Homezfoo#HELP_I_NEED_HELP

Is anyone going to help me or what must I do next. HELP ME FRED! <=O --Homezfoo (talk) 05:13, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Because you used the wrong template. Their template for that purpose is called {{helpme}}, and there is no short or alternate form for it. I've changed the template on your request. —C.Fred (talk) 05:15, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Fred you really are a LIFE SAVER! lol! jk no but really thank you for helping me!!! Farewell Fred!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Homezfoo (talk • contribs) 05:19, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Mann (rapper)

Hello,

I am curious to why Mann (rapper) has been deleted, he is currently signed to a Major recording label, and has a song on the billboard hot 100....

he meets all the requirements that wikipedia asks for, I am not sure why his page keeps getting deleted, please advise me to what i should do to keep his page from not being deleted —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.91.77.154 (talk) 03:53, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

The article did not make clear that he had a song on the Hot 100. If you can provide me a link to a reliable source that verifies he's in the Hot 100, I'll restore the article. —C.Fred (talk) 04:01, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

http://www.billboard.com/#/song/mann/buzzin/23075391 here is a link to the billboard charts

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Damblogs12 (talk • contribs) 00:42, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I have no objections to creating a new article that complies with Wikipedia article guidelines. However, I cannot restore the old article; the majority of the prose is a copyright infringement of http://atlmusicreview.com/?page_id=728. —C.Fred (talk) 00:49, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

We can site that source as well, I am actually in contact with the people who have written that bio, as well as Mann's Management — Preceding unsigned comment added by Damblogs12 (talk • contribs) 01:01, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Even if they were to agree to donate the text—and open the way for other agencies to commercial re-use the text—it would not meet the quality standards of a Wikipedia article. Further, it sounds like you have a conflict of interest in this situation. —C.Fred (talk) 01:04, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

So what can I can I do to create a better page that complies with Wikipedias article guidelines — Preceding unsigned comment added by Damblogs12 (talk • contribs) 01:08, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I still have not heard back from you in regards to what I can do to have a wikipedia page about this artist, please inform me to what i need to do. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Damblogs12 (talk • contribs) 03:12, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

For the artist to have an article, make sure to back up every claim in the article with a reliable source, preferably one independent of the artist. Remember that sources provide facts to be used in the article, not sentences—you must write the article in your own words, rather than copy it from a website. Finally, remember that the article must be written from a neutral point of view. It's an encyclopedia article about the artist, not a promotional release for him. —C.Fred (talk) 04:20, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

"Quiet correction" of quotes?

Can you point me at the guideline that says it's permissible to correct quotations?"—Kww(talk) 05:15, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm looking for it. I know the guideline exists, because it came up at Talk:Lady Gaga. There's an issue with some early stories about her using the camel case spelling of GaGa, and consensus was to render the spelling in those quotes as Gaga, not Ga[g]a. —C.Fred (talk) 05:22, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Found it: WP:MOSQUOTE. "Trivial spelling or typographical errors should be silently corrected (for example, correct ommission to omission, harasssment to harassment)—unless the slip is textually important." —C.Fred (talk) 05:23, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

You should have seen the controversy on Natalee Holloway, where "There is criticism that it is only a story because she is a because she is a pretty, blonde, and white, and it is criticism that journalists are taking to heart and looking elsewhere for other stories." got corrected to "There is criticism that it is only a story because she is a pretty blonde, and white, and it is criticism that journalists are taking to heart and looking elsewhere for other stories." Removing that extraneous comma without a [sic] was treated as heresy. I argued long and hard that we were quoting a verbal statement, and the fact that the original transcriber added a comma didn't mean that the original speaker somehow spoke an extra comma.—Kww(talk) 05:35, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Edit History cleared

Hi, have you any idea whether people can clear an edit history? I put a CSD on Chakhi_Khuntia because it was a straight copy/paste job. Went away and did something else, then saw a change on the page so went into the history. Even my CSD tagging was missing - all it showed was the original editor's name with a timestamp newer than my CSD tagging. The tag is still on the page but the content below it is very different. Weird. - Sitush (talk) 15:56, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

The logs for the page (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Chakhi+Khuntia) tell the story. At 15:29 UTC you requested deletion of the page via a G12 tag. User:Ultraexactzz deleted the page at 15:37, which cleared the history. Puneetrathsharma (talk · contribs) then recreated the page at 15:45, and the recreated page included your CSD tag but had substantially different (shorter) text. User:Panyd then deleted and salted the page at 16:13.

Ninety-nine times out of a hundred, if edit history disappears like that, it means an administrator deleted the page and another user recreated it. This is very common with articles tagged for speedy deletion, as the original editor is either still working on the page (and has it in an edit window) or is able to grab a cached version to recreate the article from. —C.Fred (talk) 17:07, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Makes sense, thanks. I suspect that the editor may have been a bit more cunning, however. Or perhaps just very naive. The second version was not a copyvio ... but nor was it anything to do with the subject. BTW, had to propose an AfD today and you were right, it isn't too difficult. I think AfD was the way to go because there had previously been a CSD on it some time ago. We'll see. - Sitush (talk) 17:14, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Redirect is what is needed not a simple delete.

Warming center or Warming centers is an up and running page. You deleted warming center but as I recall it had a request for a redirect right there on the page. I reinstated the page with the request for redirect but I thought you might like an opportunity to do us the honor. Thanks.Brothercanyouspareadime (talk) 05:26, 16 February 2011 (UTC) Somebody (perhaps you) already took care of it. Maybe it is automatic but your delete took place before the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warming_center page was built or processed into the servers, I suppose. Brothercanyouspareadime Alls well that ends well.(talk) 05:26, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

If you thought it needed a redirect, you should have just created it yourself. The syntax is very straightforward. IMO, I don't think it needs a redirect, but redirects are cheap, so I've turned Warming centers into a proper redirect to Warming center. —C.Fred (talk) 05:29, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

I thought only admins were permitted to do that. Thus, I didn't search on the term. Anyway, it works fine.Brothercanyouspareadime (talk) 05:31, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Check this out these are very nice gizmos indeed Brothercanyouspareadime (talk) 22:29, 23 December 2010 (UTC) has given you a dove! Doves promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day happier. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a dove, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past (this fits perfectly) or a good friend. Cheers!

