User talk:Excirial/Archive 29

Excirial


	Userpage	Talk	Awards	E-Mail	Dashboard	Programs	Sandbox	Sketchbook	Blocknote

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Excirial. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

←

→

Reynolds, Smith and Hills page

Hi, You removed my edits I made to this page yesterday. I work for the company and was updating our page and history so it was ACCURATE, it was very outdated, and now that you removed my edits, it is outdated again. I am going to go back and make the edits again, I would appreciate if you would leave them this time.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by RS&H1941 (talk • contribs) 12:32, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

The edits made were reverted because they were promotional - adding the same promotional content again would result in another removal (If not by me another editor would likely revert them using the same rationale). Additionally i would point out that editing an article you are closely related to is strongly discouraged as you have a conflict of interest in that case, which makes it nigh impossible to write neutral, encyclopaedic content regarding that subject. Finally I would also strongly encourage reading the FAQ for businesses. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 13:46, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi - thank you for your response. I understand what you're saying, but how do you expect wikipedia to portray accurate information if someone closely involved with the subject can't edit it? The information that was previously listed was almost 10 years old, which does us, nor the reader any good. What would your recommendation be to have this page show accurate information? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RS&H1941 (talk • contribs) 14:10, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) A good thing to do would be to find reliable sources containing the updated information that you think should be added. Note that a company website is not necessarily a reliable source, though for simple facts it may be useful. Then leave a message on the article talk page providing the sources and explaining the changes you think should be made. Hopefully then other editors will discuss it and make such changes as are agreed upon. I would also advise you to read the conflict of interest policy. Thank you, BethNaught (talk) 16:59, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

OER inquiry

Hi Excirial, I'm sending you this message because you're one of about 300 users who have recently edited an article in the umbrella category of open educational resources (OER) (or open education). In evaluating several projects we've been working on (e.g. the WIKISOO course and WikiProject Open), my colleague Pete Forsyth and I have wondered who chooses to edit OER-related articles and why. Regardless of whether you've taken the WIKISOO course yourself - and/or never even heard the term OER before - we'd be extremely grateful for your participation in this brief, anonymous survey before 27 April. No personal data is being collected. If you have any ideas or questions, please get in touch. My talk page awaits. Thanks for your support! - Sara FB (talk) 20:39, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Baseball Master added May 8

Sorry, My Bad.

Easter Seals Ontario information added March 27

Hi - I am the Director of Communications at Easter Seals Ontario and I just created an account and updated information about Easter Seals Ontario. However, you advised that it wasn't neutral and removed it. This was our standard corporate wording to describe what we do and who we serve. Please let me know how it needs to be written to be acceptable?

Thanks.

Special:Contributions/Laratadelaciudad

Andrewbf's another account Special:Contributions/Laratadelaciudad is doing genre warring and attacking. 183.171.179.125 (talk) 09:23, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

@Kuru: Hi Kuru,

This section just landed on my user talk page and seems to concern an editor you have blocked over genre warrior issues previously. I can't recall i ever saw this editor or his edits before so i wondered if you could take a look at this for me? Thanks in advance for the assistance.

Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 12:14, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Ping received; on mobile at the moment, but will look into it this evening. Kuru (talk) 15:07, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

My user page

Hi,

I appreciate your effort to keep my user page from harm, but I actually have a "vandalize page here" section on my page deliberately so that people can make nonconstructive edits. I'm hoping it'll keep vandals away from the rest of my page, and also give non-vandals a chance to have a little fun without causing any real harm. Thanks. Someone the Person (talk) 19:21, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

That section is pretty much a poster child for the WP:Beans essay. Not only does it actually suggest vandalism to a user who happens to visit, it actually encourages it by stating there will be no consequence. Aside from that actually being against the userpage policy i hope that you do understand that vandalism patrols such as myself aren't going to check userpages for random statements that vandalism on a particular page is allowed?

Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 17:47, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't know it was against policy. I'll remove it. Someone the Person (talk) 18:40, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Excirial. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation.
Message added 00:09, 13 April 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:09, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Requesting input at the discussion: !Vote requested to clarify matters about awards sent. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:11, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

If you keep seeing changes on the Bearden High School page from Knoxville, TN, it's because it's from the actual high school itself. A block on editing from the IP may be appropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.4.98.50 (talk) 19:45, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Code fix at help desk

Hey Excirial. I rarely touch another user's post but I did just make a fix to yours here; without the closing slash they would be getting an error message and would likely become more lost. Hope you don't mind. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:41, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

@Fuhghettaboutit: Thanks for fixing that one - i copied the original reference straight from the article. I did miss the last few characters so i just typed those manually - Seems i entirely forgot the slash though. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 19:47, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Anytime and glad you didn't mind. I only touch another user's post when it's something minor like that, fixing a link and the like and am glad when someone does the same for me:-)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:17, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Article about Tricorder

Hello Excirial,

can you please tell me why you removed the information i added on the Tricorder page? it was about a device called SCio, which from what is already written at the article, is a "Real" tricorder.

Thank you, Doron.

Doront (talk) 18:44, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

hi again,

i stopped by the chat help, and i told i need to find some 3rd party sources that verify my comparison of this device to a tricorder. so i will keep looking, and try again later.

Doront (talk) 19:33, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Hiyas Doron,

I was actually around in the help channel when you came in and asked the above question. At the time i was somewhat preoccupied answering a random question i came across so i didn't notice this section or your help channel question till, well, a minute or three ago.

I think that Huon pretty much explained the reason why i reverted your edit, but i think i could elaborate a little more regarding the Huggle topic you brought up. Huggle is a manually operated application that maintains a queue of all edits made to the English Wikipedia, which it displays to a patrolling user. Using Huggle a patrol can quickly review each edit made and revert them if necessarily (Technically it does not display every edit though since long term users are whitelisted). This review process is quite fast and can often often reached near-real-time speeds. I can actually state for a fact that you are far from the first user who thinks its entirely automated due to its speed.

Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 19:57, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

thanks for getting back to me Excirial.

i was somewhat hoping that Huggle was an artificial intelligence app, like an advanced gmail spam filter. but after the deletion, i also went to the Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion page, and although i agree with the reason for the revert, maybe this kind of Criteria (lack of 3rd party verification) should also be added on that page. and maybe you(me? some1?) have the Huggle tag also include a direct link for the relevant Criteria for reverting/deletion. but i am guessing it is also written elsewhere in the wiki guidelines.

well, thats just my 2 cents on this subject. i will go back to the quest of convincing other people that SCio is a real life tricorder :-)

keep up with keeping the Wikipedia clean

Doron. Doront (talk) 20:17, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

Thanks for answering questions at my Adoption HQ! I'm also letting you know that you are welcome to do so. MrScorch6200 (talk | ctrb) 02:10, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

UM

I have no idea what your are telling me but ok!

