User talk:Theroadislong/Archive 11

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

→

Archive 15

BLP and COI removal request

Theroadislong,

I appreciate you contributing to Michael Forbes by adding these tags. I added additional references for verification and I don't believe the article has a point of view issue. How can I go about removing these tags in accordance with Wikipedia policy? Jrfribbs (talk) 22:46, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

If you feel the article no longer requires them you are free to remove them. Theroadislong (talk) 07:51, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

TY

Thank you , kindlyThewho515 (talk) 22:12, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	For your work on WP:UAA. Bearian (talk) 22:56, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

help

this is the link- it is a public event photo. any help would be appreciated

thank youThewho515 (talk) 23:14, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Thewho515, I've tagged the photo as a copyright violation and removed it from here. Photos taken at a public event are not automatically in the public domain. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 23:22, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

question

I am trying to create a page for "child Foundation", it appears that I used wrong language and I was tagged.

My questions are:

1- how can I edit what I wrote to clear the tag? 2- I don't know why I was not available to register for original name of our company (Child Foundation), and I had to choose "Child Foundation, NGO" is there any way that I can choose "Child Foundation" name? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Child Foundation, NGO (talk • contribs) 21:44, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

You cannot register a user name that represents a group or a company. User accounts are for individuals only. Theroadislong (talk) 10:06, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Oops!

Hi Theroadislong. I've WP:REVDEL-d the edits with the blatant copyvios. I would have thought the article was on my watch-list, and should have been aware of this myself, but somehow I missed it... Unfortunately there plenty of good edits that included the copy-and-pastes, but that's how it goes. Thank you for picking this up! Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 11:41, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply

Hi, Thanks for the reply, I think I fixed it. I am trying to understand how to do all of this. I added and reworked the article so that it clearly states this person's notable state. I think its better. would you take a look please? SusanBeir (talk) 22:30, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Check of Talk:Objections to evolution

Hi - since you asked me to check, I did re-read my para above that request and it seems to make sense to me still, though I think it's overly long. Cheers. Markbassett (talk) 01:01, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

OK sorry, maybe it's an American English difference but it still makes no sense to me. Cheers.Theroadislong (talk) 07:57, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Aquatic Ape Theory

The information was incorrect I was trying toprove how unreliable wikipedia can be. was going to remove it anyway so thank you!! (: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aquaticapefan (talk • contribs) 10:13, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Reason for the orphange tag removal

Thank you for your correction. Am an editor with no COI. Let me quickly remind you that an orphange tag is usually placed on an article with no page(s) link to it. But the artcle Mazeking has been linked to the List of painters by me. I guess if you had check 'What link here' you would have known that the artcle is no longer an orphan. Althou it could be a form of Vandalism for an editor to remove a maintanance templates. That I want you to clearify. Thanks(Wikicology (talk) 18:30, 7 June 2014 (UTC))

The orphan tag is added to articles with none OR few links to it, your edit also removed the notability template without explanation.Theroadislong (talk) 18:34, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

That's the mistake I made. I ought to state the reason for removimg the notability template. But sincerely I think the subject is notable enough as it supply valid references tha prove its notablity. What is your view about thet article?(Wikicology (talk) 17:13, 8 June 2014 (UTC))

I'm not convinced of the notability and perhaps the tag will encourage better references. Theroadislong (talk) 17:23, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. In case of next time if I remove such template. Where will I state the reason? That is after I must have effect the neccesary corrections.(Wikicology (talk) 21:15, 8 June 2014 (UTC))

In your edit summary. I have added another reference and incoming link and removed the templates. Cheers Theroadislong (talk) 21:25, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