---

Spread the peace of doves by adding {{subst:Peace dove}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Brothercanyouspareadime (talk) 05:36, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

WHY (Canadian Band) page

Hello,

You made some suggestions on the WHY page and I've made some corrections. I'm wondering if they suffice. Thanks. Scaramangaify (talk) 12:17, 16 February 2011 (UTC)scaramangaify

Fred, your assistance is needed

There has been a bit of an ongoing debate between myself and cmadler on a certain issue related to the recent activity under Farb. I would appreciate a neutral point of view. Please take a look here and either comment or take action as necessary. Thank you. Bujin Karyu (talk) 14:23, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

I have weighed in on the deletion request over at Commons. I agree with some points you made: it's not the image itself that's causing the issues but the title and how it's used on the English Wikipedia. —C.Fred (talk) 17:43, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for helping resolve this matter. I have renamed the description but I am unfamiliar with the method for renaming the file itself. Renaming it as an armored or captured jeep would suffice. Bujin Karyu (talk) 18:03, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

David H. McGrath

There is one sentence about me, and it's all true. If you need me to verify the medical claims, I will gladly email you my medical records. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidHMcGrath (talk • contribs) 02:05, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

No, that won't accomplish anything. Instead, provide links to some stories about you in newspapers, magazines, or other reliable sources. —C.Fred (talk) 02:07, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

http://www.telegram.com/article/20101216/FLASH/12160617/1239/Worcester&TEMPLATE=TOWNPORTAL&WT_TOWN=Worcester&WT_CAME_FROM=MAIN_PAGE

http://www.necn.com/pages/landing?blockID=365996 — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidHMcGrath (talk • contribs)

And which criteria of WP:BIO are you asserting you meet? A blogger who wears a different t-shirt every day doesn't seem overly notable. —C.Fred (talk) 02:16, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

I guess I would fall under creative professionals. I suffer from Crohn's Disease, survived a cancerous brain tumor, have published 5 books, and in 2010 wore a different t-shirt every day in order to raise money for charity. Do you have another biography on Wikipedia that can make all of these claims? If you can't, I'd call that notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidHMcGrath (talk • contribs)

But you don't meet any of the five listed criteria for creative professionals. Publishing five books does not inherently make one notable. —C.Fred (talk) 02:26, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

So, wearing a different t-shirt each day for an entire year and writing about them to raise money to help cancer patients isn't a "new concept"? What other cancer-surviving, Crohn's Disease-suffering, author of 5 books did that before me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidHMcGrath (talk • contribs) 02:35, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

It may be a new concept, but I don't think it's a significant new concept. —C.Fred (talk) 03:04, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Since when is helping people with cancer by donating your possessions not significant? DavidHMcGrath (talk) 03:12, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

URGENT: Need deleted article "Jesus II: Back From the Cave" to read it again

I need the article text or html or whatever so i can get the text from my article to revise it thanks! Justinlovespastry (talk) 05:04, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Why not start from scratch, including gathering information from reliable sources, if you intend to start an article? —C.Fred (talk) 05:07, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Simon Perry

I copied the wrong link into the G12 tag; it's a straight cut-and-paste from [5]. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 05:07, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

That's the site I was looking at, and I'm not seeing copied text. What are you seeing that's copied? Which paragraphs, or which chunks of paragraphs? —C.Fred (talk) 05:09, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

I see what was going on; part of the references list was copied onto here, not the whole text. I don't think that's a problem- my bad. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 05:11, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Birmingham Power Squadrons

Fred. Please tell me why you have deleted my new (an in process) article on the Birmingham Power Squadron. Thank you, Ron Simpson — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rgsconsulting (talk • contribs) 19:41, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

As I noted on your talk page, there were two reasons:

1. As a local chapter of USPS, the article met speedy deletion criterion A7, a non-notable organization.
2. Since it was copied from the BPS website, it also met criterion G12, copyright infringement.

The infringement left little option: the article had to be deleted. —C.Fred (talk) 19:44, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Fred, Please let me know why you deleted our new (and in process) subject for the Birmingham Power Squadron. I am the Public Relations Officer for the Birmingham Power Squadron, am authorized produce this entry, and to link ot our web pages. Ron Simpson - User rgsconsulting — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rgsconsulting (talk • contribs) 19:47, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

I will reply on your talk page. Please address any follow-up replies there; I am watching your talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 19:49, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Ok I see what you are saying, however, we ARE a significant organization as the USPS operatest through it Squadrons and we are a significant educator in our area and significantly involved in the community. Additionally we have acted as the catalyst for corrpboration between South East Michigan Squdrons, The Coast Guard, The Coast Guard Auxiliary, the Michigan DNR, US Customs and Border Patrol, Canadian Customs, the Oakland County Sherriff's Department, and the Macomb County Sherriff's Department.

Additionally, as Public Relations Officer, I am authorized to refer to our website. Ron Simpson — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rgsconsulting (talk • contribs) 19:56, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Banner notice at top of an article page

Hi, I realise that you have a lot on your plate at the moment, so sorry to pester. The Carlos Slim article seems to suffer greatly from people trying to adjust the figure for his wealth - all sorts of figures are bandied about - without providing a citation to verify it. Sometimes it is outright vandalism in that they also adjust other things and/or set the figure to nil, but more often I think it is ignorance. What is more, the adjustment is usually only made in the infobox, which leads to inconsistencies with the text.

I made a comment about this on the talk page but there have been a further three such attempts in the last hour or so. I'm sure that I have seen an article somewhere which had a banner at the top basically saying "if you intend to edit this in order to do X then please remember that it requires a citation. If you have no citation then do not edit" (I'm paraphrasing). do you know if this can be done? Was it my imagination? - Sitush (talk) 20:21, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

What I've done is added a comment to the article. If you look at the infobox, you'll see it in the networth field.

Comments can be added as needed by enclosing text within special characters:

Foo bar <!-- This is a comment and won't show up --> bat

is rendered as

Foo bar bat

One thing to bear in mind: comments don't nest, so if you enclose a block of text in a comment, and there was a comment inside the text already, the comment will end where the first one did. —C.Fred (talk) 20:30, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

The next step would be to add an edit notice to the article. If it's an ongoing problem, we can escalate it to that—or just protect the page if the disruption is severe enough. —C.Fred (talk) 20:31, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Going off the history, the disruption does get to be quite a nuisance at times but semi-protection would resolve that as it is almost always from new users employing IP addresses. But let's see how we go. I'm loathe to employ protection unless absolutely necessary, although I did request it for one article last week (an article about Sikh jokes, which Sikhs were not happy with). - Sitush (talk) 20:36, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Redirects

Prompted by this reversion, which I support, I notice that around half of Almcahm's contributions have been in the form of creating redirects that seem unnecessary, predominantly to HM related articles, including one to De-Do-Do-Do, Da-Don't-Don't, Don't, Tell My Secret, which I doubt is one anyone would every bother attempting to type. --AussieLegend (talk) 22:28, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Libyan ambassadors' article

Thanks for moving the Libyan ambassadors who stepped down article. I don't know how to move it, would you mind moving it on to "Libyan officials" instead of ambassadors to make it a bit broader? thanks! derjanosch Derjanosch (talk) 18:41, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

See the discussion I've started at Talk:List of Libyan ambassadors who stepped down during 2011 protests. My concern is scope creep with the list. —C.Fred (talk) 18:45, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Patna Training College

Mr. C.Fred, you have a message - ([[6]]) Balltender (talk) 19:57, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

I have replied and an watching Talk:Patna Training College for further discussion. —C.Fred (talk) 20:20, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

JSOC Edit War

Thank you, sir. It's about time an adult entered the room. Charlie Tango Bravo 21:07, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

So, now [Charlie Tango Bravo] uses veiled attacks on character? This is acceptable? My only goal is to have the facts on wiki, not what people want to believe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paolau.kalani (talk • contribs) 21:23, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

If it's a veiled attack, he's not saying anything different about himself, since he was in the room as well. That said, it was probably uncalled for.