Have a nice day,Bandit — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.241.53.129 (talk) 19:53, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

My gamble is that you are wondering about the warning on your user talk page telling you i reverted an edit you never made? If that is the case it is likely you are using an Internet Service Provider that uses dynamic IP adresses. Simply put: You receive a random outbound address from a pool of adresses when you connect to the internet. That address may (and is likely) to have been used by other people in the past who in turn may have edited Wikipedia. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 06:09, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for withdrawing your support from my mini-rfc (never thought I'd type that!). This allowed me to close that one as withdrawn, though I did leave a prominent note at the top that the editors with opposition to all time limits from my RfC should be considered in the closure of any future RfC on the matter. Gigs (talk) 18:20, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Template:Uw-spamublock

Replied to you at Wikipedia talk:Template messages/User talk namespace. I think you're right (on reflection) to BRD, but the points need addressing. I've summed up the concerns driving the edit, so we can start to find a compromise that's (hopefully) concise yet improved. FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 12:13, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Updated draft version for you, feels a lot better to me. Look forward to your thoughts on that page too. FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 09:59, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Socks of indef blocked User:Altimgamr

Ferrari LaFerrari (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and 99.155.192.12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). Check their contributions... Thomas.W ^talk 18:13, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Seems C.Fred already moved the dirty laundry over to the laundry bin.Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 20:50, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

B-rolllover911

Kudos to B-rolllover911 for being so quick - that was the fastest vandalism I've seen in a while. You might want to give that page 24 hours of protection as there have been a few questionable edits that have not had time to be subjected to proper scrutiny. Thanks, James^x12345 18:52, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

HP Performance Advisor

Thank you for helping me with this new page. I saw the tag for immediate deletion but contested it because I was still editing and had a lot of work to do on it. I made the changes (and removed the tag). I did not realize that I should not have removed the tag. Now all my edits are gone (that fixed the problems I believe). Can you please add my changes back? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DirectorJones (talk • contribs) 19:50, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

It appears that you created about eight new articles, all of which were ads for HP products. Please review WP:SPAM and WP:NPOV. NawlinWiki (talk) 20:00, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Cyberbullying

This man/woman stalks my daughter on Wikipedia. This user is correcting everything she changes, claiming it to be "unproductive", while in reality, my daughter shows me her research and it is 100% true, backed by the library books. Take this stalker off Wikipedia. --72.221.68.45 (talk) 20:25, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

You mistake someone who expends a lot of effort keeping Wikipedia a high quality resource for one who is "stalking" your daughter. I have examined the contributions from your IP and can find no revert that I wouldn't have done myself if I had seen it first. I would encourage your daughter to read the Five Pillars of Wikipedia so she might better document her contributions. Seaphoto^Talk 01:01, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Generally taken editing a page to remove half the content of a list while inserting random characters in the remaining half is not deemed constructive, nor is posting someones personal phone number in the Prank call page. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 06:19, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Devergo brand article

Dear Excirial!

You were refused Our article about the Devergo brand because of G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion. This is not advertising or promotion, It is based on an article from 3 years ago, an international magazine called Sportswear International, written by His work companion Sabine Künhl and the title is Denim from the Danube (http://devergo.com/pdf/Sportswear.pdf) It was deleted from their homepage and also We were on the Bread&Bible exhibiton they are write too about us I can not link It, but they have a book called Brand Bible, We appears several times on it, that is all we have to public. I paste a newer version here about the Devergo brand. Please let us know what is not matching together with your rules. Thank you for helping us for a better article. All the best, Emberke888 (talk) 12:56, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Pasted article

Introduction The initial aim of establishing the Devergo brand was to develop a novel jeans collection for young men wearing fashionable clothing.

Inspired by the popularity of its men’s collection, the brand’s range was expanded with women’s clothing and unisex footwear. From the beginning of establishing the Devergo brand to nowadays, products are characterized by novelties, brave colour and fabric solutions and the strong appearance of graphic fashion elements. Devergo has been present on the jeans market since more than twenty years ago, mainly in Europe. History The Devergo brand was established by Renata Sartori and Paolo Bolzonella’s MAGICAL POOL s.r.l. at the end of the 80’s in Noale situated in Northern Italy. During these years – together with the newly appeared Energie, Replay and Diesel brands — a new youthful approach and a fresh attitude was introduced to the Italian denim market. In Hungary, a small business enterprise Flas Kft. was established by a Hungarian and a Greek young man and it began to distribute the Devergo products in October 1992 in a shop called “Rolling Store” under Síp street 9. At the time, “Rolling Store” was the biggest jeans shop in Budapest amongst ten other shops of similar profile. Wholesale distribution started in 1994 by participating in the „Budapest Fashion Days” exhibition by Hungarian Fashion Institute. Later, taking into consideration the specialties of the Hungarian market, the manufacturing right was purchased for Devergo products which were not originally distributed by the Italian parent company. Following this, the export right was also acquired and distribution to neighbouring countries began. In the first six years parallel sales was carried out in the Italian and Hungarian headquarters. By 1999 the Hungarian enterprise managed to purchase the Devergo brand name and protect it worldwide, both for manufacturing and distribution. Nowadays an international team works in the Budapest headquarters of the company, consisting of Greek, Ukrainian and Russian young people alongside Hungarian colleagues.

The leader of the international designer group, from the beginning and since Noale, has been the famous Italian fashion designer Cristiano Berto. Under his leadership several young designers learn to and work on designing and manufacturing jeans based on current trends. Philosophy The owners, designers, retailers and wholesalers of the company, essentially all employees and partners, are proud that Devergo products can compete with multinational companies, even if in many cases, multinational companies gain significant state support and manufacture products in several ten- or hundred thousand series, which in some cases is reached by child labour in third world countries. The Devergo products, which are created with heart and soul, are manufactured in factories working with small series numbers. A high quality criterion is guaranteed by a continuous quality control system. More than half of the products are manufactured in the European Union; from the first button to the last thread. Trousers are exclusively manufactured in Greece and Italy; this means a guarantee of outstandingly high quality. Sports shoes are produced in China and street shoes are manufactured in Italy, Romania, Spain, Greece and Portugal. The outerwear is manufactured in China, India, Hungary, Greece and Turkey.

