User talk:Spevw

I may have found goofs in wikipedia. Muskie ran unsuccessfully for mayor of Waterville, Maine (home of Colby College).

I don't think former US Senator George Mitchell also ran unsuccessully for Waterville mayor.
Henry Cisneros had 2 brothers and 2 sisters, not 5 siblings.

I created an article on Tara Allain, Miss Maine.

I created an article on Reddington Museum, a historical museum in Waterville, Maine.

I just wrote a new article on Tara Allain.

Welcome!

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

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Kesac 01:54, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheese

It was worth it being able to put the edit comment in as I did. Welcome, as well. . . and you should sign your notes by putting ~~~~ at the end of your comment. It will be converted to something like (John User:Jwy talk) 03:01, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Waterville, Maine

Hey, do you even LIVE in Waterville? I doubt it. Yendor — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yendor1152 (talk • contribs)

Yendor, the point is that assertions need to be written from a Neutral Point of View and backed up by sources. See WP:V and WP:RS. Please observe these policies or you will be blocked. --Richard 01:39, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spevw, that's no "Dollar General Store" next to the old Ames building, it's a "Family Dollar." And on the other side is a "Dollar Tree." Why are there so many dollar stores here? Because Waterville's a welfare town. Everybody who lives here knows that, for heaven's sake.

And you know what? I don't believe for one minute that Wal*Mart sucked the life out of downtown Waterville. I was a business owner long before Wal* Mart even thought of coming here, and the downtown was on life support then. It hasn't been "thriving" since the 1960's. For one, it lost a number of anchor stores--Levine's, Butlers, Sterns, Dunhams, Alvina and Delias, Laverdieres--stores that had been in business for literally decades. Many of these (in fact, all but one) went out before Wal* Mart came to Waterville. Yet, all I've heard from the downtown "Business Association" is that Wal* Mart has hurt business on Main Street. That's just a crock.

I see no reason why I have to cite the Concourse sculpture or the abandoned Ames building, etc. Those are "landmarks" as much as the footbridge, and I don't see that cited.

The trouble is, people are coming to this entry and changing things, removing what they "don't like," and all the while, they wouldn't know Waterville, Maine if they stumbled over it. That, to me, is the height of hypocricy.

Yendor— Preceding unsigned comment added by Yendor1152 (talk • contribs)

I have replied to Yendor on his Talk Page.

--Richard 03:28, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted your "for reference" poverty-level statistics because they appear to have been picked arbitrarily by you which makes it original research. Please try to find more general statistics such as the mean and standard deviation for cities in the state of Maine. If you can show that Waterville's percentage below the poverty level is outside one standard deviation from the mean, then you have something significant to discuss.

--Richard 07:33, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your message on my Talk Page. Feel free to respond here as I have your Talk Page on my watchlist.

My point about the two "reference" statistics is not that the statistics are made up but rather that the choice of the towns was yours. This falls under the second sentence in WP:OR which reads

The term also applies to any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that appears to advance a position — or, in the words of Wikipedia's co-founder Jimmy Wales, would amount to a "novel narrative or historical interpretation."

Kennebunk is clearly an outlier, being far from the state poverty level of 10.9%. Anybody can compare a city to Beverly Hills and come out looking bad so it's not clear what the significance comparing Waterville to Kennebunk is. Skowhegan is arguably a better comparison but it's in a different county and it's not obvious whether it is reasonable to compare the two or not.

I have replaced your text with a comparison to the poverty rate statistics for Kennebec county and the state of Maine. These tell the story as well as your two "hand-picked" examples but with a better claim to objectivity.

For your reference, my source was the 2005 Report Card on Poverty.