Re: having the facts on wiki: Remember that anything on Wikipedia must be verifiable, so there may be times where there's a gap between what really happens and what can be supported via documentation. —C.Fred (talk) 21:45, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Sir or Ma'am, Charlie Tango Bravo has AGAIN made an implied personal attack on me on the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) talk page. I've given numerous references and instances to prove my points, yet, rather than foster a productive debate and work towards accurate information, Charlie Tango Bravo has sought to ban me from making changes to the page so that he may write edits as he sees fit. Additionally, he refuses to appropriately address my concerns on the talk page by mixing some accurate information with some inaccurate information. I would prefer, if possible, an INDEPENDENT third party to review the information so that credible information is presented on the Wikipedia page. Paolau.kalani (talk) 21:50, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Chen yi

This user's user page has already been speedily deleted for advertising by you, but he/she recreated it with yet more advertising. Just a tip-off.Jasper Deng (talk) 18:38, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

And yes, I'm watching your talk page.Jasper Deng (talk) 18:39, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

It's subtler, but it's the same company. I've deleted it again and left a message saying not to link to that company on the user's talk page. Thanks for the heads-up! —C.Fred (talk) 19:53, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Done it again, but on his talk page this time. - Sitush (talk) 09:34, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello

I'm citing sources that say Born This Way from Lady Gaga is her third studio album, including 2 from Billboard. I think the article should be changed. Thanks :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akerk (talk • contribs) 11:32, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Remember that Wikipedia operates on consensus. That means that when issues like this come up, there's discussion about it at the talk page, and a conclusion is reached on what the outcome should be. In the case of Gaga's studio albums, there has been discussion on the issue, and Fame Monster is not counted as an album. If you think it needs changed, you'll have to discuss the matter and generate a new consensus. —C.Fred (talk) 15:55, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Talk page "stalking"

I'm bothering you again, sorry. I've got one of your old friends intervening on my talk page, seemingly trying to stir things up. I'm tolerating it - sort of - for now but given the person's past unwillingness to learn when to stop I anticipate that this will continue. What should I do if it does continue? The person is hacked off with me re: an article you recently redirected, which action I supported. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 22:42, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I now think that he may be engaging in warfare (certainly threatening it). And possibly sockpuppeting as well. - Sitush (talk) 22:47, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I saw that warning on your talk page, and that raised my eyebrow with possible respect to sockpuppetry. On the other hand, maybe it's a user he knows through some other context—or a talk page lurker—who jumped in on the situation.

If you think that his actions are a breach of etiquette, you could open a Wikiquette alert about his conduct. If you think they get to the point of harassment or where administrator intervention is needed, you could file a report at the administrators' noticeboard for incidents. Alternately, just ignore him whenever possible. —C.Fred (talk) 23:01, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Did you see the bit at User_talk:Sitush#Tissa_Wijeratne_qualification_is_false - last few contributions to that section and, in particular, the very last of them? I think that might be an etiquette issue but am unsure. He seems to be threatening to be deliberately disruptive. - Sitush (talk) 23:04, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I did see it. I also saw the discussion at his talk page on 22 February—and IMO, I wouldn't say you're entirely innocent over it. That's why I suggested backing away from the situation for a while. Hopefully he goes about his business and makes constructive edits elsewhere. If he continues to bother you, stay calm about it. That way, if an AN/I report is warranted, it's clear that you're tried to back away from the situation, but he's continuing to push the confrontations. —C.Fred (talk) 23:14, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

OK, thanks. See what happens. - Sitush (talk) 23:16, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I am trying to create a wikipedia page for my neighborhood. Please don't delete my edits. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LouisAlmost (talk • contribs) 06:17, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Make sure you create a page that's in compliance with guidelines. Under speedy deletion criterion A3, an article with just a restatement of the title is subject to deletion. —C.Fred (talk) 06:20, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Colleges of Patna

Hi, I've been doing some work on Patna and came across an issue which you dealt with in part a few days ago, ie: the numerous educational institutions which have (mostly stub) articles and are a part of the University of Patna. I've been bold and merged all the various elements into the latter article but have not yet made any redirects/blanked the original articles because the issue has not actually been discussed. If you have the time to check the University article as it now stands then maybe I can get some assurance that redirecting is appropriate? I know that you did it for Patna Training College and someone else has done it for another constituent, so hopefully all is ok. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 13:39, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

 Done I've set all the articles (save Bihar College of Engineering, which is now a stand-alone school) as redirects. I've also made notes in the history of University of Patna that the text was merged from the respective articles. It's a requirement of the GFDL to attribute text to its authors, and by pointing back to the prior article, it keeps the "chain of attribution" going to meet the requirement. —C.Fred (talk) 17:54, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Also, good job on the merges and setting up the subsections! Everything looks pretty orderly in the article. —C.Fred (talk) 17:55, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much. I'm pleased that it meets with approval, and even more so that you have sorted out the redirects for me! I've just taken a look at your attribution notes - am I right in thinking that you created the note by effectively performing a null edit? That is, open for editing, fill the edit summary and then save changes without actually changing anything in the article body? - Sitush (talk) 18:10, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I made a very trivial edit (spacing in the header). In my experience, null edits don't always get picked up and recorded in history. —C.Fred (talk) 18:13, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

OK. Neat trick! - Sitush (talk) 18:14, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Dancing with the Stars (season 12)

Hi, is there any way you could semi-protect this page because of all the uncourced rumours regarding the cast which have not been revealed yet. Thanks. --MSalmon (talk) 22:58, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

If it were any longer to go than tonight until the cast is revealed, I might. However, I'm going to wait and see what happens after tonight, when things should stabilize. —C.Fred (talk) 23:08, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

The cast is going to be revealed tonight in the US --MSalmon (talk) 23:10, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

NCBIS

NCBIS NCBIS (talk) 07:54, 1 March 2011 (UTC) There is no conflict of interest. I am stating facts of our non profit school similar to MBIS and BISC schhool in Cairo

If you have no conflict of interest, then your username is in violation of the username policy. It is confusing: it creates the appearance that the account represents NCBIS. I suggest you request a change of username to a username that reflects only you and does not suggest a relationship with the school. (I have replied on your talk page; please continue the thread there.) —C.Fred (talk) 07:57, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Guidance on university articles

Hi, are you aware of any WP guidance/policies for university articles? In particular, regarding what may amount to what I would consider trivia such as lists of recipients of honorary degrees or detailed descriptions of the parameters of each course offered? I've looked and can find nothing specific, which may mean that I have not looked hard enough! - Sitush (talk) 11:49, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

WP:UNIGUIDE is WikiProject Universities' guide to college and university articles. I don't see it addressing honorary degrees specifically, although it does say to avoid a list of alumni in the university's article. —C.Fred (talk) 16:05, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Told you, I didn't look hard enough. Thanks very much ... again. - Sitush (talk) 16:09, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Lubanki redirect to Labanki

Fred,

Pls help me here. I'm new to wiki and what I am trying to do here is to make the spelling of the title in the landing page correct. It should say Labanki and not Lubanki. How can that be done?

