User talk:The Mighty Glen/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, The Mighty Glen, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Milo Yiannopoulos. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Longhair\^talk 06:15, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Carl Sargeant

Come off it...it can hardly be a Copyvio, when it was obviously the late Carl Sargeant himself or his family or political staff (or some or all of the above) who wrote his page up, and then copied the stuff wholesale onto here! --- 87.102.116.36 (talk) 16:40, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, about 78% of it was a paste from a copyrighted Labour Party web page. I and other editors have now edited it to reword the text that was in breach of copyright. The Mighty Glen (talk) 10:29, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Carl Sargeant: Cause of death (suicide) should NOT be written as if it had already been established (contempt of court)

In England and Wales, whether a person has died (in a suspicious, unnatural or unexplained death) from suicide or not, is usually only formally and properly established, concluded or determined by someone called a coroner, in something called a Coroner's Inquest ... until the Inquest on the matter of the death of the late Carl Sargeant AM has been concluded, I would suggest that reports of suicide from even from such eminent and respectable journals as the Mirror, the Guardian, the Socialist Worker and the Morning Star should not be misused here in order to "jump the gun" before the coroner (and his jury, if there is to be one) has actually have the chance of finishing doing his (or their) job under the Coroners Act 1988 (1998 c. 13) [1] and the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 (2009 c. 25) [2]. "From an unconfirmed suspected suicide", not "from suicide". (Under the Contempt of Court Act 1981 (1981 c. 49) [3], which also covers the work of coroners and Coroners' Courts, the maximum penalty according to Section 14(1)(2) [4] is a fine not exceeding £2,500 or 2 years' imprisonment, or both. [5][6][7]: "Commenting on the results of an inquest could prevent a future criminal trial as the defendant may not be able to get a fair trial.") --- 87.102.116.36 (talk) 07:23, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied to this spam at ANI. The Mighty Glen (talk) 10:29, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Carl Sargeant

I took the death template off cause the activity levels have stabilized so don't come for me on my talk page with an attitude. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Strawberriez (talk • contribs)

@Strawberriez: Then you need to say in the edit summary why you're taking the template off. You've never added an edit summary to a single edit you've ever made on Wikipedia, and been warned about this many times. Your response has always been to blank the warnings off your page and continue on regardless. I was polite on your talk page, but you've posted your reply on my page "with an attitude". The Mighty Glen (talk) 16:56, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Susan Fowler, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Book club (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 18:44, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Udayar

1) I accept that some people of udayar caste are following Christianity. But when compare to Hindus udayar not even comes to 1%. The reference what you have given is not worked based on caste or orgin. It deals with only south Indian Christianity people.

2) Socially Humbler than Vellar - Vellar is the group of people how doing agriculture. But udayar caste are belongs to Velir group. For reference please read Dennis B. McGilvray work on caste system in south India. One more all udayars are under obc category. Earlier it was in General category later changed to obc category after Dravidian movement has became ruling party in Tamil Nadu. But most of the vellar cast are in mbc category earlier they where in BC later moved to MBC. If the caste is humbler than vellar then how this this is possible.

3) Malayaman Udayar are belongs to Malayaman Dynasty. There are lot of inscription which has return on sangam period found in Tamil Nadu and also found in Literature. Please refer the following artical - http://www.whatisindia.com/inscriptions/south_indian_inscriptions/volume_26/introduction_1.html We request you to don't revert the page. If you have any concern replay to this mail. Will make it clear. -> Archescientist — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archescientist (talk • contribs) 12:14, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll reply to this at the article talk page, where this discussion belongs. The Mighty Glen (talk) 12:43, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Glen, Thanks for the partially acceptance. The discussion is regarding below phrase "According to Selva Raj, the Udayar are "socially humbler" than the Vellalar community[1] and, together with the Pallar and Kallar, are a "dominant caste" in the region variously known as Ramnad and the Maravar country.[2]". This is absolutely meaning less. But any way let it be. The purpose of this page is only to describe about Udayar caste and their History. This page is not to compare udayar with other caste. Do you think the above info is relevant to this page?. We request you to remove this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archescientist (talk • contribs) 13:14, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't partially accepted anything yet: I haven't reverted your unsourced and unreliably-sourced additions yet because I don't want an edit war. Please keep the discussion at Talk:Udayar (caste), thanks. The Mighty Glen (talk) 13:39, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 24

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lonnie Mack, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Roadhouse and William Grimes (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:21, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Birdman film

The whole description in the lede i cancelled was irrelevant and POV pushing. For example there are sentences such as "unique long take approach", this is not the first film in which it's been used a one take approach, The Rope, Russian Ark and other films did that. Birdman actually is made of two long takes, it's not continuous. Plus the citation of the cinematographer's opinions in the lede are totally irrelevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.211.25.192 (talk • contribs)

You've repeated your claim that a sentence was "irrelevant and POV pushing", but all you've offered in defence of those claims is that the word "unique" is incorrect. The cinematographer's opinion is certainly relevant, even if we disagree with it. Also, please read WP:POV pushing, to understand why that's not a phrase we should use lightly. I'm restoring the sentence, minus the word "unique". If you disagree, please take it to the talk page to get consensus. Thanks, The Mighty Glen (talk) 23:13, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All My Friends We're Glorious

