User talk:Rhinotate

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or sock puppetry.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome!

Jared Mimms

This is an automated message from VWBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Jared Mimms, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Jared Benjamin Mimms. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. VWBot (talk) 22:39, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jared Benjamin Mimms

The article Jared Benjamin Mimms has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. reddogsix (talk) 00:08, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Jared Benjamin Mimms

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

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

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. reddogsix (talk) 00:10, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Jared Benjamin Mimms

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

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

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. reddogsix (talk) 00:52, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Jared Benjamin Mimms

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Jared Benjamin Mimms requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Rhinotate (talk) 01:21, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

February 2013

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Jared Benjamin Mimms. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. reddogsix (talk) 00:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing speedy deletion notices from pages that you have created yourself, as you did with Jared Benjamin Mimms. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. If you continue to remove the Speedy Deletion tags you will be banned from editing or creating pages. Please stop this disruptive behavior. reddogsix (talk) 00:59, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you remove a speedy deletion notice from a page you have created yourself, as you did with this edit to Jared Benjamin Mimms. Josh3580_talk/hist 01:03, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rhinotate, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Rhinotate! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Nathan2055 (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:16, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion over Jared Benjamin Mimms

Seems as though a plethora of issues has occurred on the Jared Benjamin Mimms page. Please work on finishing the article and keep in touch on my talk page if issue continue in regards to reversions. I apologize for the insanity of this and hope it does not put you off from editing wikipedia. Contact me with any questions. Jab843 (talk) 01:32, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Jared Benjamin Mimms for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jared Benjamin Mimms is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jared Benjamin Mimms until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. reddogsix (talk) 01:32, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 01:51, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Materialscientist (talk) 03:34, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Rhinotate (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I did nothing wrong, just edited posts, did not know about signing, will fix in the future. Rhinotate (talk) 03:46, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Errm, you receive three messages telling you not to remove speedy deletion tags from an article you created, including two that tell you that doing so is likely to lead to your being blocked, and one of them tells you that you may be blocked next time you do so without further warning. After you have been told that, you remove the tag another seven times, and you don't know why you have been blocked? Well, that is why. JamesBWatson (talk) 21:50, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

{{unblock|reason=The speedy tags and entry were reverted as the article was being cited. Conscious effort to disrupt citation process. Ongoing citation exempt from speedy delete. Rhinotate (talk) 01:18, 11 February 2013 (UTC)}}[reply]

No, an article being actively cited is not exempt from speedy deletion. The proper thing to have done is to have had the cites in hand at time of article creation. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 06:32, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That wasn't why you were blocked, though Materialscientist should have been more specific in his block notification. You're actually blocked for "disrupting deletion processes", though I don't know the specifics and your history only illuminates so much (I count 8 speedy-deletion tag removals, but nothing really sanctionable as regards the AfD unless the IP there is you.) —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 09:28, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rhinotate for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. reddogsix (talk) 16:43, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of evading scrutiny for 1 week, as you did at [[:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jared Benjamin Mimms]]. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 05:52, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Rhinotate (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

No evidence of sockpuppetry - all different IPs - entry better known in specific geographic location. User reddogsix is obstructing citation yet again. Reason to believe that reporting user is himself sockpuppeting. Have more to cite on that entry and a few more entries to write. Please open up the entry again and remove collapse so we may properly cite and discuss the entry. Rhinotate (talk) 01:00, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