Smartest stupid (talk) 05:25, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

First, you'll need to find reliable sources that say that Labanki is the preferred spelling (or Romanization) of the language's name. The article is lacking any reliable sources, and a Google search suggests that Lubanki is the preferred spelling. I'm starting discussion on the issue at Talk:Lubanki.

(Procedural note: I have replied at your talk page, since this message was in reply to a warning about copy-and-paste moves. Please continue the discussion on your user talk page, which I am watching, or at Talk:Lubanki.) —C.Fred (talk) 05:29, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Ricardo Duchesne

Hi. What is the problem with the article? He has been an assistant professor for 15 years, he has written numerous articles in peer-reviewed journals and he has just published a major work on the 'Uniqueness of Western Civilization'. What more do you want to get the article included in WP? Gun Powder Ma (talk) 01:42, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

The major problem is he has just published the work on the "Uniqueness of Western Civilization." With no coverage of it in independent reliable sources, there's no way to gauge whether it's a significant work. —C.Fred (talk) 01:54, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

So what you want, reviews? And what if there are already reviews of his older works existing? Gun Powder Ma (talk) 18:07, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

It depends on where the review is published, and to what extent it's about Duchesne himself. A review about a work he co-edited wouldn't count much in the sense of substantial coverage. —C.Fred (talk) 18:09, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

I've collected a fair amount on him now, he is actually a full professor, received a SSHRC Grant from the Federal Government of Canada and, most importantly, has been fairly extensively discussed by prominent colleagues of him. The question is now shall I restore the article adding the new material or how do we proceed? Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 00:10, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Is he in a named professorship? That would meet WP:ACADEMIC's notability criteria. The SSHRC Grant might meet the criteria also, depending on the nature of the grant. Discussion by colleagues also might make him notable, depending on how and where he's discussed.

My suggestion would be to draft a new article on Ricardo Duchesne. If you prefer to start with the previous text, I can restore it to your user space. Let me know what you decide: if you start a new article and it isn't up to snuff, I'll make sure to userfy it rather than delete it outright (remind me of this if another admin should delete it before I see it). —C.Fred (talk) 04:25, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, please restore it to my userspace. Can you specify what you mean with the "nature" of the grant? I know he has received the SSHRC in 2003. He made his PhD in the interdisciplinary program of Social & Political thought at York University, Toronto, Canada, and won the "Doctoral Prize Award for Best Dissertation of the Year". He has written over 30 refereed articles and a number of encyclopedia entries. And he has been cited by highly notable scholars such as David Landes to name one. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 09:47, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Could you restore it now? Gun Powder Ma (talk) 19:05, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done It's up at User:Gun Powder Ma/Ricardo Duchesne. —C.Fred (talk) 19:51, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Fred? I am starting to improve to the article now but now that the edit history is reestablished it is clear that there is some foul play involved. Have you looked at the contributions of User:BlueonGray? The user registered at 22:58, 21. Feb. 2011 and went on to delete contents from the Duchesne page less than an hour later (00:06, 22. Feb. 2011). His edit summaries are vitriolic and he only edited the Duchesne article. This guy clearly came with a grudge to Wikipedia. I agree that the article needs to show more the impact Duchesne made in his field of study, but this BlueonGray was evidently never here to improve WP but seems to be on a personal vendetta mission. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 23:13, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I expanded the article with a section on his main thesis. I also gave more information on his academic career and participation in academic discourse. What do you think? Gun Powder Ma (talk) 01:32, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

It's expanded sufficiently that I no longer think that CSD A7 applies. I've moved it back to mainspace accordingly. —C.Fred (talk) 01:37, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

.Thanks. Could you delete User:Gun Powder Ma/Ricardo Duchesne. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 02:50, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done —C.Fred (talk) 02:51, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

OMG!

Hi, I've been trawling through various Patna-related articles and have just come across Education_in_Patna. I'm starting to wish that I didn't get involved in this spaghetti situation. Would appreciate your comments, bearing in mind the main Patna article's education section (which does not in any event link to this one ... yet). I'm much more confident dealing with the defunct engineering companies of Manchester, UK - eg: W & J Galloway & Sons or Churchill Machine Tool Company - but keep getting drawn into other, diverse areas. The wonders of the web! Don't worry if you haven't the time or inclination to check it out: I'd quite understand. - Sitush (talk) 01:19, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I've just gone ahead and cut it back massively. Not finished yet & am off to bed, but hopefully it is a little more as it s/b than when I started. - Sitush (talk) 03:12, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

I just hope nobody edited his ass.

I swear thats going to make me laugh all night. HalfShadow 01:37, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Larry Cox

I have finished cleaning up after my move of Larry Cox. Best, Alpha Quadrant <sup>talk</sup> 01:56, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Re: Maji Desu ka Ska! AfD

Thanks, little brain fart there. J04n(talk page) 23:05, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification!

So if I rewrite the article from a non-biased POV (or get someone who isn't an intern or creator from outside the organization to) would I be able to try and post the Pack for a Purpose article once more? I would hate to spend all the time rewriting just to get blocked once again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by PackforaPurpose (talk • contribs) 01:10, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

See your talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 01:20, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Musicsupervisor.com

What do I have to do to make the article about musicsupervisor.com a notable article. It is a real company, like any other company listed on here. I had linked references. Was it how I linked the references. What was the issue? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcosta1982 (talk • contribs) 01:34, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

The issue was the references. They weren't reliable, independent sources. —C.Fred (talk) 01:35, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

It takes more than a company's IMDB page and its own contact page to show its notable. —C.Fred (talk) 01:36, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Pack for a Purpose

Thanks so much for all of your help. I did what you suggested (to be found on my user page) and hope to see what you think. Hopefully this will be avoiding some of the issues I have before.

Thank you!

Pack For A Purpose (talk) 02:05, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Note: User was renamed from Pack For A Purpose to BJGoodman (talk · contribs). —C.Fred (talk) 04:07, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Does "Neutral point of view" mean only haters opinions are welcome,and Positive account and defense on the subject being discussed is unwelcome?