Why are you maintaining a page that has an incorrect curly apostrophe in its title? Because you contributed several edits to it and don't want them to be lost? You didn't even create it. The page should have been created at All My Friends We're Glorious, with the correct apostrophe. Ss112 08:41, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I also wouldn't nominate it for AfD. There's a difference between not thinking an article is currently notable and wanting it to be gone from Wikipedia outright. Please read WP:NALBUMS: being the subject of multiple, non-trivial (which is debatable, because those articles appear to just be noting its release. Seems pretty trivial to me) works indicate it may be notable, not that it is. Ss112 08:45, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The correctly punctuated one was already created before this new one. I only noticed the curly apostrophe after I'd made some edits, and a page move is simpler than a history merge, that's all. Can you please stop redirecting it? You can see from the edit history that I'm in the middle of improving the stub. Thanks. The Mighty Glen (talk) 08:49, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

January 2018

Hello, I'm CLCStudent. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Government shutdowns in the United States have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. CLCStudent (talk) 17:26, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@CLCStudent: What do you mean? How was it unconstructive? The Mighty Glen (talk) 17:28, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You put a d on the top of the page where it did not belong. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Government_shutdowns_in_the_United_States&diff=821791266&oldid=821791245 CLCStudent (talk) 17:29, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a typo while reverting vandalism on a busy page. Was that really not obvious? Did you not notice my thank you message for getting to it seconds before I did? The Mighty Glen (talk) 17:31, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I did not get the message until after I reverted this edit that we are talking about. CLCStudent (talk) 17:32, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No? Well then scroll down a bit on that diff you linked to above: see my reversion of the new reference (which makes no mention of the highly contentious POV claim), and restoration of the citation-needed tag? As clearly stated in the edit summary? If you're going to use Twinkle, you need to be careful with the user warning tags. The Mighty Glen (talk) 01:31, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maharashtra cricketers

Even I have played for Maharashtra cricket team so why doesn't the list have my name Raj8108 (talk) 10:20, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Got a WP:Reliable source to show that you have? And did you think that vandalising pages by removing other players' names and adding your own would somehow boost your credibility? The Mighty Glen (talk) 10:37, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maxim's Caterers

The article on Maxim's catering is just a long list of mostly unnotable info drafted as advertising.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.118.186.165 (talk • contribs)

Agreed. I've stepped away after realising I was probably editing in the middle of your work, but please let me know if I can help. Thanks, The Mighty Glen (talk) 11:39, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your offer. I'll take you up on that. I honestly believe most of the content these just now is of negligible value and can be removed. Some of it seems worth keeping but not much. Correspondingly for an outfit that size there is likely some useful info out there worth adding. I'll at least make a start on this to try to get the ball rolling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.118.186.176 (talk • contribs)

Hi again,

Would you mind taking a look at what I've done so far please? I've removed what I feel is unnotable. I've found a couple of useful references. One is in the South China Morning Post that to be honest looks like it was written by a PR lobbyist. That said the content is likely still accurate to I've included it. The best source I found from what was admittedly a quick search is a Bloomberg investors info page. Last but by no means least there is at least one controversy regarding Maxim's. they have been targetted by an eco conservation group. Again I've only had a quick look and made a short update. There may be more to that and of course also possible other controversies.

I've added a section titled brands. The Bloomberg article will likely help pad that out to something useful. I'll try and get back to this within a few days. Feel free to bash away with anything you think makes the article better of course. Compared with what we started with I believe we can make that article much better without too much effort.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.118.186.176 (talk • contribs)

Thanks, I'll take a look. The Mighty Glen (talk) 18:30, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are now a pending changes reviewer and rollbacker

Hi The Mighty Glen! I hope you don't mind, but I went through your contributions and I noticed that you perform consistent recent changes patrolling edits, and you consistently view and undo damage to articles. I noticed that you didn't have the "rollbacker" and "pending changes reviewer" user rights, and I think these are both tools that would be useful for you to have. Rather than asking you to request them in WP:PERM, I just went ahead and gave them to you. These user rights allow you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes and quickly revert the edits of other users.

Rollback user right

Please keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

Rollback should never be used to edit war.
Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin).

Pending changes reviewer user right

The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection enabled is located at Special:StablePages. You may find the following pages useful to review:

Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing.
Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes.
Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.

Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of reviewer or rollback. If you no longer want either of these user rights, contact me and I'll remove it. Happy editing! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:55, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, thank you! The Mighty Glen (talk) 11:56, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You bet. Thank you for the dedication you give to Wikipedia, and keep up the excellent work! Please know that it's much appreciated and it doesn't go unnoticed. Cheers :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:58, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

From Mark Camilleri

Hello Mighty Glen, I noticed that you decided to delete my content on tourism, sharing economy, etc. Please note that I have uploaded content to help students and practitioners in the realms if tourism. As you may be aware, many students would not buy textbooks (for many reasons).

Honestly, I just wanted to share and disseminate knowledge from my book. I genuinely believe that it is a useful resource for students and practitioners.

My book has been endorsed by some of the best academics in Tourism and Hospitality.

I hope that you will reconsider your decision.