About Yoogan

Hi Theroadislong. (Is it OK to call you "Road" for short?) "Yoogan" looks pretty neutral in tone... especially considering it doesn't actually appear to exist. Tagged as such. Public holiday here - bicycle time. ps: ↑↑↑ I wonder if Aquaticapefan is aware of the A Bathing Ape fashion range? --Shirt58 (talk) 03:04, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

jtv page

i'm in no way presenting my views, just views that have been written about the company either in news articles and press releases. granted i know that press releases my be slanted towards the company. but when i try to type into the affiliate area that those few affiliates only represent the part-time affiliates about maybe 40,000 viewers compared to jtv's total affiliates which is around 85million, why would you change that? i'm trying to do what wiki believes is correct and right, but i feel as though you have made it your personal mission to keep anything written about this company from appearing on wiki. i'm here to help provide a neutral view of this company since this company is a smaller company and it appears that the page was actually started by someone who placed the lawsuits within the wiki page just to express their anger towards the company during the recession back in 2008 when the company laid off many people just to survive one of the worst economic collapses in the world's history. and when you have a small company like this in our community, who is going to write about this company, nobody. i certainly welcome your advice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fredrockjtv (talk • contribs) 14:53, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia requires independent, reliable sources and only information that has been reported by others can be included. Press releases are just not suitable sorry. Theroadislong (talk) 15:03, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. Sorry about that. Please forgive me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexpinder (talk • contribs) 19:48, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Nikita Kahn

Please delete this page as soon as possible. Thank you. Infideastudios (talk) 22:06, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

NGC 2516

Why did you again revert this page, when the evidence clearly shows this os a made up name and is not the common name? Wikipedia requires names are in common use, and the source you quote has been taken from the original 2012 source. Please go to Talk NGC 2516 and discuss. Arianewiki1 (talk) 20:49, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

The source is reliable. Theroadislong (talk) 20:53, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi

I hope u are doing fine! Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 15:32, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes thanks good... to hear from you, hope your situation improves and you can get back to editing one day. Theroadislong (talk) 15:57, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Jonathon moar attack page?

I don't think that Jonathon moar is an attack page, but it is probably vandalism or simply a non-notable person (A7). Regardless, the page should probably still be deleted. Piguy101 (talk) 20:24, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

I prefer to err on the side of caution, certain sentences in the article are attacking him, so kinder to call it an attack page and have it blanked as a courtesy before certain deletion. Theroadislong (talk) 20:30, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Well the article was deleted as an attack page. However, I try to err the other way and assume good faith. Do whatever works for you. Happy editing! Piguy101 (talk) 20:50, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

yes..

i am david thomas and i will refrain from writing about myself anymore. just wanted to let wikipedians know who i am and that i support the Dave Thomas (programmer) article. Thanks, for your great work and keep the good work up! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davethomask (talk • contribs) 17:15, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Well...I rushed and didn't read all of the message before I when back to update the text, I did delete the speedy deletion tag while updating the text. Sorry for the inconvenience. I was unable to select the contest this speedy deletion button, just a image no link. --TEAM Publications (talk) 21:24, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Dan Wagner Page

Hi, I noticed you recently did some changes to the Dan Wagner page in an effort to bring balance to the large changes Techtrek did. Techtrek has been flagged for a CIO has has repeatedly failed to engage or justify the changes made. They have removed a large amount of sourced material in order to create a PR piece. Can you take a look at the bits removed and give your opinion on the validity of the changes and advice how this should be dealt with given techtreks refusual to engage? Thanks 66.249.93.141 (talk) 00:23, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Hiya, I have tried to bring balance and subjectiveness back to the article, adding back in most of the material removed by Techtrek, and amending language and layout of the entire article. I welcome any suggestions you may have to try and get it better. Many thanks. Ol king col (talk) 07:02, 21 June 2014 (UTC) ol king col

Addendum to the above - Despite request for changes to be discussed on Talk:Dan Wagner before being made, Techtrek has reverted all changes including those made by Senior editors including Theroadislong and has readded back into the article blacklisted links that have twice had to be removed before. Request for discussion has been made on both User talk:Techtrek and Talk:Dan Wagner. Ol king col (talk) 09:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Suzannah Lipscomb