The people-oriented creed of the Devergo “family,” is all about creative young people working together in a joyful and friendly atmosphere and in a trendy, modern environment. It does not identify itself with the distribution of products reached by child labour and ordered by managements working on the basis of guides, not even if quite often, this attracts an enormous profit. This gives each Devergo product a soul!

Countries selling Devergo products: Presently the products are available in the following countries:

Netherlands, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Russia, Ukraine, Greece, Cyprus, Libya, Germany, Poland.

Further planned expansions United Arab Emirates, Tunisia, Malta

Hungarian network:

Near 100 multibrand partners
26 Devergo&Friends shops all over the country
Webshop

Outer references, sources:

Official Homepage
Webshop
Bread&Butter Exhibition 2012 – Hungarian article generally talks about the B&B and Devergo
Sportswear International - Devergo starts designer competition
Peoplegreece.com – Greek article about Devergo
Ozon Magazine 2014 feb-march – pg 19
Panic alternative web magazine - Greek article about Devergo
Yupiii.gr - Greek article about Devergo
Naftemporiki.gr – Greek article about Devergo

Notification of a June AfC BackLog Drive

Hello Excirial:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from June 1, 2014 to June 30, 2014.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1200 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

The AfC helper script can assist you in tallying your edits automatically. To view a full list of changes, visit the changelog. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks. Sent on behalf of (t) Josve05a (c) by {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} using the MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:45, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Edit notice

I wanted to see how you made that neat-looking icon navbar on your page, and I saw the big green edit notice. Im curious, how did you do that? =3 Latias1290 (talk) 19:04, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

If you are looking for the navbar you can find it over here - It is transcluded from that page onto all my other user and user talk pages (Advantage of that? It saves clutter and space in those pages. Even more helpful: Since it is transcluded any changes to it will be visible on all pages that include it). As for the green notice - it is indeed an edit notice that can be found here. You should also be able to see the "Page Notice" link on the top right corner of that green template if you edit my talk page.

Aside from that, you do take a care that your amnesia doesn't spiral out of control, hmmm? Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 19:19, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Change to Gilligan's Island article

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gilligan%27s%20Island&diff=601072491

Seems very trivial, yes, but it's a running joke in the episode since Alf specifically passes on a homemade coconut cream pie after experiencing the dream sequence. It demonstrates that even an object of enjoyment can become an object of ennui and seemed to demonstrate the episode's theme that ideal situations are not all they seem (through a revisionist look at Gilligan's Island).

Thanks! 71.110.122.164 (talk) 22:57, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Burlingtons Sound of music

Hello, you have sent me a message in regards to "Burlingtons Sound of Music Festival" you have made a mistake in changing my edit. the page name is incorrect and the information is out of date and i want people to be redirected to our festival site so please do not change it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.150.17.103 (talk) 19:29, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

You are fast

I was just using the Lupen tool, and every time I found something bad, you had already fixed it. How? Is there a better tool in use by you or the Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit? BollyJeff | talk 17:52, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Ah, the Lupin anti-vandalim tool - thats the tool i used exclusively back when i first joined Wikipedia. Decent tool, though these days it is barely used since other tools have more or less superseded it in terms of efficiency and accuracy. There is two tools i would recommend for vandalism patrol:

Huggle - My preferred tool for vandalism patrol these days. Huggle preloads every edit made into a queue and allows you to view its diff (Exception: Users who are whitelisted are skipped). One key press or mouse-click is enough to revert and warn the user, and while Huggle takes care of reverting and warning the next diff is already displayed thus allowing for extremely high patrol speeds.
Stiki - Stiki is similar to Huggle in the sense that it displays diffs and allows for one click revert-and-warning. Unlike Huggle it does not display recent changes - instead STiki is a server based application where one central server supplies STiki users with edits that were not yet checked. These edits are served based on Cluebot's ranking, which results in the most likely problematic edits being served first. This allows STiki to serve edits hours to days after they were made, which is convenient if there was a shortage of vandalism patrols during a certain timeframe.

Aside from that there are a few other tools such as Igloo, but since i never used those i cannot really comment on their usability or setup. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 18:10, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Just a heads up: Huggle 3 will finally be releasing it's final stable release on Sunday (1 June). (t) Josve05a (c) 19:06, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

iCAD Med

I recently added additional information on the overview of iCAD Med. The information I added to the Wikipedia page is a description of the products offered by iCAD. This information is available and verifiable on the company website, investor summaries, and annual report. I do not understand how this information could be biased. If it is a matter of removing "industry leading" to remain neutral please let me know and I am happy to do so. In order to provide readers a fundamental understanding of the company. I think it would be important to expand on the products offered by iCAD. Describing the products offered by iCAD should not be considered biased, they are simply the products offered by iCAD. Please review the proposed change below without the "industry leading" and let me know if this is acceptable.

iCAD is a provider of advanced image analysis, workflow solutions and radiation therapies for the early identification and treatment of common cancers. iCAD offers a comprehensive range of high-performance, upgradeable CAD solutions for mammography and advanced image analysis and workflow solutions for Magnetic Resonance Imaging, for breast and prostate cancers and Computed Tomography for colorectal cancer. iCAD’s Xoft® Axxent® Electronic Brachytherapy (eBx®) System®, offers radiation treatment for early-stage breast cancer that can be administered in the form of intraoperative radiation therapy or accelerated partial breast irradiation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rldbytwins2 (talk • contribs) 18:44, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

The text as written would fit quite well in a sales brochure or another commercial document released by iCAD Med - in fact i was not surprised at all when i discovered the section was closely paraphrased \ copied from the companies own website. Simply put this section as written is by no means a neutral representation of the company. Aside from the "industry leading" part there are multiple other peacock words and promotional markers throughout the text.