Kind regards, Mark MarkCamilleriPhD (talk) 14:00, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Three separate editors have now reverted and/or warned you about your continual self-promotion. If you don't stop, you are going to get blocked from editing by an admin. The Mighty Glen (talk) 10:52, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

add accurate info on Kung Fu

Brother in Chinese martial arts page u said that Kung Fu and Wushu are two seperate sports..

  no Wushu is "Chinese" term used only in china to collectively describe the "chinese martial arts" and they formed association to save Wushu from extinction by creating a Sport in the name of "World Wushu Championships"..
  Kung Fu is the "english" term used to collectively describe the chinese martial arts 
 so Wushu is sport and also a common term used in china to collectively describe the chinese martial arts..  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thangs Thangasamy (talk • contribs) 13:57, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Have you got WP: Reliable sources to support that claim? The Mighty Glen (talk) 14:02, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

COI template

The guidelines for the use of {{COI}} say "if you place this tag, you should promptly start a discussion on the article's talk page to explain what is non-neutral about the article. If you do not start this discussion, then any editor is justified in removing the tag without warning." Please bear that in mind when using the template in future. Thank you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:24, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done, and templates restored. The Mighty Glen (talk) 18:57, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

From SBoyle

re :(rv unexplained blanking of reference) Ah sorry about that, newbie mistake, I thought was doing a good thing by removing like to nonexistent source for I only clicked on the first part of

Crystal Waters Archived 4 August 2008 at the Wayback Machine.

ie., only clicked on the word "Crystal Waters" not on the word "Archived" and so thought the reference was gone. Late at night, over-enthusiasm to learn by getting started, did some editing before even doing The_Wikipedia_Adventure. And yes even I know Wayback machine is about archiving, not necessarily about contemporary pages, so I am not sure why I missed that. Anyway Wikipedia is starting to appear far more interesting than I had expected, now I've started to have a serious look there is a massive amount to learn about, I better slow down and take much more time. SBoyle (talk) 18:51, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. :-) Yes, Wikipedia is never dull, and there's a metric bajillion ways to contribute. Have fun! The Mighty Glen (talk) 19:00, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ultraframe, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Conservatory (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you... I have been editing in wikipedia as an anonymous for last 3 years. This was my first edit today after creating the account. Roger anton (talk) 15:24, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

About Naborr

User:CrabbetGirl's edit was a reversion of an earlier edit by some new user claiming the horse was not a purebred Arabian horse but some kind of crossbred. This was incorrect, as he was registered as purebred in several countries. The article had already passed GA and the fact he was purebred is sourced and documented. Just letting you know that it wasn't unsourced. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 23:01, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks. The Mighty Glen (talk) 09:45, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

China Women's League One

China Women's League One is the second division of women's football in China. Here is a data website of the league http://www.cfadata.cn/fans/nvjia.html. And here is the official website of Henan Huishang, one of the clubs in the 2017 China Women's League One http://www.hnhuishangnvzu.com/. Qby (talk) 13:09, 9 February 2018‎ (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, that's just the information I needed to categorise the article. The Mighty Glen (talk) 09:29, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

question

You posted a deletion nom notice on User talk:Chickenhero, but there isn't a deletion tag on the actual article being nom'd. What's up with that? - ^theWOLFchild 16:25, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Check the deletion log for that article: it was deleted a few minutes after I tagged it for speedy deletion, then recreated an hour later by the same editor. The Mighty Glen (talk) 16:52, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are you going to tag the recreated article again, or report it anywhere? - ^theWOLFchild 17:53, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the same copyvio or promotion problems the last version had. Have I missed something? The Mighty Glen (talk) 18:00, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Meh, I was just curious. Though I believe Editor760 might be looking to tag it. - ^theWOLFchild 18:18, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

question

You posted a deletion nom notice on Lick Twist, and I'd like to know what I can do to get the page up to par with Wikipedia's guidelines. They do have a lot of press, and strong social following, and a large streaming presence. Is it a matter of taking out some of the more obscure sources and slimming down the information on them? Or is this not an issue that is fixable at present time? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jordanscheffler219 (talk • contribs) 18:33, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jordanscheffler219: slimming down the unsourced stuff is a secondary problem, and easily fixable by simply removing what's unsourced. For keeping the article up though, it's a question of showing that they meet the notability guidelines on WP:BAND. I couldn't find evidence in WP:Reliable sources that they do, but I might have missed something. Please have a read of WP:BAND, and if you want any help with the referencing, please give me a shout, I'd be very happy to be proved wrong! The Mighty Glen (talk) 22:25, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 15

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Spoon Guru, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page B2B (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:06, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reg page Kuldeep Pai

Sharan (talk) 22:53, 15 February 2018 (UTC) Hi,[reply]

Aware that the page 'Kuldeep Pai' has been considered as an article for deletion. I would like to mention that Kuldeep Pai is a very popular musician in India and is well-known for his contributions in Hinduism and Spirituality through music.

I have cited references that are available as external links in the main article that are readily available on the internet. However, just so you know, there are media coverages and articles about him covered in various other newspapers and magazines. The printed version of newspapers bearing his articles and awards have been scanned and uploaded in his website under the 'Press' section - http://kuldeepmpai.com/press/ (The article 'Kuldeeply Passionate' mentions about Kuldeep's gold medal in Indian Music from Madras University which required citation in the main article).

I am aware that the references from his own resource is deemed invalid and hence was unable to add these as citation in the main article.

Kindly consider the page to be restored and make it an active wiki page.