Theroadislong (talk) How dare you! It's seems to be OK for Wiki editors to be rude and sneer about subjects but a COI is told not to 'attack'. I think you will find that any attack comes mostly from those who made the derogatory comments in response to a perfectly polite request. If the answer is no, say no, but talk such as 'making a fuss about adding baubles' or some other such pejorative comment is appallingly rude in response to a request to add a Master's degree. It was a simple request, if the answer is no, fine, the additional derision is not necessary. So how dare you tell me what I can and cannot say when you don't speak to the perpetrators of the rudeness! I've put up with months of disparaging, sneering drivel from other editors. At the end of the day the article is reasonably cogent, but if all this awful wrangling is behind every article I feel sorry for people like you who feel it is normal to speak about people who are the subjects of the Encyclopedia with such disdainMdeBohun (talk) 21:51, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

I have made no rude comments about you and certainly made no disparaging comments about you? I have attempted to edit the article in a neutral manner, in accord with all Wikipedia guidelines. Please assume good faith.Theroadislong (talk) 23:04, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

I agree you personally have made no derisory comments, and I apologise, but wonder why I should I assume good faith when I've seen so little evidence of it? You reprimand me for defending myself against the constant barrage of sarcastic derision I've received, primarily from TheRedPenofDoom. If you check his talk page you will see that nobody has a good word to say about him. He should be blocked from his disruptive influence on Wikipedia. All I am trying to do is suggest truthful improvements to a page, if they are not appropriate that is absolutely fine, no problem, but for him and another to refer to making a pallava about shiny baubles in entirely disrespectful.MdeBohun (talk) 11:24, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

hi

My edit on remote viewing was accurate — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.96.181.51 (talk) 19:15, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

You'll need to provide references then.Theroadislong (talk) 14:45, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Ali Imtiaz

I joined Wikipedia three days ago to create article on Ali Imtiaz who is musician from Lahore, Pakistan. I was really confused on how to put it on main space as an article and asked about it to one user. I didn't know that I should not mention myself as musician, that it may be considered as promotion. I was just asking to clear my confusion. Trust me I didn't mean it. And secondly I tried to delete a question on teahouse since my problem was resolved and I felt question will be of no use now. And I wanted to ask some other question. Instead I got message of speedy page deletion and it stunned me. I do not want this page to be deleted, rather want guidance on how to move the user page to article on main space. Will be really really thankful to you. Thanks.

Your query has been answered at the Teahouse, good luck. Theroadislong (talk) 14:50, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Question RE: Lawrence Jones (Businessman) "Career" section

I noticed that you removed the Music Design Company from Jones' career history and was curious as to why you had done this. I don't wish to revert this change, but am interested to know why it was made.

I don't believe it's an example of "promotional puffery" as Jones no longer runs the company, so was it removed because it may not be relevant to his current activities? I'm tempted to replace it with a line saying when he moved to Manchester and that he founded the company, without including the story behind it, but if you think it's not relevant I'll resist the urge.

Kellyormesher (talk) 15:54, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Sorry but I think it certainly is an example of "promotional puffery" It's about what Jones states, not what reliable secondary sources say about him but if you want to get other users opinions please ask at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions Theroadislong (talk) 20:19, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

I am Wayne Muloin's gran kid so I know the stuff I added is true:)♦ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Horsecrazy01 (talk • contribs) 15:11, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not concerned with the truth, but only what the reliable sources confirm. Theroadislong (talk) 15:15, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Why are you suppressing the new Intelligent Design <id>?

Dear The Roadislong,

Why are you suppressing new scientific discoveries and information regarding the new Intelligent Design <id>? Are you the President or Head or CEO of Wikipedia?

I am wondering why you had deleted my new contributed information regarding the new Intelligent Design <id> in the Intelligent Design page. Are you a scientist or a discoverer in naturalistic science that you have the right and authority to suppress new scientific information in naturalistic science? Do you have scientific reason that you are correct?

If you don't know about the new Intelligent Design <id>, would it be fair enough to read the books or search it on the internet and see for yourself and make an experiment to show that you are correct before you suppress the new discoveries?