It is perfectly obvious that you have been indulging in sockpuppetry. In addition, if you took the advice to read the guide to appealing blocks before making this unblock request, then you will have been aware that making accusations about others in your unblock request had zero chance of increasing the likelihood of an unblock. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:51, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Apart from your evasion of a block and your totally transparent attempt to vote-stack in a discussion, doing things such as calling other editors "idiots" will not advance your cause. If you want to contribute to Wikipedia then you are very welcome to do so, but only if you are willing and able to fit in with the established ways that Wikipedia functions. Otherwise, there is a danger that you r block, which has already been increased from 1 day to 1 week and then to 1 month, may eventually become indefinite. That would be a pity, as I am sure you could make useful contributions, so I do hope you will think again about how you edit. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:24, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is no evidence for sockpuppetry here. Please open up the disputed entry so that I may further cite it. This is obstruction of citation. Thanks. Rhinotate (talk) 00:52, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please link to a specific case of calling other editors "idiots," this constitutes uncited libel. Rhinotate (talk) 01:26, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am tempted to ignore your request to link to a specific case of calling other editors "idiots", as I suspect it is trolling. However, I will give you the benefit of the doubt, and give you this diff. I suspect that your notion of libel law is inaccurate too: I doubt you would bet far in trying to make a libel case out of that. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:54, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Chummer, we have page histories that show a ton of IPs making the same arguments you've been advancing here, and you're showing the exact same hostility to the admins here that one IP showed Reddogsix, with the exact same writing style. Do you seriously take us for imbeciles? —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 06:12, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As an aside, accusing other users of being sockpuppets without any valid evidence (I'm assuming you're going to accuse reddogsix of being a sockpuppet of everyone who's voted "Delete" on the AfD or otherwise has advocated for deletion of the page) is considered a personal attack, and an especially serious one at that. Continuing to attack other users will lead to your ability to edit this talk page to be revoked. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 06:20, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Guys, I hear your arguments - but this is all circumstantial. I have examined those posts and see no similarity of "writing style." You should hold me to the same standards you hold reddogsix - accusing me of sockpuppeting is a personal attack as well. reddogsix started this argument and was the first to level a personal attack. When did I ever attack anyone? You cannot hold me liable for the comments of other users. This is ridiculous. Rhinotate (talk) 06:41, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I feel bad for reddogsix - I know he is trying to be a good wikipedier. But in this rare case, he goofed up by reverting citations as I made them and blackballing the entry before the community could make the proper citations demonstrating notability. Because the subject of this entry lives in SoCal, the subject has more notability in SoCal, explaining IP addresses from SoCal. I'm sorry if I had to spend time with my family while this was happening and could not intervene and discourage the ANONS. To reddogsix - we all make mistakes. I forgive you. Please help the community ramify this situation and unlock this entry so we may properly cite it and move on. I have more editing work to do and a large knowledge base to do it with. Rhinotate (talk) 07:04, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, if they edit in a manner indistinguishable from you, we can. And please stop accusing reddogsix of "blackballing" the page - all he did is nominate it for deletion. Had you actually looked for sources to put into the article as opposed to removing deletion tags ad nauseam, the article wouldn't have been at risk of being speedied and we wouldn't be at an AfD. At present, every source on that article is either a primary source (articles he's written or stuff directly linked to his companies) or a user-generated resource (which are subject to change at any moment and thus unusable). I would strongly suggest, if you have any desire to save this article, that you find third-party sources (newspapers and trade magazines are ideal) that discuss the subject at depth and have absolutely no ties to him financially or socially, as is required by WP:Notability. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 10:05, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing to do with unblock, this is developing into a dispute. Others, do not engage about the dispute. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 09:32, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

I did look for sources and included those sources. I have more sources but cannot include them as my account has been blocked due to the actions of others. This is a catch-22 now. I can't edit the page to include third party sources due to the block placed on my account due to alleged "sockpuppetry." The only way I can defend myself and the article is to make a sockpuppet in order to properly cite the darn thing to disperse the charges of sockpuppetry. Your actions would not hold up in any court in America and I refuse to resort to sockpuppetry. Rhinotate (talk) 19:46, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As just about everyone agrees, the sources in the article do not support notability. If you feel you have additional sources that might meet the test for WP:V and WP:IS and support notability list them here and someone will look at them and help make a determination if they are. If they are, I am sure someone will be add them to the article. reddogsix (talk) 22:11, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As reddogsix says, post them here and someone else can add them to the page if they're viable sources. Addendum: I'll help explain what we need: A subject is notable if multiple (preferably 3+) third-party sources with a reputation for factchecking and no ties to the subject discuss him. Blogs are not viable sources, and nor are user-generated-content sites. (Addendum added 23:39, 11 February 2013 (UTC)) —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 23:26, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://marshallteachers.sandi.net/teacher_sites/Berthiaume/techleaders.html and http://www.athletic.net/TrackAndField/Athlete.aspx?AID=92949 for early life - hold on, http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/print-edition/2012/01/06/top-leaders-in-commercial-real-estate.html?page=all http://www.georgiatrend.com/May-2006/2006-Family-Business-Awards/ -- It looks as if there is an attempt to cover this family up in the media (deleted articles). There is a full page article in the Union Tribune Archives as well I may have to dig for to get full content. Plus honorary degrees etc.. Hope other Wikipedians will search also. Just found the subject of this entry's twitter today. Unfortunately, the mass media is completely manipulated for financial and political interests i.e. the NYT Tesla review and Toyota crisis fabrications - don't trust them. Looks as if a former president is involved in family murders pre-civil war era. Also, documents suggesting civil war era murder (politically orchestrated) of entry subject's ancestors over gold export from south to north surfacing. Also, suspicious firings (current era). In terms of present notability, subject claims "ghostfounder" on Twitter. How do we handle ghost writers/ghost founders? Dates on self posts from subject of entry reveals correct trade calls. More to come over next few days, subject very interesting. Need more historians to comment and help dig up archives. Have a few more unpublicized/repressed entries after this I am privy to. Rhinotate (talk) 02:57, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to be a gentle as possible, the articles you presented do not meet Wikipedia criteria to support the article.