Sharan

Sharan (talk) 22:53, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reg Kuldeep Pai

Sharan (talk) 23:13, 15 February 2018 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuldeep_Pai - link to the article[reply]

Sharan (talk) 23:13, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What are all these "reg" requests you've been posting to various editors' talk pages? What does "reg" mean? You can see I had already recommended keeping Kuldeep Pai in the deletion discussion, so what exactly are you asking me to do? The Mighty Glen (talk) 04:42, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:WikiProject Deletion sorting/United States of America

Reads in part 'This is a high level category for deletion sorting. It is strongly recommended you do not add discussions directly to it. Instead, please add them to a more specific category, such as a state and/or relevant subject area.' Your inclusion of WP:Articles for deletion/Empire Airlines Flight 8284 at USA AFDs was obviously incorrect because the aviation accident happened in Texas. In fact you put it at both pages....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 13:45, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I try to get as wide a visibility as possible for AFDs as a rule, but you're right, I missed that italic text at the top with the strong recommendation. It might be better for that to be bolded. Thanks for the heads-up. The Mighty Glen (talk) 13:48, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For Aviation accidents, they are put at deletion sorting pages= Aviation, Transportation, Events, Location of the accident, and if it is a military accident or incident then Military sorting. I start alot of aviation AFDs and do the sorting too most of the time....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 13:56, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 22

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Prashant Mehta (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Gujrat

Renew Britain (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to El Mundo

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thou'rt kind.

thnks--Dlohcierekim (talk) 14:49, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

:-) The Mighty Glen (talk) 15:04, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UAA reports on users with no edits

Generally, there is no reason to report usernames with no edits whatsoever. Per WP:UAAI: "Wait until the user edits. Do not report a user that hasn't edited unless they are clearly a vandal. We do not want to welcome productive editors with a report at UAA, nor do we want to waste our time dealing with accounts that may never be used." The exceptions are obvious hate speech or names that attack a living person/Wikipedia editor, those are blockable even without any edits, but other run-of-the-mill violations need not be reported unless and until they at least attempt to edit, and you should be able to clearly explain what the problem is if it is not immediately evident.

For whatever reason, every day dozens, if not hundreds of accounts are created that never make one single edit. It is our responsibility as admins to conscientiously review every report a user makes at UAA, so we have to check for contribs, deleted contribs, and tripping of the edit filter for every one of these reports, only to find out there's nothing there and therefore no problem to be solved. So we add the {{wait}} tag to the report, it goes to WP:UAA/HP for a week or more, and must then be reviewed again to see if the account has since become active before removing it. That's time that could be spent doing more productive things, but you basically obligate admins to do it by making such reports. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:46, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ah okay, understood. Sorry if I created extra work. The Mighty Glen (talk) 21:11, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 1

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Bhatkyachi Bhramanti (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Criminal gang

Quiet (song by MILCK) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Verse

Robert H. Tucker, Jr. (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Loyola University

Wang Huizu (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Moralist

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Arshi Khan

Hey,

The Mighty Glen

The wikipedia of "Arshi Khan" on the top of the page, it indicates general notability guideline. Do you know how can it be removed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.70.22.137 (talk) 07:32, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say it can be removed now, plenty of coverage online in WP:RS. The Mighty Glen (talk) 07:36, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Eskasoni First Nation

Hi Mighty Glen. You just reverted my edits to Eskasoni First Nation. I saw the weird edits before and am trying to make sense, while also improving the article. Perhaps it would have been better to get rid of the Massachusetts refs first.

If you would please give me a few minutes and let me finish, I'd appreciate it. — ERcheck (talk) 14:59, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, was trying to revert the same weird edits. I restored your edit immediately. Thanks, The Mighty Glen (talk) 15:00, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious...

I was wondering why you moved Moscadello_di_Montalcino (wine) to Moscadello di Montalcino. ^{Atsme📞📧} 01:48, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Parentheses are normally only needed in an article title for WP:Disambiguation. I couldn't find another topic online that might also need an article with the title of Moscadello di Montalcino, so removing the disambiguation makes the article easier to find. Please let me know if I'm wrong though. Thanks for creating the article. The Mighty Glen (talk) 06:36, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Glen - you explained it perfectly. I actually didn't create the article - I came upon it as a reviewer. ^{Atsme📞📧} 14:14, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Malcomson

Hello Mighty Glen. You tagged this article as being copy pasted but I've looked a couple times at the source text and the article text and I'm not seeing it. Can you point out the particular passage or passages you're referring to or jist remove them yourself? I'd be hapoy to fix the issie bit I'm just not seeing it. You also tagged a source in another article I made as failing verification but I looked and it does indeed say the plot was "logged two or three years earlier" so I don't know why you've concluded it doesn't support the statement that ot was logged a few years before it was acquired? FloridaArmy (talk) 20:34, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the copypaste tags: copyvio is not really a problem there, as what's duplicate is mostly lists of publication names rather than prose composed by someone else, and a change of their order would fix the problem. The Mighty Glen (talk) 14:06, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you. That was my thought on the material. I had also repeated a statement the a book was his fifth and the publication date but that didn't seem copyrightable. I have removed the statement anyway. And there was a listing of area where he was posted and traveled but I changed it to say "six continents" which just seems fluffy now and should probably be removed. I had carried over the original bit just to indicate the wide span of his work area. Thank you for your consideration. FloridaArmy (talk) 14:10, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Low cost reality tv shows

Rahul Singh (actor, born 1985) has done janani, kalpana which was aired on DD National. This channel is not the "low cost". Also did a recurring role in the show Dr. Madhumati On Duty , supporting role in Badi Dooooor Se Aaye Hai. All these three shows are of SAB TV. This channel is also not low cost, a cameo in Star Plus show Ruk Jaana Nahin. Again this channel is also not a low cost. The first refrence in the "ref section" has already included literally everything about him.Xenon One (talk) 19:35, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All reality TV is low cost, regardless of what channel it's on. It pumps a steady stream of new faces through, most of whom vanish without trace once they leave the show. The other roles were all minor. But the AFD discussion is really the best place to discuss this. Thanks, The Mighty Glen (talk) 20:02, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 8

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Info-metrics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Complexity theory (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bappi Lahiri

Hi Mighty Glen the information about Bappi Lahiri was complete and accurate as well as in Russian version, please do not remove any changes, thank you— Preceding unsigned comment added by Arthurm84 (talk • contribs)