Dear Sir or Madam,

I have known this free encyclopedia as one that strives to make knowledge available on the web free of charge.This belief led me to check information on African freedom fighters on the page. To be genuine I first visited the article on Sudan Peoples Liberation Movement( SPLM)and searched Oromo Liberation Front for the sake of comparison.In effect the two subjects are covered with stark difference about the content and the spirit of the article. Does neutral point of view mean collection of allegations on the subject discussed?? Is the article meant to prove OLF as terrorist?? I believe you know the subject is very sensitive issue. And when you collect unproven allegations from websites or others collect unproven allegations on OLF and post as a neutral article, it is quite incredible.And it would severely undermine the profile of Wikipedia in the eyes of 40 million potential Oromo readers today or in the future. This is why I included links from neutral media like Nation TV Kenyan:1. [7] 2. [8] Please patiently watch these documentary and draw a conclusion from neutral point of view.In border areas even civilians are armed and they kill each other for posture (grazing lands) and loot each other. The fact that OLF traverses borders to seek safe haven often triggers people for prejudice like we see here. More than ever OLF is now stronger and carrying out its liberation struggle in the heart of Oromia ( Ethiopia) and more frequently posting military achievements on its website.It more unified and I believe the independence of Oromia is inevitable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oromian (talk • contribs) 03:51, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, let's see some of the text that you tried to put in the article tonight (diff):

The writers of this article should first understand the nature of TPLF before copying and pasting unproven accusations against OLF. The writers should accept OLF for whom it claims to be rather than displaying the figure in the minds of its enemies.No one can claim to know someone more than the person knows himself.Just check your window screen scroll ,more than 75% of what is written here on OLF is unfounded allegation while it should have focused on OLF's real nature, and what it stands for.

That's absolutely unallowable in the article itself. If you want to discuss what's in the article, carry out a discussion on the talk page about how to improve the article.

One Oromo citizen named Esayas Hordofa who worked as director of Oromo TV program on Ethiopian TV, confessed participating in the drama produced by EPDRF, including the Bedano mass killing before he died of gangrene.Such important information could not be documented. But it is the reality.

Wikipedia hinges on verifiability. Unfortunately, if the information could not be documented, it cannot be used in the article. Taking a surface glance of the rest of the article, the bulk of it has references. Now, I haven't vetted all of the sources, but at least there are footnotes and an attempt to comply with the verifiability policy instead of an admission of unverifiability.

There probably are some issues in the article. Identifying the problems on the talk page and building consensus on how to change the article is the best course. Airing one's opinions and making unverifiable statements in the article is not. —C.Fred (talk) 03:58, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Userpage spam

See User:BJGoodman - got to be spam. And I note that this user substituted "Pack For A Purpose" in their sig further up your page. Never seen that before. - Sitush (talk) 03:53, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

... and I've just had a thought. Is it simply a case of a new user not understanding sandboxes etc and drafting in the wrong place? - Sitush (talk) 03:54, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

He forgot the /subpage part of it. If you check his talk page archive, I suggested he draft the article in his userspace, rather than get it deleted db-org or db-spam. —C.Fred (talk) 03:58, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Cheers. I've not seen that happen before & only thought of it after I'd written my first msg. The poet A. E. Housman once said that "five minutes' thought would have told him he was wrong; but thought is irksome and five minutes is a long time". I can spend ten minutes on something simple and still not see the obvious sometimes. - Sitush (talk) 04:06, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, thanks!

Dear C.Fred: This is Oromian.

Any way, it is good that you see the article needs major edition and may be re-writing.I believe there are a lot of Oromo and non Oromo Scholars who can neutrally analysis OLF and improve the article for future documentation. In addition quite many times, journalists and bloggers duplicate what they hear or read from medias concerned on the issue with no regard to whether the media is neutral or not.Such media foreign journalists and bloggers fish on about OLF is EPDRF's mass media that frequently broadcasts fabricated accusations and well planned propaganda dramas on OLF.

And for millions of Oromo like me reading the same crap on famous website like Wikipedia irritates me much, because I know tens of thousands of innocent civilian Oromos are languishing in Ethiopian prisons, and thousands of civilians and students were killed at gun point accused of being or sympathizing with OLF .And I know OLF stands for the freedom of these victims.Wikipedia should know there are out there who do not want the Oromo citizens having their own human rights,freedom that all human beings are entitled to,their own country and bringing transformation to the lives of millions who are systematically impoverished by successive Abyssinian rulers,by tarnishing the images of OLF-the vanguard of Oromia.

If you allow, we can improve the article by creating neutral contributers from around the world.

Thank you very much for understanding my emotion on the article.

Sincerely, Oromian Links on EPRDF's atrocities on Oromos accused of being OLF or OLF supporters: The People OLF fights for. See parts on Oromia: TPLF's terrorist actions unveiled. The people OLF fights for: --Oromian (talk) 17:20, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

AFD left hanging: Planking

If you are going to remove an AFD notice after the article was changed to a different article under the same title, then to replace an existing article under a different title. you also should close the AFD. Thanks. Edison (talk)

I closed the AfD and then explained what I did, and I got a little more long-winded than the usual AfD close. Thank you for pointing it out. I should have all the loose ends wrapped up with that article now; let me know if I missed anything. —C.Fred (talk) 16:17, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Nice job. I was really pleased to see the explanatory note on the talk page of the new article linking back to the AFD on the defunct article before the merge. Good explanation at the AFD as well. Kudos. Edison (talk) 16:36, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Planking

Well done! If I ever become an administrator, I will study the work of really good ones like you. Cullen328 (talk) 16:25, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Carlos Slim

Hi, you'll hopefully recall that I've been developing and keeping an eye on the Carlos Slim article, and I know that you have intervened recently to revert various edits. It has gone haywire tonight because of the new information from Forbes. More to the point, it has gone haywire with edits from IP addresses. I sorted out the issue earlier and now umpteen incorrect revisions have occurred. Would I be justified in simply restoring it to my last edit, which included the Forbes info? It would be much simpler than trying to unpick all the problems and would not unduly affect the status of the article. Not sure what to do but am a little dispirited with the ratio of bad edits to good ones in the space of a couple of hours, especially since I worked off cited sources and a lot of the new stuff is a bit weird or even downright wrong. - Sitush (talk) 00:03, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Have a look at my last edit. I pulled up this diff from your last edit to the then-current version in another window and went through item by item, fixing the things that should be changed. Hopefully that's got the bulk of them. —C.Fred (talk) 00:23, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

(ec) I see that you've sorted out most of it. Semi-protection might be a decent idea for a week but in any event, thanks. Again. <g>. - Sitush (talk) 00:25, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Deserved

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For tireless assistance to me, interventions, advice and, yes, a rap on my knuckles when it was appropriate. It is blindingly obvious that you do the same for many others. Sitush (talk) 00:41, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

John Fowles Center page deleted

C.Fred, Just want to make sure that I understand what we should do so that the John Fowles Center page can be included. Because the wording is from the Chapman site, it has been deleted, is this correct? The John Fowles Center is an institute on Chapman University campus, the information on the website about the John Fowles Center comes from the center documents and brochures. Are you saying that we must reword the information on wiki so that it is different from this, even though the info on Chapman's website comes directly from printed materials produced by The John Fowles Center? Thank you for the clarification~ jfc chapman — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfcchapman (talk • contribs) 20:43, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Correct. The material on Chapman's website is copyrighted by either the John Fowles Center or the university. The license is an all-rights-reserved one, so the text may not be used on Wikipedia. —C.Fred (talk) 20:49, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Please give me another chance.