Based on the added content i am fairly certain you are an employee of iCAD or someone otherwise closely related to the subject of the article. If this is the case you have a so called conflict of interest and you should not be editing the article to start with. I see another editor another editor already left a longer explanation on this matter on your talk page so to prevent needless repetition i won't be parroting what he already said. That said i strongly advice reading the message he left; especially the FAQ for organizations part. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 19:37, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for blocking sockpuppet

Thanks for blocking User:Let's kill some ducks (jk), who is actually a sockpuppet of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Altimgamr. The "duck" is a nod to the many WP:DUCK and WP:QUACK references used to identify him. Thanks, Bahooka (talk) 23:52, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

@Bahooka: *Nods* - i actually found the right sock bin a minute after i blocked him. I added a checkuser request as well since there was an IP and another account engaging in the same activity earlier, so its reasonable to assume there may be a few more around. 23:57, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Zebra Technologies

My edits to the Zebra Technologies page were not accepted. I am not an employee of Zebra. I am trying to update the current information with more accurate descriptions of the company, what it manufactures, the corporate timeline, etc. All of the information is from other sources and can be linked directly to press releases and public documents. No information that I am providing is my own opinion. I was going to format the citations later, but I can go in and add in the direct citations now in order to keep editing these changes.

Thanks for your time.

The formatting of the citations themselves is not a problem - the problem mostly lies in the sources that have been used for the citations themselves. Press releases and other documents released by the company itself (In other words: primary sources) should rarely be used as a first source of citations when writing about a company as these documents tend to be favorably biased.

Due to this there are two problems with the added content. The first issue is that the added content has a promotional tone to it. For example: "global leader in manufacturing technology solutions that give a virtual voice to an organization's assets, people and transactions, enabling companies to track and analyze business operations" and "Zebra offers an extensive portfolio" are examples of promotional content. This leads me to the second issue - the mentioned lines and others seem to have been copied verbatim from their sources / other pages around the internet. There seem to be some minor changes here and there but the end result is still to closely paraphrased to the original which raises Copyright concerns.

Updating the article is a-ok - just keep in mind that content cannot be copied literally from external sources, nor should it have a promotional tone when considered in part or as a whole. Kind regards, Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 20:18, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Ok - I am following! Thanks much for your feedback. I will revisit that particular section and add in content that meets the criteria and guidelines.

Passing on a message

Several days ago I reverted some vandalism from User talk:209.53.181.159. Today I got a message from an unidentified user at that address, which is registered to Vancouver Public Library, asking me to investigate or pass on to someone who would investigate a suspected spambot causing many VPL IPs to be blocked. Since you're in anti-vandalism and techie, may I take the liberty of asking you to look into it, or refer it to an appropriate group I may be unaware of? Many thanks, BethNaught (talk) 21:10, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

I'll comment over at your talk page

Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 20:10, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate your thoughtful and detailed reply. You explained it much better than I could! Let's just hope they see it. Thanks again, BethNaught (talk) 21:39, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/June 2014 Backlog Elimination Drive/Adjustment & Copyvio-bonus-point(s)

How come you didn't create Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/June 2014 Backlog Elimination Drive/Adjustment (with the AFC-Buddy)? (t) Josve05a (c) 21:37, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

@Josve05a: The adjustment page is only created if there is actually something to put on it. Since there have been no re-reviews or deleted copyvio's yet AFCBuddy effectively tries to upload a blank page though the API - which is (quite sanely actually) not created. Once someone does a re-review or two or reviews a copyvio the page should be created. Usually that is as soon as the second run. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 22:36, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Actually I had a deleted copyvio, which was marked as 'deleted revision' at my "page". (t) Josve05a (c) 23:44, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

@Josve05a: Well, this sure was one of those "Absence of errors is no certain indication of quality" moment. After checking the results there were actually a few issues with them:

I entirely forgot to add the draft namespace to the namespaces that should be scanned, effectively causing AFCBuddy to ignore it entirely (Oops!)
The MediaWiki API seems to have changed a bit in regards to the user contributions. Instead of returning an "ucstart" variable to know what edits should be scanned after the first 500, it now uses "uccontinue" to denote that. No effect on the results, just an error when an editor reached > 500 edits.
The check if a submission was declined as a copyvio was apparently case sensitive where it should not have been. Due to this the edits marked using the rewrite of the AFCH script were suddenly not detected anymore, since its edit summary casing was changed (For the better, i might add).

Separately i note that you marked several G12 submissions for deletion using Twinkle instead of AFCH or AFCH Rewrite. Since there is no way to distinguish an AFC Drive related G12 and a non AFC Drive related G12 using Twinkle those are not counted towards the score adjustment. The AFCH / AFCH Rewrite ones should be counted just fine though.

Also, this reminds me i should really drop everyone a note to double-check their results while the amount of reviews is still manageable. This is the first drive using the Draft namespace, and aside from that it has been a few months since the last drive so there may just be some hiccups here and there due to changes in the AFC process, the API and so on. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 18:25, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

(I use Twinkle to tag G12, when the submission is not active and can't be tagged/declined using the AFCH-scrips.) (t) Josve05a (c) 18:34, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

BTW, is it possible to...hmm...take Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/June 2014 Backlog Elimination Drive/Josve05a as an example. Now when someone has re-reviewed some reviews it can be impossible to check which has already been re-reviewed and which hasn't. Is it possible to make the program add a little "tick" or something next to all articles which has already been re-reviewd by someone. (I know that my list is small now, but later in June it will get bigger.) (t) Josve05a (c) 18:39, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Peter North

The article currently says that "it is unclear" what PN's stage name means, followed by somebody's idiotic po-mo "speculation" on the subject.

I replaced that with a quote from PN himself, stating what it means. Source: the FAQ on his official website.

Kindly re-revert. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.96.44.253 (talk) 19:25, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Seems like you are entirely right here - looking at the diff this edit lacks the context that it details a porn star (Which makes the edit look like vandalism to a biographic article). As for the edit you made: i ended up merging it into the existing section instead of reverting the edit itself. If the only content of the entire "Pseudonym" section was a quote from his website it should probably be merged into the rest of the article. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 22:32, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

I still say the "speculation" should go. Not only is it superfluous (since we have PN's definitive statement), but also, as I wrote above, it's idiotic: there's no implication of "controlling," nor even of large size -- and there's certainly no damn "man-as-penis" metaphor! PN is not a penis; he doesn't think of himself or represent himself as a penis; he simply has one. (And it's erect.) That's all there is to it.

If the only content of the entire "Pseudonym" section was a quote from his website it should probably be merged into the rest of the article.

Agreed; as far as I'm concerned, there shouldn't even be a need for such a section -- the meaning is plain as day. But, since it's apparently not obvious to all, the quote has to stay (it could go under "Career," after the second paragraph, which mentions an earlier stage name). The bit about the hockey team can go under "Legacy."

No objections, I hope?