Hi, I don't know much about how Russian Wikipedia works, but on English-language Wikipedia, all claims made in WP:Biographies of living persons must be WP:Verified with WP:Reliable sources, so removing unsourced claims from Bappi Lahiri is actually the correct thing to do. Thanks, The Mighty Glen (talk) 13:29, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi you removed the information that was there before, and along with the picture, all the information was correct — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arthurm84 (talk • contribs) 14:26, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to restore the images, although they rather outweighed the amount of sourced information remaining. Please note that on Wikipedia, it doesn't matter how honestly certain we are that something is correct - we still have to supply reliable sources to verify it. Thanks, The Mighty Glen (talk) 14:31, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 15

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

2002 Dudley earthquake (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to West Midlands

Bewnans Alysaryn (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to St Ives

Stride (music) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Tension and release

UCMDB (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to CI

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:38, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

re

On WP:AFD: "If you are unregistered, you should complete step I, note the justification for deletion on the article's talk page, then post a message at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion requesting that someone else complete the process." I did post a message but it gone. 2A02:C7F:963F:BA00:35A9:1579:6BFD:67FF (talk) 18:06, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's gone because you deleted it. But I hadn't seen that anonymous editors were allowed to request an AFD: please accept my apologies. I will restore the template, if you will restore your request. The Mighty Glen (talk) 18:13, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just restored the request. 2A02:C7F:963F:BA00:35A9:1579:6BFD:67FF (talk) 18:23, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question Regarding New Topic's Notability

Dear The Mighty Glen

Thank you for leaving me the message at my User talk. I started to create a page for ZaiGeZaiGu Community. But it was placed a template for the topic s notability. I added 5 references from different sources mostly professional news papers and tv stations for Chinese in US, However as this is a minority community with non-English as primary language, while the ZaiGeZaiGu Community is very well recognized within this group, it was still challenging to find out of community source. What would you suggest? Xinbenlv (talk) 02:43, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

At least two of the new sources you've added are WP: Reliable sources, so the group is clearly notable. Thanks for your work on this. The Mighty Glen (talk) 05:10, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! That would be wonderful. Now the next question I have, and for the community, is the reliable source model. Nowadays the newspaper and TV are going to a downwind trend while new pod-cast, blogger, new media are growing fast. I wonder if the old model of WP: Reliable sources is still very good. On one hand, the news paper and TV station are sometimes much way off in the fact checking, on the other hand, the new media might be honest or trying very had to make itself reliable. What's a better model? Xinbenlv (talk) 18:21, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Though viewing patterns change, the criteria on Wikipedia for reliability are more to do with editorial accountability, versus self-published content on personal platforms like blogs and social-media, or even self-published books. I think those will continue to be deprecated for time being, as insufficiently reliable sources for an encyclopedia. But you could ask the question at Wikipedia talk:RS, if you're interested. The Mighty Glen (talk) 22:14, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great Xinbenlv (talk)

Bear with me for the third question, how do you discover my new article, and how do you insert the welcome message from template? And how do you find these kind of templates in general? Xinbenlv (talk) 06:02, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I do a lot of categorizing of uncategorized articles, and another editor (who I'm guessing watches for new ones) had tagged yours as uncategorized. As I was looking at the article to decide which categories fit best, I noticed that it didn't make much claim of notability, and I couldn't see much about it online apart from its own website etc., and it only seemed to be about a club that had an excellent party every year. So I added the notability template, to see if some reliable sources could be found for it. Then I added some categories, and removed the uncategorized template, using the very useful categorization utility WP:HotCat. The Mighty Glen (talk) 08:15, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

COI

Hi The Mighty Glen

You left me a message about managing a COI. I will use the talk page as you suggest (and have always been upfront about disclosing COI). I'm more than happy to discuss, suggest and edit collaboratively via the talk pages.

However, the talk pages on many of the pages have not been very active - in most cases I haven't received any responses at all in the last five years. What is the best approach in this case? I want the information to be factually accurate for readers and much of the information was out-of-date and incorrect.

Cheers Louise LouisePope (talk) 06:45, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @LouisePope: regarding disclosure, it's true you've stuck to policy by adding COI disclosure statements to talk pages. But the main problem I see at the moment is not a failure to adequately disclose COI, it's the tone of so many of your contributions. You have updated out-of-date information, but you've also added what can only be described as blatant marketing for the organization. Some recent examples:

These qualifications test English language in a business context. They are designed to help learners develop the English language skills to communicate confidently in an international workplace and prove to employers that learners have the English language skills to succeed in the workplace
Assessment at different levels gives learners clear goals to work towards along the language learning journey, with each level corresponding to a meaningful improvement in language competency.
These qualifications are designed specifically for school-aged students and are informed by research into how children developed language skills. The topics and tasks in the exam are targeted at the interests and experiences of school-aged learners and designed to reinforce the learning students do in class and help them develop English language skills to communicate in the real-world.
These qualifications are targeted at the interests and experiences of adult learners and support those who aspire to get into university, start their own business or develop their career. They help learners to develop real-life communication skills they can use for everyday life, travel, study and work.
. It is used by Higher Education Institutions and employers who need a fast, accurate way to check the English language skills of students and employees.
The test is modular. Each organisation chooses the combination of language skills to be tested. Linguaskill has a flexible structure, so that organisations can administer it however, wherever and whenever is convenient for their exact needs.
etc.