Where had I gone wrong? How was it an advertisement? If you give me another chance, how may I renovative it?Naruto31132 (talk) 23:51, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

The big issue was the number of times the reader was encouraged to visit a website. That's what made it spam.

If you recreate the article, make sure that the subject is notable. The hand seals are the kind of minutiae about a show that do not warrant an article. Only if the seals have received substantial coverage in reliable sources should they have an article. —C.Fred (talk) 23:54, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Either way, I cannot have a guide.

So either way, I cannot have a guide that's followed by the company, and there is a website linked?Naruto31132 (talk) 23:57, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

The simple answer is no, you may not. Wikipedia is not a manual or guide. —C.Fred (talk) 00:02, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Carlos Slim

I'm backing off. Saw your note on the other user's talk page. Have tried to engage in discussion without success but am now pushing my own luck with reverts & respect that. - Sitush (talk) 01:56, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

User Explanation

You left me a message telling me my username was unexeptable, unless I explain myself. Here ya go: The name Adminium came from the popular RPG Minecraft. It is the name of the bedrock that is unminable that shows the bottom of the map. (Google it)Anther name you might see for the rock is Adamite. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adminium (talk • contribs) 11:58, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Pack For a Purpose Page

Good afternoon! My boss wanted me to try and rework the site once again to try and get Pack for a Purpose on Wikipedia. She was curious to why we keep being deleted when pages such as "Stuff You Rucksack" have a simular layout and seem to advertise Kate Humble (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuff_Your_Rucksack). Once again I will try to add more outside sources and see if I can get this approved via my userpage.

Once again thanks for all of the help. I'm sorry for being such an inconvenience!

Pack For A Purpose (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:41, 14 March 2011 (UTC).

First off, other articles exist. Just because similar topic X has an article doesn't mean that topic Y should have an article. That said, I'll look at Stuff Your Rucksack and see whether it merits an article or not.

I agree about improving the version on your userpage. (Or, personally, I'd have put it on a subpage, to leave your main user page free for information about you.) Let me know once you've improved it and I'll take a look.

Finally, you should probably rework your signature to mention your current account name and not your old one. Make sure you sign with four tildes and not three, so that a time stamp gets automatically tacked on. —C.Fred (talk) 19:45, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh, and the short answer on Stuff Your Rucksack: there are enough independent sources mentioned that the article is not subject to speedy deletion. The tone may be a little iffy in places, but it isn't blatant promotion. —C.Fred (talk) 19:47, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Any Ideas?

 I get it. Hmm. Is there any website where you can post guides or what? If you have no clue, then never mind. Just wondering. I want to share from my hobby. Naruto31132 (talk) 22:53, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Cheni Yi spam

Spamming again - User:Chen_yi. A persistent so-and-so ;) - Sitush (talk) 15:44, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Sidney Lowe

Wow! Everyone wants a shot at ol' Sid! My edit today was designed to work regardless whether Lowe was fired, resigned or was retained, simply changing in the first graf, "is the current coach" to "most recently was the coach" or something to that effect. Basically the change was to call attention to any admins to be monitoring his status today. Good job on keeping up. O7

The infamous 74.250.180.104 (talk) 00:36, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

The irony

That was so funny. We have an article which has a section on the Shroud of Turin being a "medieval forgery" and we get forged signatures on a possibly forged article on it. So we now need theories on where that article was and who forged the signature.... History2007 (talk) 16:50, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Syriac-Maronite

Hi, I've been talking with the contributor who added the Syriac bit and it seems that is the full title of the church but, as you say, the short form shld suffice. I didn't want to push it further in the article because of warring. Oddly, this contributor favoured Maronite Christian over Maronite Catholic when I asked that question, and gave a detailed reasoning for it! Sometimes I feel life really ought to be a lot simpler than it is. Anyway, the good news is that this contributor seems to be a collaborative sort and so let's hope s/he hangs around. - Sitush (talk) 15:58, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Great minds think alike… :) I saw the edit in question, and the conversation at your talk page, and butted in over there. I also went back to the short form in Slim's article and explained my reasoning in the edit summary. If the issue persists, I'll start a thread at Talk:Carlos Slim. —C.Fred (talk) 16:03, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Pop back to my page when you have a mo - there may be an issue with the WP Maronite article. Or maybe I've just been totally misreading stuff in the last hour. Certainly there are plenty of web hits for the Syriac-Maronite Church ("of Antioch" or otherwise). Religion confuses me when it gets beyond the basic groups, which is why you'll never see me touch an article on the subject here. - Sitush (talk) 16:20, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

BlueonGray

Hello. So far the edit history of this user makes him appear a pure Wikipedia:Single-purpose account. And it does not help that he is active in a WP:BLP. This issue is close to be presented to the noticeboard, but I would like to hear your opinion first. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 14:33, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Something wacky is going on with the account, because the early edits were to pare it back severely, but then on 17 March he turned it into a gushing POV-fest (diff). I think the COI noticeboard might be a better place to start than the general administrators' noticeboard. —C.Fred (talk) 15:57, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#User:BlueonGray Gun Powder Ma (talk) 20:26, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Carlos Slim

Sorry - got a problem on Carlos Slim. Again. Someone is ignoring the talk page discussions and my edit summaries. - Sitush (talk) 01:20, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Cancel that. He broke 3RR, I explained, seemed to have got the message across and he has now self-reverted. Good. Sorry to bother but was running out of reverts and had already got the discussion going before his edits. - Sitush (talk) 01:31, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Pack for a Purpose Changes

Good afternoon, I made a few more changes on the Pack for a Purpose page that I wish to eventually submit. I added various outside sources that are not from Pack for a Purpose's website. I was hoping you could look this over before I submit to prevent another speedy deletion. The edits can be found on my user page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BJGoodman#Introduction

Once again thanks for all the help, Pack For A Purpose (talk) 18:05, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Please take action at WQA

The Cyberia23 and DailyEditor threads are not getting anywhere near dispute resolution and are just filled with personal attacks and incivility. If I were an admin, I would block all editors making those comments. My pleas for civility have not helped. Please help.Jasper Deng (talk) 18:17, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Excessive list/table query

Hi, could I ask your opinion of the tables/lists at SM_Supermalls#Branches_in_Philippines? This could go on forever as I see it. Do you think it is justified? Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 00:45, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

My edits

Kavas's sources have not any scolar value (or something like academic research). I have already contact with him. So, you dont have to warn me. Thanks. (academic books has been pushed into the article)--Confederatre (talk) 16:41, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

He doesn't like Halil Inalcık, one of well-known professors working in Ottoman history. His former accounts were Alpha Beta Gaga and Cupcaker, though we are sure that he had more prior accounts. Unfortunately, we don't know his former user names. Kavas (talk) 18:14, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Im a new user, i don't know what do you want to do.--Confederatre (talk) 00:45, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Pack for a Purpose

Do you know if there is any way to see who is trying to create a Pack for a Purpose page besides me? My boss said she recieved an e-mail saying she had created a page here with her e-mail, but no one in the organization did it.