65.96.44.253 (talk) 06:27, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

@65.96.44.253: No objections from me - it would get rid of the "Stage name" section while also placing the information at a sensible location in the article. I would strongly advice using an edit summary to describe that particular edit though. Adding one is always a good idea, but as you noticed the content change is very similar to vandalism and thus prone to being reverted (Edit summary's don't prevent that 100%, but at the very least it should reduce the change it happens). Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 18:42, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Emerson School District

Hi, I have corrected the last piece of vandalism on the above page (the information appears to be out of date by some length of time anyway), didnt see the risk of someone claiming you were edit warring. Amortias (T)(C) 21:54, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Ottawa Hospital Research Institute

I work for the Ottawa Hospital research Institute. I am trying to update our Wikipedia page.

Why do you keep deleting my entry?

Thanks - Joel Baglole — Preceding unsigned comment added by JBaglole (talk • contribs) 18:49, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Since you're an employee at Ottawa Hospital Research Institute you have a clear conflict of interest with the topic of the article. If it strongly discouraged (bordering not allowed in severity) to edit an article you have a conflict as interest with, as writing a neutral, encyclopedic article may be difficult or even near impossible when one has such. Just ask yourself: If the Hospital would ever receive negative publicity, would you add this to the article? And if another editor would add a sourced section containing this criticism, would you delete it? Even if it is not intentional it often proves to be difficult to keep an article overall neutral in tone. Exceptions to the rule exist of course, but the added text is quite the polar opposite of expected article content.

The content you added itself is a clear demonstration of non neutral, promotional content. This is - in part - caused due to the information being copied directly from the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute's website. This brings us to the second issue, being that the content added is a copyright violation. Wikipedia can in no circumstance accept copyrighted material from an outside source unless it is licensed under CC-BY-SA or GDFL (Or a compatible license). Note that it does not matter if the organization you work for owns the copyright on the added content - as it is clearly marked as "Copyright 2011 Ottawa Hospital Research Institute. All rights reserved." it cannot be used on Wikipedia. Having said that it is rarely a good idea to copy a commercial website ad verbatim to start with due to the aforementioned neutrality issues. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 19:03, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your explanation and quick response, Excirial.

There is information in the current entry that is wrong. I am sure you would want that corrected, and being part of OHRI should mean that I can provide the best, most up-to-date info.

I also think we can provide a better picture than currently exists in the entry, not necessaarily promotional. How do you propose I go about doing that?

I will happily revisit and reword with your guidance on neutralilty, and to avoid your copyright concern, but can you please point to particular information you found less than neutral? Please let me know and I can try to address the concerns.

Thanks very much — Preceding unsigned comment added by JBaglole (talk • contribs) 20:54, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Adventures of Huckleberry Finn correction

Hi Excirial!

I recently edited the article for the Mark Twain book "Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" to correct a character name for historical correctness.

The character that has been reverted to the incorrect name "Jim" has always been called "Nigger Jim". Surely we can agree that Mark Twain was not a racist in his words and acts, which is why he satirized the roles of slaves in America just before the civil war.

One of the brilliant points that Hucleberry Finn has to work out was whether or not he could trust Jim seeing as how he is "only a nigger". He finds that Jim is not only smart, but kind and deserving of the freedom that he seeks.

I agree that "nigger" is an uncomfortable word, and one that might have become unacceptable for our sensitivities, but we shouldn't correct history and one of the greatest books ever written just for the sake of our sensibilities.

The point of using the word was to make you feel uneasy and sad for how we used to treat our fellow people not-too-long-ago.

Was Mark Twain prejudiced? Here's what he had to say:

“I have no color prejudices nor caste prejudices nor creed prejudices. All I care to know is that a man is a human being, and that is enough for me; he can't be any worse.”

Here's some articles from credible newspaper begging that we not change the name for political correctness:

The Guardian (UK): Censoring Mark Train's N-Work is Unacceptable

http://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2011/jan/05/censoring-mark-twain-n-word-unacceptable

The New York Daily News: Take the N-Word out of 'Huck Finn'? It's an Insult to Mark Twain - and to American History

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/n-word-huck-finn-insult-mark-twain-american-history-article-1.151086

MSNBC (Grio): Why the N-Word Should Stay in 'Huck Finn'

http://thegrio.com/2011/01/05/why-the-n-word-should-stay-in-huck-finn/

The View: Whoopi Goldberg: "I'm sorry, it's a classic, you can't change a classic"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dTuu1yjrIc

I consider this book a milestone in human literature, and I think that we have the right to make changes to it. What if we removed all slavery references from the great religious literature like the Holy Bible or the Qu'ran?

Thank you for your considerations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pebh (talk • contribs)

Hiyas there Pebh,

Personally i reside on the European side of the Atlantic, where the word "Nigger" does not have the same emotional strings attached to it as it seems to have on the American side (This may be over-generalization on my side though). That said Wikipedia is not censored to start with, so even if i were gravely offended by the word nigger that would not be a rationale to leave it out of an article. (For completeness sake: Wikipedia does apply the Principle of least astonishment to possibly offensive or sensitive content. For example: offensive images should only be used in article's where an editor should reasonably expect to see them).

Having said all that it might actually be a good idea to start talking about the article itself. I have not read the book itself in years (And the one i read was a translated edition), so i have to base my commentary on these (original) scans. One thing i note is that, while Jim is introduced as a nigger and often referred to as a nigger, he seems to be bearing the name "Jim" (As opposed to "Nigger Jim") on all the pages i scanned trough. Based on that i would say that in the book, his name is "Jim" and not "Nigger Jim". I don't particularly see why we would have to rename Jim to Nigger Jim throughout the text if that moniker is not used in the book itself (Referring to him as such in the plot summary would be to renaming "Huck" to "Caucasian Huck".). Sure, it is an important part of the story but the "Major themes" and "Controversy" seems to be doing a fine job detailing that without the plot referring to him by race every single line.

Aside from that it would probably be overdone from a readabilities perspective to mention a character by his full moniker throughout the entire plot summary. Every other character is introduced in full once and after that references to that character use either first or last name ("Huck" for "Huckleberry Finn ", "Tom" for "Tom Sawyer" and "Pap" for "Pap" Finn). Even if Twain had opted to use "Nigger Jim" as his character name it would probably be prudent to shorten that to "Jim" after a full name introduction, similar to the way the other characters are introduced. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 22:45, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations from STiki!

The Bronze STiki Barnstar of Merit

Congratulations, Excirial! You're receiving this barnstar of merit because you recently crossed the 5,000 classification threshold using STiki.

We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool.