--Richard 15:49, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

You aren't blocked at all, some person put that up there on your user page without logging in. You're free to edit. Kwsn^(Ni!) 19:31, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Thanks for your question at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Jeepday, I have responded. You realize you are allowed to vote at RfA? There was a contribution limit at ArbCom but only for the vote there. In most other areas of Wikipedia number of edits have little meaning. Jeepday (talk) 23:23, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI - Wikipedia, Wikimedia and ownership

Just to clarify something your comments show you may not understand - Wikipedia and associated projects are owned and operated by the Wikimedia Foundation, a non-profit company located in the US state of Florida. Jimbo Wales is one of the members of the Board of Trustees (he is not the Chair). The bylaws, which are legally binding, make it impossible for the company to ever be sold for profit or to a profit making company. ^Avruchtalk 01:21, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right - to tell you the truth, I don't recall immediately why I left the above comments. It is true that any non-profit corporation can engage in revenue-generating practices. What they can't do is sell themselves or a substantial portion of their assets in a way that contradicts with their exemption (lest they lose the exemption and be forced to pay taxes on all past revenue). ^Avruchtalk 00:34, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFA

If you are interested, I have answered your question on my RFA. Cheers, Icestorm815 • Talk 14:49, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Patrick Whitesell

A tag has been placed on Patrick Whitesell, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read our the guidelines on spam as well as the Wikipedia:Business' FAQ for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Ged UK (talk) 21:54, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

star for you

It is very noble of you to discuss the Celine Dion issue in ANI rather than use your administrative powers in the article. Hello from a fellow Wikipedian. Spevw (talk) 21:16, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thank you. With disputes like these, I find it's best to give everyone a fair advantage to voice his/her opinions. Might isn't always right :). By the way, I appreciate your comments on the article's talk page. Orane (talk) 01:30, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Internet censorship in Malawi

A tag has been placed on Internet censorship in Malawi requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Ged UK (talk) 21:41, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tag it with the {{hangon}} tag, and start a discussion on the talk page. It's not my call on whether to delete or not, I'm not an admin. Like you said when you created it, there's nothing like an article there, it's just a definition. Ged UK (talk) 21:52, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

mentor

G'day, yes I will adopt you. I like to take an active role in mentoring, so if you want some help with anything that is making you uncomfortable, email me.

If you would like, we can collaborate on Colby College; I've left some questions on the talk page. It would be great if you could come over to Wikisource and help me proofread this: s:Index:The formative period in Colby's history.djvu. The software wont let me do it by myself; a different person must validate that the text is correct. We will be able to use this as a source for the Wikipedia article. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 06:07, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We are cleaning up the "The formative period in Colby's history" so that it can be used as a source on the article. There are all sorts of historical details we will find in it. To start, can you go to page 6, edit the page, click the Green icon at the bottom, and click Save. By doing that, you confirm that the page is indeed a blank page. Next go to page 7, and verify that the text on the left is the same as the image on the right. If it is correct, edit the page and mark it as validated. Those pages are simple and boring, but it will become more interesting, I promise :-) John Vandenberg ^(chat) 04:35, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re: ok with you

Yep, I agree that's the best thing to do. Thanks for the heads-up! —Politizer^{( talk • contribs )} 02:09, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, thanks! The same offer goes out to you, if you ever want a second opinion on an article or anything. Happy editing! —Politizer^{( talk • contribs )} 02:15, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Icelandic Financial Supervisory Authority

Given the current 2008–2012 Icelandic financial crisis, and the fact that more could be written on the article if a translation from Icelandic to English was provided, I would keep the article for now in the hope that it could be expanded upon in the future. I'm going to put in a translation request. Abstrakt (talk) 04:07, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Block

If you check the block log, you'll see that about 10 minutes later I realized my error. Without letting out too much private information, you were using Wikipedia from the same region that a recidivist sockpuppteer did, and I accidentally included you in the block of the socks. I corrected it pretty soon, and I apologize for any inconvenience. As for your deeper problem, for better or for worse, my opinion of wikipedia differs. Perhaps you are editing in areas which are more contentious than the norm? -- Avi (talk) 23:43, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anybody can accuse anyone of being a sockpuppet, you do not need to be a sysop. However, that is what WP:SSP (and after 1/10/2009 - WP:SSP2 ) is for. If you feel wrongfully accused you can follow the procdures there. Heck, I've been accused of sockpupptery myself, twice, even after I became an admin. It's not a crime to be accused, it's just a violation to actually run one. In this case, I explained why you were initially caught in the block, and as soon as I realized my error, I unblocked you with an apology. -- Avi (talk) 00:02, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Princeton