"Someone from the IP address 76.182.36.119 has registered the account "PfaP" with this e-mail address on the English Wikipedia."

Thank you!

BJGoodman (talk) 02:25, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

If that's the organization's IP address, then your organization's IT department will need to handle any investigations of what person is using the IP.

As far as what user is editing pages, all pages have history tabs (although for a deleted page, those are visible only to administrators).

I will note that PfaP (talk · contribs) has made no edits whatsoever. —C.Fred (talk) 03:12, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

ld50

I have already debated( and won the debate) with another moderator over the ridiculous ld50 test... Do I now need to do it all over again... I will send you the guys name... The ld50 test is a joke and is not credible for anything other than a mouse....

If I need to debate it again I will —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.78.238.84 (talk) 16:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I;m so tired of having to constantly debate people on here( who have zero knowledge on snakes) about this ridiculous mice test. I should edit out the entire "most venomous or 2nd most venomous" line as its garbage... In reality NO ONE knows which snakes are the most venomous to humans....We know which snakes are the most venomous to MICE on a drop for drop basis but we dont know which are the most venomous to humans... Then their is also the fact that snake venom varies over population/location in the same species... No snake has a set ld50 value is venom toxicity and composition varies across its range for the same species. Also theirs the fact that the ld50 test is missing alot of snakes... I would say a good 20 highly venomous snakes are not on the ld50 test and haven't been tested. So how could we say the inland taipan is the most venomous when we still have plenty of likely highly venomous snakes that havent been tested yet... And don't even bring up how the test is ONLY on mice... and how EVERY different animal would have a different ld50 value for a given snake venom...Broadly stating that the "inland taipan has the most toxic drop for drop venom known" based on a test only done on mice is absurd.. It may be number 20 for dogs for all we know...We have no way of knowing which snakes are the most toxic to humans and any other animal except for mice.... I have evidence to support this and will gladly debate this with you or anyone else.

And dont tell me.." Just put it on the ld50 page"... No. I'm tired of the average nitwit reading this and thinking that its the truth when in reality its absurd.. The inland taipan could very well be the number 1 snake for humans...but it could also be number 30.. The point is we have no idea and I;m tired of people proclaiming the ld5o test as a fact when its a ridiculously inaccurate test.

If you don't believe... I will gladly debate you or anyone else and provide alot of evidence..

Chen yi spamming again, even while blocked

User:Chen yi is continuing spam on his talk page, even while blocked. I reverted his latest addition.Jasper Deng (talk) 05:14, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I've revoked his access to his talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 05:59, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Good. Was what I expected. No more problems from him (unless he makes socks)!Jasper Deng (talk) 06:33, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, C.Fred. You have new messages at Sitush's talk page.
Message added 20:36, 24 March 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

regarding the page ARTNETBOOK

Dear Fred,

I do believe that "ARTNETBOOK" is a new created word that represents the new systematic approach towards running and managing art galleries and artworks. The word ARTNETBOOK, is made out of a 3 words, ART, NET, BOOK, representing 3 main features - ART, NET, and BOOK, that explains about specially created tool for ARtists, art galleries all over the world, that can be united in one NET, and the word BOOK represents the business manner and New management system operated online!

Word News.com posted the news about Arnetbook.com. Please have a look!

http://search.wn.com/?action=search&search_string=artnetbook&results_type=videos&template=cheetah-search-adv%2Findex.txt

Donatas 78.60.113.169 (talk) 23:46, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

The search has no hits about the term artnetbook. The results point to a video by Artnetbook.com promoting their website. —C.Fred (talk) 23:50, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

ld50 test accuracy for humans

I;m so tired of having to constantly debate people on here( who have zero knowledge on snakes) about this ridiculous mice test. I should edit out the entire "most venomous or 2nd most venomous" line as its garbage... In reality NO ONE knows which snakes are the most venomous to humans....We know which snakes are the most venomous to MICE on a drop for drop basis but we dont know which are the most venomous to humans... Then their is also the fact that snake venom varies over population/location in the same species... No snake has a set ld50 value is venom toxicity and composition varies across its range for the same species. Also theirs the fact that the ld50 test is missing alot of snakes... I would say a good 20 highly venomous snakes are not on the ld50 test and haven't been tested. So how could we say the inland taipan is the most venomous when we still have plenty of likely highly venomous snakes that havent been tested yet... And don't even bring up how the test is ONLY on mice... and how EVERY different animal would have a different ld50 value for a given snake venom...Broadly stating that the "inland taipan has the most toxic drop for drop venom known" based on a test only done on mice is absurd.. It may be number 20 for dogs for all we know...We have no way of knowing which snakes are the most toxic to humans and any other animal except for mice.... I have evidence to support this and will gladly debate this with you or anyone else.

And dont tell me.." Just put it on the ld50 page"... No. I'm tired of the average nitwit reading this and thinking that its the truth when in reality its absurd.. The inland taipan could very well be the number 1 snake for humans...but it could also be number 30.. The point is we have no idea and I;m tired of people proclaiming the ld5o test as a fact when its a ridiculously inaccurate test.

If you don't believe... I will gladly debate you or anyone else and provide alot of evidence.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snakefan55 (talk • contribs) 03:51, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

You need very strong sources for all of that.Jasper Deng (talk) 04:07, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

It's growing tiresome

I'm 99.9% sure that User:Wnfck and User:Vermapriya1986 are the same user (check out the similarities in their editing idiosyncracies at Talk:Let's Design). I gave Vermapriya a head's up that they should only use the one account in hopes that an SPI could be avoided, but it looks like the editor is using both accounts to edit disruptively and to try to give the appearance of consensus. If I do open an SPI do you want me to drop you the link? Or is it ducky enough to just block? --Jezebel'sPonyo<sup>bons mots</sup> 17:26, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

If you do open an SPI, yes, drop me the link. My inclination would be that's it's ducky to block; I hear enough quacking that I'm convinced the two accounts are connected. (I'm a little too close to the situation to make the actual block myself; if Wnfck keeps removing the AfD notices, for example, I'd report him at AIV, to make sure a neutral set of eyes looked at the situation—but I'd probably mention the existence of the second account in the report.) —C.Fred (talk) 17:33, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