Please have a read of WP:Neutral point of view. But with the best will in the world, it's going to be extremely difficult for you to have a neutral point of view about your employer. Hatchet pieces are not permitted on Wikipedia, but neither is marketing or hagiography. Have a go please at editing your contributions for WP:NPOV, and see how you get on. Thanks, The Mighty Glen (talk) 08:34, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi The Mighty Glen Thanks again for the feedback - that's really helpful, I understand the issue. Can see what you're saying with those examples. I will go back through my contributions and remove 'marketing-style' language (including those you suggest above) and also post on the talk page for discussion with others if pos. Cheers again Louise LouisePope (talk) 07:04, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again

You've added back the notification box at the top of the Cambridge Assessment English page, e.g. marketing language. Could you be more specific on the talk page about the issues, so I know what to address?

Cheers Louise 82.1.212.13 (talk) 10:02, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK. The Mighty Glen (talk) 10:07, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vaniya Nair/Vaniya chettiar

Hello sir First of all i'm extreemly sorry for deleting 'Proposed deletion' as a mistake since i was not familired with wikipedia . I have improoved the article by posting related references (I didn't knew how to link referances that is why i didn't postee earlier at the time of article creation). Please kindly check them out. Vaniya community if malabar(North part of kerala) is a exclusive caste having unique customs and history. Nair/Chettiar are surnames the caste members use(As

mentioned in article those titles was granted by king of kolathunadu)but that creates confusions since separate chettiar and Nair castes exist.

Vaniya caste is belived to migrated from north indians states to kerala duting 10-11BC (There is no easily available written recorded history but through songs ,invocations and vocally the history is pass on to generations) They have unique chief goddes and almost 118 temples of their own in malabar region. Once Again sorry for deleting the maintiance template Thank you Satvikgeetha (talk) 16:59, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 22

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Ahmad Milad Karimi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Afghan civil war

Frank Witters (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to IPSC

Islamic Perspective of Human Rights (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Dan McIntyre

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Many thanks for you help with my article about the band Katch 22. Mike-eastman (talk) 15:56, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mighty Glen, re the new Katch 22 page. I too, feel that the group is worthy of a place on Wikipedia, but need some help with references. I do not think there is a conflict of interests, I was in the band, and now I am the archivist and webmaster. Question: Does a band page have to be written by an outsider ? i.e ( if Mick Jagger of the Rolling Stones wrote a page about the band, would that be a COI ? Question: I only have newspaper cuttings and memorabilia to reference the band, is this material acceptable ? Question: How do I find some more reliable references ? Any help would be appreciated. Kind regards, Mike. Mike-eastman (talk) 15:54, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike-Eastman: Hi Mike, and thank you for the barnstar. Conflicts of interest can be managed, if you're careful to write the article from a WP:Neutral point of view. If Mick Jagger wrote an article all about how the Stones were plainly the best band in the world ever and the Beatles were utter shite in comparison, then that would be a problem. :-) But yes, offline references like cuttings from WP:Reliable sources like mainstream newspapers are definitely acceptable: more info on this in WP:Offline sources. What have you got? The Mighty Glen (talk) 16:05, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 25

Hello. Please do understand that Badaga is a part of Kannada. Please refer "Kannada-badaga" language group on google. I belong to this region and I know that it's a dialect of Kannada. Badaga was a sub division from early form of Kannada called old Kannada. I know to speak Kannada language. For your reference -[1] Steamerrr (talk) 15:06, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Steamerrr: Hello. On Wikipedia, our own personal experience is not an acceptable reference; we need to WP:Verify what we write using WP: Reliable sources, not Google Groups posts or blogs. Can you find any reliable sources to verify your assertion? Thanks, The Mighty Glen (talk) 15:10, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 29

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Device neutrality (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to App

Federation of Asian Chemical Societies (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Asia-Pacific region

South Asian Youth Action (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Coding

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mental Disorders Diagnosed in Childhood

Hello user:The Mighty Glen I am trying to edit the page mental disorders diagnosed in childhood for a class project. I am trying my best to improve the article, I apologise for my earlier errors, which I understand why they were reverted. However, I completed an updated version (update criteria to DSM 5) and I believe it is good work, I do not understand why it constituted disruptive editing. My best guess is because I removed the 'controversies' section, which I found to be biased and unhelpful, but I could leave if that is the only problem. I have a copy of my edits live on my sandbox, can you see those? If you could tell me specifically what to fix so as to be able to have the updated version on Wikipedia I would be very pleased. Kindest regards, Heyemmab (talk) 17:40, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Heyemmab, I'll reply at the article talk page, where you first posted this. The Mighty Glen (talk) 07:08, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Limavady, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Transatlantic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Point 5310

Hello,

Recently you added an incorrect category, Category:Mountains of Gilgit-Baltistan, in this edit, to Point 5310. The category clearly doesn't belong on that article because, as the article states, if you bothered to read it, that "the peak located on the Pakistani side of LoC was captured in an operation by troops of the Indian Army on April 8, 2000." That means that the mountain peak was on the Pakistan side of the Line of Control at the time but since India occupied it, it is now on the Indian side. Your edit mislead a bot too.[8] Please make sure you double-check your additions in the future, especially when you add categories to articles. —MBL ^talk 11:11, 9 April 2018 (UTC) [reply]

No, there's no "clearly" about it. At the time that I added the category to the then-uncategorized stub, it read, in part:

"Point 5310 is a mountain peak on the Line of Control dividing the Indian- and Pakistani-administered portions of Kashmir in the vicinity of Kargil.", (note that "Pakistani-administered" is piped from Gilgit-Baltistan)
" It is located at a distance of about one kilometre on the Pakistani side of the LoC...",
"The peak located on the Pakistani side of LoC was captured in an operation by troops of the Indian Army on April 8, 2000.", and
"The peak is of strategic importance because it enables the Indian Army to tactically control 12 square kilometres of Pakistani territory in Karubar bowl."