Thanks for the GA status.-Kieran4 (talk) 23:20, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re some of your recent contributions

I'm not sure what you were trying to achieve with this - Reliable Forever is perfectly correct that they look like sock accounts, and absolutely right to bring it to administrator attention. Furthermore, your post on WP:ANI here is equally perplexing. Perhaps you should consider withholding comment in these situations until you are more familiar with Wikipedia, its policies and the way it operates. Regards, EyeSerene^talk 12:12, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review Question

Hello! I recently noticed that you had placed the comment "Needs some very significant work to be GA but will be nice and not reject it." under the entry for Murder of Robert Eric Wone on the good article nomination page. Do you intend to review this article, or were you just making a note for other editors? Please feel free to reply here, I will have your talk page temporarily watchlisted. Dana boomer (talk) 16:40, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. I had removed the comment a few days ago after not getting any response from you up until that point. I understand your thought about recognizing all of the work that goes into GANs. However, many potential reviewers on the GAN page see a comment under an article as an intent to review by the commentor. In this, if you're just making a comment, rather than reviewing the article, there's a good chance that other reviewers won't look at the article and the nominators will have to wait longer. In the future, it may be better to simply leave a note of congratulations/praise on the nominators talk page or the article's talk page, instead of on the GAN page. You are, of course, welcome to comment under any and all articles you plan to review! Dana boomer (talk) 01:43, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sock...

Spevw.. I think you misunderstand. Martinphi is not this sock, and I know that. The only way to clear him is to have a Checkuser check the account. No worries ... But thank you for your concern and I'm sorry about your situation.(olive (talk) 02:13, 29 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

I've decided to edit a little bit. I was a bit peeved after being blocked by mistake. Someone said that I didn't know about it but I did know about it that same day. Spevw (talk) 00:26, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA review of Denise Chong

Hi there. I noticed that you have opened the review page for the article. Are you still reviewing the page for GA status? – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 20:14, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of John Coleman (Obama wave)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article John Coleman (Obama wave), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

This is not a biography. It is just a report of an incident. "WP is not news."

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. The article actually was interesting. I just didn't think Mr. Coleman is important enough for an encyclopedia article, especially since he will go on and do other things in his life and he shouldn't be defined by this one "controversy." Borock (talk) 14:47, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit you added a news article about John Coleman (Drum Major Extraodinaire), but the article is about John Coleman (weather forecaster) who is a wholly different person, and I couldn't see any relationship between them apart from sharing the same first name and surname. --Enric Naval (talk) 00:54, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Revenge No

If it had been just changing the article to say he wasn't notable, it would have been one thing and I would have been among the first to educate him. But nominating an article at AfD, then going to ANI to complain--all within hours of creating your account? That didn't sit well at all. Blueboy 96 00:21, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD: Murder of Anne Barber Dunlap

Hi Spevw, I saw your incisive comments on another murder article up for deletion and thought you would like to weigh in on the AfD for Murder of Anne Barber Dunlap. It is clearly not a routine, or ordinary murder. It was the most publicized murder of the decade in Minneapolis. The murder led Pillsbury to stop advertising on violent TV; it involved a world landmark, Mall of America; the case was the first where a victim's family member used the Internet to ferret out witnesses; and the case led police to revise policies on sharing case files after a federal judge ruled the police had to share with the prime suspect anything they shared with his insurance company. Please consider voting to keep the article. (I am the main author.)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Murder_of_Anne_Barber_Dunlap Bundlesofsticks (talk) 02:57, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

June 2022 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations \| June 2022 Backlog Drive
On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? Sign up here!
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. (t · c) buidhe 04:27, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for University of Toronto

University of Toronto has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 01:58, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]