We hope you continue your ascent up the leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (developer) and Fai zan 06:46, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

:-) 5 albert square (talk) 23:39, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

please help translate this message into the local language

	The Cure Award
	In 2013 you were one of the top 300 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you so much for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date medical information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do!

We are wondering about the educational background of our top medical editors. Would you please complete a quick 5-question survey? (please only fill this out if you received the award)

Thanks again :) --Ocaasi, Doc James and the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation

The messages I received.

I logged on to my ipad ( the only device I have ) and I got 3 messages saying about vandalism. Can you do something about it? 2.28.247.109 (talk) 14:30, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

I can block the IP Adress if there is further vandalism - that would prevent more messages. You are not fooling anyone - These edits were made by you. The IP you are editing from has never done so before, and the time gap between the edits and this message are not enough for it to have been assigned to another ISP customer. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 14:38, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Ericsson Post

Hello. I posted a small edit to the Ericsson Mediaroom page. You removed it because it was not "neutral".

I am a new tech writer at Mediaroom and have been asked to write a few corporate bios for our page. Any suggestions?

Thanks so much for your help.

Christine Beck cb95060@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cb95060 (talk • contribs) 20:51, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Since you're an employee at Mediaroom you have a clear conflict of interest with the topic of the article. If it strongly discouraged (bordering not allowed in severity) to edit an article you have a conflict as interest with, as writing a neutral, encyclopedic article may be difficult or even near impossible when one has such. Just ask yourself: If the Mediaroom would ever receive negative publicity, would you add this to the article? And if another editor would add a sourced section containing this criticism, would you delete it? Even if it is not intentional it often proves to be difficult to keep an article overall neutral in tone. Exceptions to the rule exist of course, but the added text is quite the polar opposite of expected article content.

The content you added itself is a non-neutral, promotional content. For example, the world's most innovative and leader in first-to-scale are both promotional statements. Considering the added content as a whole it is something i would except to see in a sales brochure or a corporate introduction send to new customers. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 14:53, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Episodes of American Dad

I said why!!! ARE YOU KIDDING ME???

Read again what i wrote and put an advice, please. --151.74.67.239 (talk) 14:42, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

The basic page blanking template doesn't really cover this situation all that well it seems. If a page has an error in it, feel free to correct it yourself as long as there is a reliable source that backs up your claim. Alternatively you can leave a note on the article's talk page pointing out the problems in the page, alongside a request for someone to fix it. Blanking the entire page is response to a content problem is not the way to go in these instances though Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 15:02, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Truncated The Law of One

Hello Excirial! Can you please check The Law of One page? Most of it's content has been deleted and at current state it doesn't provide sufficient informations about this topic. I would be grateful for any help you are able to provide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gutkowsky (talk • contribs) 20:22, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Hiyas Gutkowsky,

My best advice would be discussing this page on the article's for deletion nomination page, where a somewhat lively discussion seems to be taking place. The content itself was removed using the argument that the added references were not reliable, which seems to be the main topic for the discussion itself. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 11:18, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Chris.w.braun

Hi Excirial, you just wrote on my talk page – fortunately – to inform me about my mistake concerning the deletion of the content of Texas Military Forces Museum. Man, my fault – I accidently deleted the real page – instead of my sandbox-page. Sorry for that and thank you for your quick reaction. I appreciate it a lot. I fixed the page and everything is looking good now. Best regards, --Chris.w.braun (talk) 19:22, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Chris.w.braun,

You're very welcome of course - and i have to thank you for catching my wonky rollback which ended up turning the page into a redirect towards 28 cm Howitzer L/10 instead

. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 11:28, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello Excirial,

Anytime – teamwork! Thanks again and take care, --Chris.w.braun (talk) 13:27, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Unblocking user:81.156.88.64

Hi Excirial. I just talked to 81.156.88.64 on the IRC unblock channel and I think the situation that got them blocked was a series of misunderstandings on everyone's part. The had inadvertently duplicated the content of Lizard Lick Towing in one of their earlier edits, and then their efforts to blank that cloned content got interpreted as content removal. If you look at the version you reverted to, it is indeed the same content twice in the article. Since the whole thing seems to have been a mistake, I'm going to unblock the IP, but I wanted to let you know what was going on. I've advised him to seek help in the -help IRC channel for how to make the edits he's been trying to make (which is basically a tabular episode list) so that he doesn't continue sandboxing back and forth in the article. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 16:33, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Hiyas Fluffy,

Thanks for clearing this one up - the block itself was intended as an "Please read your talk page" block anyway since a previous edit looked like decent content removal. I am somewhat surprised by the talk page though - I've seen the same content removal several times and i know i used revert and warn inside Huggle 3 several times (which should have left a message explaining the need for an edit summary). Neither do i understand why Huggle eventually told me the user was at warning level 4 while no warnings were placed in the first place. Seeing it never acted like this before i am just going to assume the bug is between the chair and the screen in this particular case. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 17:15, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Re-review comments

Will added comments in the re-review section always be wiped out like here or will keeping everything on one line (like I have now done) fix that problem? If its the latter, do you think it could be fixed easily? --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:31, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

ThaddeusB AFCBuddy regenerates the entire drive page every time it is started. The only thing that it won't remove are rereviews enclosed in the {{AFCDriveQC}} template (Or rather, it will search for those and copy them over to the newly generated page). I suppose the template could be extended to account for this by allowing the value "C" for the Pass or Fail criteria, but that would take some coding and testing as AFCBuddy currently assumed every instance of that template is a review. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 22:40, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

OK. The ability to comment is useful, so whatever you can work up would be nice... Without knowing the technical details of your script, it doesn't seem like it would be that hard to preserve comments at the end of a line (parse the string: article - review - review - ... - everything else=comments), but modifying the template to allow for a "C" would work too. Let me know what you decide on. --ThaddeusB (talk) 13:24, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Ceiling fan

The link is not working properly so i had changed it to site knows me which is relevent to contents — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.143.124.149 (talk) 10:11, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

The link you added pointed to an promotional site for a specific company - and the page the link pointed to provided no information that could back up the claim it was put next to. That said - the old link was indeed broken, something that is now fixed. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 10:33, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Karl John

So this is how it works right? On the website anyone can edit? Lugnuts just deletes people's hardwork with a made up reason.

I mean I was adding content. Wasn't I? Where is the WP:BOLD or the WP:GF.

It is me who should be getting an apology because I actually added material to make the article better.

And please don't say it is not verifiable because it is from the German article.