It's entirely reasonable to read the above statements as describing territory of one country, occupied by another. Is that true? Is that territory really eternally part of Jammu and Kashmir, and is India entirely in the right to occupy the territory? That doesn't matter: I quite correctly categorized the article on the basis of what was written, with the references cited at the time. Other editors are then free to revise what's written (and how it's categorized).

I see you've changed the categorization, and changed some other content of the article since then: fine, I have no strong opinion on the subject either way, and really haven't the faintest desire to get involved in disputed India-Pakistan articles, so will leave the re-addition of Category:Mountains of Gilgit-Baltistan to editors who enjoy arguing about confected nonsense like national borders.

I also note from the edit history that you previously edited the same article in March in the edit right after mine, and didn't raise any objections at the time.

So next time, before accusing another editor of not taking sufficient care, and of "misleading a bot" (?), and wagging your finger about double-checking, simply because you later changed your mind about the article and decided it should be categorized differently, please check the article's edit history before lecturing them at their talk page. The Mighty Glen (talk) 12:21, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

About 3 of the 4 sentences that you have quoted are clearly supporting what I have told you above regarding the specifics about this mountain peak. Sure, they love to enjoy arguing a great range of "confected nonsense", but they are duty-bound to provide reliable sources for their information, and certainly none exists for your categorization. It is also not impossible that I overlooked those categories since I was making script assisted edit as evident from my edit summary—but, obviously I looked at it today, hence my message here.

Oh, and your edits[9][10] speaks volumes that it took you only about 4 minutes to check all the sources and information, given your misrepresentation of 3 sentences above, which actually states that opposite to what you are claiming here. That's why I told you to "double-check your additions", but you are deliberately disregarding it as "lecturing", "accusations". You should consider changing your behavior before this apparent conduct issue needs to be addressed at an appropriate noticeboard. —MBL ^talk 17:33, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My categorization was correct, and your repeated, hectoring attempts at framing an edit you happen to disagree with as somehow being a matter of policy are laughable.

And now you hope to threaten me with an "appropriate noticeboard", hilarious. By all means, do report me at the "Editors Whose Categorisations MBlaze Lightning Disagrees With" noticeboard. Bye! The Mighty Glen (talk) 06:23, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, it wasn't. Given your failure to admit to having made errors in place of vowing to be more careful, I think it will really make a good case, but for now, I am inclined to give you enough rope, but I am cautioning you that this sort of non-collaborative behavior won't help you in the long run. —MBL ^talk 08:44, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I always admit my mistakes when I make them. Try it some time! And please, since it will "really make a good case", please do report me, anywhere you like. Take it to ANI, since you stand by your ridiculous claim that I've violated policy by adding a categorization that you disagree with. The Mighty Glen (talk) 08:51, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You talk about policy violation? So let me tell you—your inability to realize that you have misrepresented the sentences of the article to justify your drive-by categorization is called disruptive editing and continued failure to acknowledge this mistake by making unnecessary justifications makes me wonder if this in fact a case of WP:CIR. —MBL ^talk 02:40, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mate, seriously. You need a break.

There's no content dispute: I disagree with your category change, but haven't reverted it.

If you think I'm being disruptive, then quit threatening me about it at my talk page: report me at ANI, or don't.

It's OK for us to have different opinions. It's really, really OK.

You've been ranting at me here for three days. Give it a rest. The Mighty Glen (talk) 07:41, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Grade Cricketer

Hi, I just wanted to get your view as to why the glossary section on this page was deleted. I read the Fancruft article and I can sort of see your point of view. The point though of unverifiable is not true. Literally this morning they uploaded a podcast where they discussed the glossary section and refined it to be in line with the book they authored. As a new listener about 35 podcasts in, I know I would have benefited from a glossary section on wikipedia and by deleting it, it's just not cricket. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dannywattylufc1908 (talk • contribs) 16:16, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Danny. The overall tone of the article was a bit like a fan page, and the glossary of words they like to use on the podcast didn't really contribute information in an encyclopaedic tone. There's more information on this at the page WP:TONE. Thanks, The Mighty Glen (talk) 11:50, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Snow Kingdom

They were using "The park provides sterilised gears to provide the sub-zero temperature inside." as in 1 a and to provide protection from the temperature. At first I thought it some sort of special snow making equipment but then it dawned on me what it was. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 10:13, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@CambridgeBayWeather: thanks for the clarification! The Mighty Glen (talk) 10:34, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

House of Lucero

I've deleted this as a blatant hoax. The closest match in sources I can find is this, which is talking about settlement in Mexico - nothing to do with Spain in the middle ages. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:05, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ritchie333: thanks. I was going to nominate it for db-g3, but I've seen so many articles submitted in good faith on obscure micronations, or on random blokes who've convince themselves on the flimsiest grounds that they're really an aristocrat with a valid claim to a usurped throne, that I figured I should err on the side of caution. :-) The Mighty Glen (talk) 11:11, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Trouble is, A7 only applies to individual people, not groups of them, so you'd have to use PROD or AfD. However, Google Books is pretty good at turning up something and if you get a complete and utter blank on even trivial passing mentions, alarm bells should start ringing. On a similar vein, I've just done the same to Pamella carrington de coutte (that's twice in one day!) which has the same problem only worse - I couldn't find anything under "carrington de coutte" (and various mispellings) anywhere except Wikipedia mirrors, and that's only because the article has been hiding in Ashley, New Forest for a few months. (There was also a draft copy of the article which claimed "She has featured in over 20 films and 32 stage plays during her acting career spanning over 20 years." Hmmmm....) Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:16, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

True about db-bio not applying to groups of people, but a named royal house is an organization, so wouldn't db-org be applicable on House of Lucero?