It's tempting to just let the Wnfck account be blocked for disruption, but it will probably be a temporary block whereas if I go through the SPI process the account will be blocked indef and it will force Vermapriya in to using the one account. I think, given the apparent WP:COMPETENCE issue, the Verma account will ultimately end up blocked as well. I'll come back with the SPI link once it's filed - it could take some time because I'm terrible at filing SPIs. They're my kryptonite. --Jezebel'sPonyo<sup>bons mots</sup> 17:45, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

It is accomplished.--Jezebel'sPonyo<sup>bons mots</sup> 18:33, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

(butting in, sorry) Good. Thanks for this as I have been suspicious for some time. Bet you enjoyed trawling through my talk page :) - Sitush (talk) 18:43, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

You have remained amazingly patient given the circumstances Sitush. --Jezebel'sPonyo<sup>bons mots</sup> 18:46, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

NOSA

Hi, Regarding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iran Software & Hardware Co. (NOSA) I have made a few sources available, I would appreciate it if you look at it and give me your input. Thanks  Rmzadeh  ►  02:57, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Question on editing own talk page

C.Fred,

In my Wiki editing experience of couple months, you are the only reasonable "Wiki cop" I ran into. Rest of the folks just dont care to provide a reason and slap unjustified warnings. Now, I dont know the rules so I am asking you, am I am allowed to remove unjustified warnings from my talk page or a "Wiki cop" has to do it?

Thx, Smartest stupid (talk) 04:08, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Removal of a warning is allowed. It's deemed an acknowledgment of the warning. If you do anything to warrant future warnings, other users will see the old warning in your edit history. For that reason, you may prefer to leave the warning in my place along with my comment nothing that the warning may not be fully justified. —C.Fred (talk) 04:12, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Help with edits on Hadali page

C.Fred,

I made some edits on the Hadali page and they were deleted citing the reason that they were un-sourced. Now the source of the information for my edits was the other wiki pages I referred to. I even explained the user:Eeekster and requested to rollback the edits. Seems like no one paid any attention to my request. Here is what I wrote on that user's page:

Edits_on_Hadali

"Eeekster,

You deleted my edits on article [Hadali] calling them unsourced. Well, did you read the articles I made a reference to in my edit:

"This is the village where the famous Sikh civil contractor, who built New Delhi, Sir Sobha Singh and his famous writer and journalist son, Khushwant Singh were born."

The two articles I made reference to, have sources providing the same information. I just connected the dots. Can you now revert your deletions, pls?

Thanks, Smartest stupid (talk) 04:03, 27 March 2011 (UTC)"

Since that user is not rolling back, what should be the next step?

Smartest stupid (talk) 04:29, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree with Eeekster on the removal. I looked at the two biographies and saw no sources to support that they were born in Hadali. Were there sources on those articles, then the claim could be supported. —C.Fred (talk) 04:31, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

How about this? It shows birth place of both the characters as Village Hadali. http://uqconnect.net/~zzhsoszy/ips/h/hadali.html

Smartest stupid (talk) 04:34, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Reliability is a concern. Who is the writer of that page? For all I can tell, it looks to be a personal web page. —C.Fred (talk) 04:36, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Can't find the writer's name but it is definitely not a personal page as the article is on a ROYAL AND NOBLE LINEAGES website from someone named Henry Soszynski.

Smartest stupid (talk) 04:48, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

it's here - I'd guess not reliable. Butting in, again! - Sitush (talk) 04:50, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

revdel

and now we need to have everything from here to here revdel-ed per WP:OUTING *sigh* (initial diff) Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 <sup>> haneʼ</sup> 18:38, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Van Vechten photo credit

Thanks for the clarification on the by-lines required for CVV photos. I wasn't crazy about adding it, and am glad I don't have to. Thanks again. — HarringtonSmith (talk) 05:49, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Need some advice

A problem has cropped up, and I need some advice on how to go with it. A while ago, WP:Record charts (which incorporates WP:GOODCHARTS and WP:BADCHARTS) got moved to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (record charts). That's causing some trouble, with some editors claiming that since it is now an MOS page, it can't possibly be viewed as a guideline related to article content (and, in an even more bizarre thought process, that it only can apply to the tables of charts, not other text relating to charts). Take a look at this example: like I say in the discussion, I can see the argument that it's a sufficiently special case to override the guideline, but I still find the argument that the guideline doesn't apply at all to be surreal.

In a sense, they have a point: MOS pages don't usually contain anything related to source reliability, notability, or anything like that: they are strictly where to put hyphens, dashes, and the like. WP:GOODCHARTS and WP:BADCHARTS don't belong in that kind of guideline: they've got nothing to do with formatting, and everything to do with source reliability and notability.

I can easily split the thing up, probably by making WP:GOODCHARTS, WP:BADCHARTS, and WP:USCHARTS independent guidelines, and focusing Wikipedia:Manual of Style (record charts) strictly on the table formats. I'm worried that I would be viewed as a biased editor, and wind up with a backlash that made all three lose credibility. Do you think I'm being paranoid? Do WP:GOODCHARTS and WP:BADCHARTS have enough buy-in by enough editors that I can put them someplace else and maintain them as guidelines? Or am I just better off hoping that this kind of fight never shows up again?—Kww(talk) 19:18, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Lack of conclusion, lack of time, or lack of interest?—Kww(talk) 14:58, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Lack of conclusion. I haven't thought of what a good approach to this is yet. You do have a point: if MOS pages don't usually contain reliability guidelines, then that information needs carved out to WP:Reliability of music charts or somesuch. —C.Fred (talk) 15:42, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Take a look at User:Kww/recordcharts (which would go back at WP:Record charts) and User:Kww/MOS (which would replace Wikipedia:Manual of Style (record charts)).—Kww(talk) 20:35, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Connormah

Hello, C.Fred. You have new messages at Connormah's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Replied again. Connormah (talk) 03:15, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Here's a screenshot of the cached copy of the site: File:SA White.jpg Connormah (talk) 03:24, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

White also shows up here: (same date) [9] Thoughts? Connormah (talk) 03:28, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

What do you think? Connormah (talk) 23:52, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

My inclination is that familytreelegends is in that borderline area. A birth certificate or court record isn't an admissible document, but what about a site that gathers such records? As for the website about four star generals, I'm not sure what their history and editorial policy are, so I can't really evaluate them right now. —C.Fred (talk) 15:44, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

See Farley Granger, Chesley Sullenberger and Gary Busey for some examples - I think we can cite it for White's date of birth (or if not, just go with 1928). Connormah (talk) 16:19, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

TDROTI

There is this guy 205.209.83.211 and 88.160.63.227 who keeps vandalising the elimination table on the TDROTI page. I can't seem to get him to stop. Can you tell him something about it so he can stop? Giggett (talk) 19:06, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't see evidence that it's the same person. That said, I've just given the 205.* user a level 3 warning for deleting information from the article. —C.Fred (talk) 19:12, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Okay thanks. It was getting kind of annoying of reverting every edit like every five minutes, so I hope he stops. Giggett (talk) 19:15, 29 March 2011 (UTC)