[1] - Only lists the subject's name in a list. There is no substance to article or support for notability. BTW - the list indicates the subject was a 8th grade student who served as teacher assistant.
[2] - Lists the subject as a runner in high school Varsity - Finals - again, no substance to the content.
[3] - The page does not even mention the subject of the article, only a person named Malon D. Mimms.
[4] - The page does not even mention the subject of the article.

I suggest you focus on the subject of the Wikipedia article... notability is not inherited, so even if the subject was related to someone famous or worthy of a Wikipedia article it would have no bearing on the notability of this article - it might help to reread Jeremy's comments above in his Addendum discussing what is needed. I also suggest that if you disagree with my assessment, before you comment, you wait for others to chime in to support or disagree with my comments - I would hate to see you cited for WP:UNCIVIL behavior. reddogsix (talk) 04:05, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.google.com/?tbm=pts#hl=en&tbo=d&tbm=pts&sclient=psy-ab&q=larry+mimms&oq=larry+mimms&gs_l=hp.3..0j0i30l2j0i5i30.1936.3427.0.3601.11.9.0.2.2.0.156.716.7j2.9.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.1.2.hp.VHSWjfoyrsk&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.42261806,d.cGE&fp=8f99229667ad660a&biw=1288&bih=773 Rhinotate (talk) 06:35, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

reddogsix - much more from where that came from. Looks like subject himself has not been publicized that much in terms of business exploits but the traces I have found (examine dates) speak for themselves - more will come. Searching for historical documents now. There are many more buried articles pertaining to the subject and subject's family. Rhinotate (talk) 06:35, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=mimms+L Rhinotate (talk) 07:04, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are >3 and probably 30 more will surface. 10 historical, 10 subject specific, and 10 family. Rhinotate (talk) 06:49, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't judge a book by its cover. The subject of this entry is notable - even with a coverup, press is still there - I just never got the opportunity to cite because you accused me of sockpuppeting and blocked the entry from further edits. There are plenty more sources specifically about the subject and tons of WOM. Subject founded and ghostfounded 8 firms, ghostwrote several t.v. shows and wrote full length films, and is owner of a legit, unpublicized firm - is also a historical figure. If you need more let me know - I would rather not spend time digging up historical documents - I have other, important entries to write. Thank you. Rhinotate (talk) 07:04, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rhinotate, you just posted a whole load of copyrighted material to this page, I have reverted it, and deleted the revision due to copyright violations. Do not post copyvios again or your talkpage access will be revoked. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 09:32, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry DQ, those were sources - links do not work well so I needed to post content. Have 100s of them. Rhinotate (talk) 09:33, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.google.com/?tbm=pts#hl=en&tbo=d&tbm=pts&sclient=psy-ab&q=larry+mimms&oq=larry+mimms&gs_l=hp.3..0j0i30l2j0i5i30.1936.3427.0.3601.11.9.0.2.2.0.156.716.7j2.9.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.1.2.hp.VHSWjfoyrsk&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.42261806,d.cGE&fp=8f99229667ad660a&biw=1288&bih=773 Rhinotate (talk) 09:46, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