And yes I spotted that hidden chunk about a Pamella C in Ashley, New Forest too, and the over-the-top claims of men falling at her feet, world fame, etc., made it sound like a joke article made about a friend (by a WP:SPA). Still, as her daughter appears to have had minor roles in a few films, it's possible she was a minor actress about whom someone was trying a little too hard to make look notable, so I went the cautious route on that one with A7, and let the reviewing admin decide. The Mighty Glen (talk) 11:25, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Spanish royal house definitely isn't A7 at all; a so-called "royal house" for some obscure micronation that somebody made up one day might be. I think your assumption of good faith is the right way to go on these things, but the creator has been busy elsewhere saying "Due to the top secrecy First Born was filmed as a fictional story but actually it was based on a true story with Charles Dance playing the scientist, who in real life was a top scientist and veterinarian surgeon Professor Lord Carrington-Cootte 1894-2002 (Equine)" I await their unblock request with interest. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:30, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Oh my." --George Takei The Mighty Glen (talk) 11:41, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

John Hennessey

I have edited the page. The only phrases that resemble copyrighted material are things like "was born" and place names that can't be rendered any other way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramos.michael1 (talk • contribs) 18:18, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, so I've removed the template for that. Thanks, The Mighty Glen (talk) 23:22, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yo Dude chill.

If you think Zambian Music Blog should be deleted then should also BellaNaija, Black20 is worse it should now no arguments on that one... Wait I still have more Comedy.com is tagged for advertisement, Rating site just has one reference, Network2.tv has no refs you have got to be joking really, Openfilm is practically dead why is it even here. What's you point exactly what are you trying to do with this African content just because you don't know it where you come from doesn't mean it's not notable. You are from Europe deal with Europe we from Africa we have African admins that can handle us and our problems. ChaloNiZambia (talk) 20:30, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, and please also note that Wikipedia does not require African editors to only edit articles about Africa, nor European editors to edit articles only about Europe. The Mighty Glen (talk) 23:26, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 12

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Moazzam Malik (diplomat) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to North West London

Paul Satz (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Predictor

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:55, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Star Awards

Hello, The Mighty Glen, refer to the Star Awards page, and see the previous edit. This user DerrickTan editing can make readers confuse and I'm trying to rolling back the changes to normal. Hope you can give a warning to him. Thanks, Regards Unknown152438 —Preceding undated comment added 16:24, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Unknown152438: hello, yes I have warned him. In fact from the history of his talk page it's clear that he's been warned about it several times and blocked once for it already, whereas I'm guessing that you might not have known about WP:3RR. I don't know whose edits are better or worse, but the point is that edit warring is not the way to reconcile the dispute. The Mighty Glen (talk) 17:08, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 19

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Maritime cyberattack, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hijacking (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:40, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Messy

This gives a very messy result. If you are going to change refs this way, when the same books are used repeatedly, it's much better to put the full listing in a different section below, then just give author & page number at each citation. Johnbod (talk) 10:49, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Though arguably less messy than the previous edit. :-) The Mighty Glen (talk) 10:53, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh certainly. Johnbod (talk) 11:03, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article for deletion

I just want to say I appreciate how thorough you were on your nomination for George T. Farrell. I learned a lot. Thanks!Butch.labajo (talk) 14:29, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I notice that so far most of your edits have been on AFDs. Please read WP:BEFORE for things to try before taking an article to AFD. The Mighty Glen (talk) 14:45, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 26

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Advitya (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Assamese (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of Zambian Tribes

Hi - You can revert the changes to the article List of Zambian Tribes and move it accordingly to preserve the version history while retaining the article titled "List of Zambian Tribes". Please note that contrary to your suggestion, the list is of 72 Zambian Tribes and not Ethnic groups and you can also have a look at my explanation in my revision comments. As such, there will be no need to retain the page article "List of ethnic groups in Zambia". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris.simusokwe (talk • contribs) 13:35, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, this has now been done. The Mighty Glen (talk) 13:37, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Hay thanks mate for making me understand that it's not the right time for the pages to be on wiki. Pls delete the pages as its not needed now. Pls proceed. Thanks. Anky95 (talk) 12:28, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 3

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Dereverberation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Conferencing

The Epic of Utnoa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Epic

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Star Trek cast edits - AUColonist

Hello, this is user AUColonist. You put a stop on some minor edits on some Star Trek cast members in which I highlighted roles they played in their high school years. I was browsing through yearbooks that are digitally archived on classmates.com. The cast members were identified on the pages of their yearbooks, but the archives are not available unless you sign up for classmates.com. I don't know how to credit it otherwise. I request that you restore these minor edits as they are not derogatory in nature and in fact, enhance their fans' appreciation for their talents, which the notations make clear manifested themselves at an early age.AUColonist (talk) 16:05, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Understood, and it's clear that you made the additions you were acting in good faith. But per WP:Biographies of living persons, we have to be able to WP:Verify all additions we make to the biographies. Unfortunately, on Wikipedia, Classmates.com isn't considered a reliable source. Can you find any other resource to confirm your additions? I'd be happy to help you with the referencing bit, if you like. See also WP:Offline sources. Thanks, The Mighty Glen (talk) 16:09, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]