The Germans seem quite happy with their version so I was just adding the English.

So please apologise on behalf of Lugnuts who only deletes and never really makes a contribution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.123.28 (talk) 11:23, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

I am waiting??81.129.123.28 (talk) 11:28, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

The warning you received from me were for both edit summaries that went alongside the edits - i hope i don't have to explain why those are clear examples of personal attacks? As for using the German Wikipedia article to source this article: Wikipedia itself is not considered to be a reliable source as it is editable by anyone. I could add some bogus information to some random-language Wikipedia and suddenly pass it as a reliable source for other language article's if that were the case. That said - if the other language Wikipedia contains sources that are considered to be reliable, those can be used on the English language Wikipedia as well (If those sources are in German, that's fine).

Aside from this, have you considered using the article's talk page or sending a message to Lugnuts to ask for an explanation? Simply reverting each other over and over isn't going to end well and serves no purpose as you will just end in an endless loop of reverts. Aside from that please keep discussions civil. I don't particularly mind the somewhat more colorful language, but there is a difference between a friendly discussion and outright name calling. I'd add that i never seen the latter produce any decent results regardless of the discussed topic. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 11:37, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Forget it. You are welcome to this site. All of you. The only material you get to see on here is what the "heads" want. I took a little time out of my working day last week to translate the German articv=le in to English because John was fine actor and his English article deserved better than a two-line footnote and a list of his films. Instead - for all my effort - all I've had is grief from a known from someone with a character disorder and their faithful lackey of an admin (sniff sniff - "that'll do pig"). This site is just one big fat lie. The first thing you get is that "pillars of wikipedia" crap and top of the list is WP:GF. Except there is no good faith is there?? Is there? Is Lugnuts going to any improvement to the article? Of course not? But they are allowed to delete what I have done and that is better? Frankly all this leaves me at a point where I am speechless and utterly dumbfounded at the insanity of it all, so the sooner I leave you lot to your AFIs and edit wars the better!!! 81.129.123.28 (talk) 11:56, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

I would advice you to turn the situation around for a second. You added a section to a page that lugnuts removed - instead of assuming good faith or asking Lugnuts why he did so you revert it with an personal attack as an edit summary (twice). After that you ask me to explain why the edit was reverted, during which i point you to the reliable source content guideline that explains why Wikipedia itself is not a reliable source. Your next edit summary states Ah so now the Germans are liars? They can't be trusted either. My, my can your attempt to usurp my WP:GF get any more desperate. Quite frankly stating a content policy has nothing do to with assuming good faith, nor with the integrity of the German editors or people as a whole. If i were to source an English wikipedia article using another English wikipedia article the same policy would apply. After this edit you add the above response which contains another set of personal attacks aimed at both me and Lugnuts.

I have no doubts that your intentions for translating the article were good and heavens, i applaud it as i AM aware that enwiki tends to favor English language artists, just as i am aware that the German wiki's coverage of German related article's tends to be better than enwiki's. However, AGF is a double edged blade - if i were to start sending personal attacks your way you would be screaming blue murder at me, and rightfully so. Seeing you marked yourself as retired i doubt you will see this text, just as much as i doubt you will agree with it as i am probably permanently marked in your mind as the "faithful bovine lackey". Still, if you ever decide to return you are quite welcome - just drop the personal attacks in favor of a polite discussion and you're entirely good to go. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 12:25, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Steve Brozak

You just reversed some changes I made to the Steve Brozak page. I am very familiar with the subject and with his consent did a couple of things. First, I was in the process of consolidating the publication list. It was far too long for anyone to go through. Second, I was trying to shorten the corporate life biography, which also had become a long explanation of Mr. Brozak's work life. The object is to make the page more concise, more readable and more accurate.

I hope I can recover the publication list that I created in the corporate section and use it to replace the list in the publications sections from a previous version since I just spent two hours compiling and reviewing it.

I appreciate Wiki's integrity and would not do anything to knowingly compromise it. This is a work in progress, attempting to improve quality and accuracy.

Please feel free to contact me at hbassman@comcast.net or to call (908) 693=9999-mobile or (908) 522-9212. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hank42 (talk • contribs) 19:29, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

I assume that "very familiar" equals "Employed as a PR consultant" for Mr. Brozak? (This being more of an educated guess than an assumption though). If that is the case i would have to point to the conflict of interest policy, and in particular the sections discussing Paid editing and promotional editing. I do note that your edits don't seem to be an attempt to create a glorified autobiography for Mr. Brozak. Even so, while the page is definitely not as blatantly promotional as some, the structure and presence of multiple peacock terms give it a clear aftertaste of promotional editing (Especially the peacock wording is quite prevalent throughout the entire article.)

But to answer your question - all edits made to an article are present in the page history which can be found here. You can easily access any historical revision from there, and copy its content or restore it. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 12:53, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: User:Nyth83/Metal Ware Corporation

OK, Never did this before but I added the template to Metal Ware Corporation Nyth83 (talk) 11:30, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Will I have to re-add the request for delete template to the old user page, or can you go ahead and delete it after the history merge? Nyth83 (talk) 11:36, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

@Nyth83:

Merger complete. Your talk page history is now present in the article, sand four revisions that dealt with the speedy deletion and the decline of said speedy deletion (It would be quite confusing if those ended up mixed between the more recent edits in the actual article). The userpage itself is deleted as well now, so no need for another template

Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 12:37, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Marcella Detroit

Where is verification that the information is true? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.232.170.18 (talk) 22:48, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

In the thirty-one references present on that page? Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 22:52, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations from STiki!

The Silver STiki Barnstar of Merit

Congratulations, Excirial! You're receiving this barnstar of merit because you recently crossed the 10,000 classification threshold using STiki.

We thank you both for your contributions to Wikipedia at-large and your use of the tool.