reddogsix - much more from where that came from. Looks like subject himself has not been publicized that much in terms of business exploits but the traces I have found (examine dates) speak for themselves - more will come. Searching for historical documents now. There are many more buried articles pertaining to the subject and subject's family. Rhinotate (talk) 09:46, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=mimms+L Rhinotate (talk) 07:04, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://docs.newsbank.com/s/InfoWeb/aggdocs/AWNB/116D2F366544406D/0D1A845FAF8F8CA0?p_multi=SDUB&s_lang=en-US http://docs.newsbank.com/s/InfoWeb/aggdocs/AWNB/116D38FA0D5A8D1E/0D1A845FAF8F8CA0?p_multi=SDUB&s_lang=en-US http://docs.newsbank.com/s/InfoWeb/aggdocs/AWNB/0EB7D0F471F53DA8/0D1A845FAF8F8CA0?p_multi=AJBK&s_lang=en-US http://docs.newsbank.com/s/InfoWeb/aggdocs/AWNB/0EB7D4202773AA18/0D1A845FAF8F8CA0?p_multi=AJBK&s_lang=en-US

Listen, there are literally 100s of articles, current, historical, and related about the subject of this entry. I just could not cite them all before other users reclassified the entry. Other Wikipedians are not bothering to do simple due diligence to verify this. This is a valid entry. Let's move on. Rhinotate (talk) 09:43, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

With respect to these ones you have just posted: The first and second newsbank articles discuss disease tests. The third and fourth discuss a city. The fifth source discusses the wrong Mimms, and the sixth is a name drop, also of the wrong Mimms. The seventh is about a school, not the subject. The eighth is a listing, and thus useless. The ninth discusses a school-supply programme, and the tenth a church initiative. The eleventh is about a school activity, and the twelfth looks more like an image caption than an article given its extreme shortness. The thirteenth and fourteenth are listings, one for real estate transfers and the other for prep-school track standings. The fifteenth discusses a homeless shelter, and the sixteenth is a headline (seriously, that's all that one is) and unusable. The seventeenth (18 is the exact same link as 17) again discusses the homeless shelter as its subject. 19 is too short to be usable as a source. 20 is about a mill. 21 is a financial press release. 22 is about the mill again. NONE of them discuss Jared Benjamin Mimms to any extent beyond a name-drop, and all of it is scraped from the actual sources. I'm sorry, Rhinotate, but what you have here is unusable for the article. As Reddogsix says, notability in Wikipedia's eyes is not hereditary - all subjects must abide by WP:Notability on their own - and for a (assumed) biography what I'm seeing here thus far does not cut it. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 09:59, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I disagree. The comment that this is "scraped" is untrue and irrelevant. This is an archive. These are all legitimate, archived, published sources. These are all related to the subject of this entry and his family, mentioning by name all relevant parties and detailing the relevant parties' actions. These are legitimate, third party sources. Combined with first party and primary sources (also, scientific, academic, publications - patents), these notable articles bring notability and credibility to the subject of this entry. Please cite the article accordingly as I find these so that others may weigh in their opinions. There are hundreds more - historical sources abound as well as buried stories. Rhinotate (talk) 21:22, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the decision not to add them to the article. Based on the review none appear to support notability. reddogsix (talk) 21:56, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry guys, those are as notable as they come. All discuss the subject in detail. All are third party publications. A homeless shelter that the subject's family built. A mill that the subject's family refurbished, etc. Press releases about the subject. Patents the subject was granted. Academic papers the subject published. There are ulterior motives here. Conduct a simple search - hundreds of articles. This is corporate or government censorship. I'm sorry, but reddogsix and Jeremy are one in the same or have reached preconceived conclusions and are suffering from groupthink. Connect the dots here. This is the definition of notable. DeltaQuad will realize this. Rhinotate (talk) 00:57, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, they do not discuss Jared Benjamin Mimms in detail, and I am not engaging in groupthink with reddogsix. All those sources do is discuss the town and various buildings, or a different Mimms entirely. We need sources that actually talk about Jared Benjamin Mimms, not the various buildings and towns his family propped up. It isn't our fault that you're explicitly ignoring WP:Notability. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 02:28, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]