We hope you continue your ascent up the leaderboard and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! West.andrew.g (developer) and Ugog Nizdast (talk) 05:50, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

AFCBuddy Oddity

I would like to draw your attention to this diff that has been repeated twice. It appears that AFCBuddy is appending blank lines. If you could investigate, that would be superb! Hasteur (talk) 22:21, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Logged as a Todo. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 22:52, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Edits to The Speaker's House wikipedia page

Hi, I just made some updates to The Speaker's House wikipedia webpage and you removed all of them. I don't understand why. I included citations of my sources, which are articles that I authored, and I included an edit summary. There were not lengthy quotations that would violate copyright. I am president of the board of trustees of The Speaker's House organization and we very much want to update the now very-outdated content on the wikipedia page about our organization, its mission, and our property's history. Most of the information currently on the wikipedia page is derived from a Historic Stuctures Report that has been superceded by more current research. We want to update the history and biographical information, then work on adding more content and some new images. Can you please help me to understand what the problem is with my updates and why you removed them? How can I update the page to be more accurate? Thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.227.243.211 (talk) 15:19, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

The added content is a verbatim et literatim copy of this external page, which is marked as being copyrighted (© 2004-2014 The Speaker's House). I would guess that your reaction would be something along the lines of "This is our own website, so we own the copyright of the added content thus there is no infringement whatsoever". Unfortunately due to the way copyright law works the content is still copyrighted and there not compatible with Wikipedia's site structure (content can be edited, removed or restructured which is against normal copyright laws) and content licensing policies. In short, Wikipedia can only accept content that is licensed as GDFL or CC-BY-SA (Or compatible licensing structures). Of course there are plenty of exceptions and nuances to this general rule (Such as expired copyright, content created by US government officials and crown copyright) but thankfully none of those seem to apply here as they have a tendency to make copyright related matters even more complicated.

In short there are two things that can be done. It is possible to reword the content in such a way that it is not closely paraphrased from the original - in that case the content is no longer a copy of the original and therefor not a copyright violation. It is also possible to release the added content under a compatible license in which case it can be used directly on Wikipedia. Please be aware that Wikipedia's license allows anyone to use the added content - including commercially - without renumeration or prior permission for any purpose as long as it is attributed to its original source. If you wish to release the content under this license i would strongly suggest reading the linked page and the CC-BY-SA explanation to ensure that you really wish to release to content under the stated terms. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 15:49, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi

Why did you change the article I edited? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomasgreek (talk • contribs) 19:59, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

@Thomasgreek:

The school mascot for a public elementary school would be "Bulldog @ss"? And at the same time the amount of staffers just happened to be upped to 69 as well (Of all numbers?). Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 20:08, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Hey Ex, I don't suppose I could ask you a favor...

Hey there. I'm not sure if you are aware or not, but I've been going through the wiki trying to get rid of deprecated and obsolete HTML elements (such as big, font, tt, and center) and in the process of doing this, I'm noticing you have some font tags in your signature. As such, I was wondering if I could convince you to update your signature, and if so I suggest replacing:

[[User:Excirial|<span style="color:#191970;">'''Excirial'''</span>]]<sup> ([[User talk:Excirial|<span style="color:#FF8C00;">Contact me</span>]],[[Special:Contributions/Excirial|<span style="color:#FF8C00;">Contribs</span>]])</sup>

with:

[[User:Excirial|<b style="color:#226">Excirial</b>]] <sup>([[User talk:Excirial|<span style="color:#F80">Contact me</span>]],[[Special:Contribs/Excirial|<span style="color:#F80">Contribs</span>]])</sup>

which will result in a 202 character long signature (5 characters shorter) with an appearance of: Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)}
compared to your existing 207 character long signature of: Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)}
— Either way. Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 19:30, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

@Technical 13:

Done. Thanks for updating it for me, as i haven't looked at my signatures code in a long, long time. Now that i think about it: The last time i looked at it Firefox 2.0 was only just released, IE was still stuck at version 7 and Google Chrome did not even exist yet. Hence, i believe there was not even a HTML 5 working draft back then. Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 20:19, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

A vandal

I assume I'm allowed to report that another user has been vandalizing, the user in question is Brendangilardo1 (talk · contribs). Yoshi876 (talk) 20:01, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

@Yoshi876:

Done - In the future you may want to report vandals to WP:AIAV though. Dropping me a note works fine as well, but AIAV is a central noticeboard that is actively watched by more than one admin and thus tends to yield a faster response time for vandalism reports (Something quite practical if an editor is actively making a mess of things). Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 21:28, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	I want to let you know that I recognize and appreciate all that YOU do for Wikipedia. Keep it up. SkaterLife (talk) 18:27, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank! The sentiment is mutual - I noticed you filed a report for a certain username (that i probably shouldn't repeat for obvious reasons) which definably warranted a whack with a hammer

Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 21:58, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Technical Barnstar
	For your work with AFCBuddy - fantastic program that makes tracking AfC reviews that much easier. Thanks! *~SuperHamster* Talk Contribs 20:03, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 21:58, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

User Paway

I don't think it was appropriate for you to live this message on his talkpage: user talk:Paway. Even if a user is distuctive to the point of vandalism we still need to assume good faith and not personally attack them.--Mishae (talk) 17:34, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

@Mishae:

Ehm, look at the page history. This is the standard block template i left. But this is what the user subsequently did to his page and the block template. That said, thanks for pointing me to those edits. I just revoked his talk page and mail access for obvious reasons. Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 17:40, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I am sorry for misunderstanding (wasn't aware of the users edit). See, your talkpage says, that I may make mistake or screw up, so I kindly let you know.--Mishae (talk) 17:45, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Cassandra Peterson

Not sure who made you the speedball laird master of WCP, but if you need to see evidence of her actual full nude loop video so that you shall have your desired "citation", just let me know, because I can certainly provide that evidence with no problem, except perhaps your inability to receive it through email channels. Just looking to inject some TRUTH here, pal, even as much as too many prevailing inquisitors dislike it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.185.116.245 (talk) 19:24, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

It may well be true that she appeared in an erotic short film, but that needs to be verifiable since the inclusion criteria is verifiability and not truth. What the article needs is a citation is the form of a reliable source that can Verify the aforementioned claim. Since the page itself is a biography of a living person all content, and especially content that is potentially contentious or libelous needs to be backed by reliable source lest the addition be removed. Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 19:40, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Therm-O-Disc

Sir, It was good to start AfD on this, I were looking at Larmstrong1008 who were adding unsourced claims in the article. A.Minkowiski^{_Lets t@lk} 19:30, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

The closest that I could come to substantiating Therm-O-Disc's claim of "largest producer of bi-metal disc controls" was A wealth of expertise in bimetal temperature controls and thermistors has given Therm-O-Disc, Mansfield, Ohio, a strong and well-established position in those areas. Babyak, Richard J. (1998). "Sense & Switch". Appliance Manufacturer. 1998 (July): 50.. --Bejnar (talk) 20:01, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Edits to pelican lake

I was just seeing if I had put the text I the right spot and the picture was legit.

PersonTheAwesome (talk) 20:41, 18 June 2014 (UTC)