I am the discoverer and main scientist of the new Intelligent Design <id> and it is my responsibility to share that information to the whole world (and science), especially to Wikipedia since Wikipedia loves to have new information in science so that many people would be using this site and many people will donate.

YOU ARE NOT FAIR. PLEASE STOP SUPPRESSING THE NEW REAL SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERIES. If you are a scientist, show me scientifically that I'm wrong. I demand one single experiment to show that I'm wrong scientifically.

Please, stop suppressing real science. If you are a real scientist, I challenge you to a debate and see who is in error.

This is your post to me.

---

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Intelligent design. While objective prose about beliefs, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 11:14, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

---

Truly Yours,

Edgar Postrado Discoverer and Scientist The New Intelligent Design <id> — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheNewIntelligentDesign (talk • contribs) 13:11, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

If you look in the history of the Intelligent design article you will see that User:dave souza removed your content, with the edit summary "rm advert for non-notable book" I saw this and left you the message that explained why this sort of promotional edit is not acceptable. Good luck with your book.Theroadislong (talk) 13:52, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

United States Association of Former Members of Congress

Hello, is there a reason you tagged this page as possibly biased, other than because you noted a connection between my user name and the subject organization? i.e. did you actually find evidence of this? I encourage you to read through the article and give me evidence of this, otherwise please remove the tag as it is unproductive. Thanks. FMCIntern (talk) 18:51, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

You have a clear conflict of interest you should be making editing suggestions on the talk page and not editing the article itself, you should certainly not be removing maintenance templates when they refer to you. Please read WP:BFAQ#EDIT Theroadislong (talk) 19:01, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

I understand that, and thank you for the recommendation, but if there is no actual problem with the language in the article (meaning that it is neutral, contrary to the vague language in the tag), I see no need for it. FMCIntern (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:05, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Andre Charles

Would you mind changing article to be titled Andre Charles (Zone T.C.T.) or Andre Charles (artist) which ever you think would be more appropriate. He does not currently use his given second name of Pierre or us an accent on andre. thank you so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Futuronyc (talk • contribs) 17:02, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

There are many Google hits for "Andre Pierre Charles" but hardly any for "Andre Charles". Theroadislong (talk) 20:02, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Andre Charles

I am the artist's official biographer. Much of the information in your article is wrong. Andre goes by Andre Charles. His nickname is "Zone". What would you like me to do differently? Would you like to use my research to add to update yours? Please let me know. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Futuronyc (talk • contribs) 16:53, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

It is not my article? Wikipedia relies on reliable sources that are independent of the subject.Theroadislong (talk) 20:09, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Andre Charles

Thank you for creating the original article for the artist, Andre Charles. I am an unpaid, but official biographer for the artist. As a champion of his work and an admirer of art history I really appreciate your effort to document notable culture.

I wanted to discuss the issue of the title of the article. "Andre Pierre Charles" is the artist's given name, but he is much more commonly refereed to and searched as "Andre Charles". He is less commonly referred to as "A. Charles" or by his tag, "Zone", but is rarely referred to by his given name. Though he went through a small stage (less than one year) using his middle name he does not so now. The reason the google hits may be possibly skewed is because of the performer, RuPaul having the same name, I believe. I am thoroughly familiar with the artist and know he is not referred to by the current title even by his family. I am proposing changing the title to either Andre Charles (artist) or Andre Charles (Zone T.C.T.). If that is OK with you can you make those changes? If not can you please advise?

I am obviously new to Wikipedia and so I don't understand why his quotes from the history section of www.urbanworksny.com cannot be used. Please educate me on this if you have the time.

Thank you so muchFuturonyc (talk) 23:32, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Cambridge International Examinations

Hi there

Thank you for your email and also for your help and advice.

I work for Cambridge International Examinations and am keen to ensure that the information provided on Wikipedia is up to date, relevant and useful to the community.

The page that currently exists is somewhat out of date so I will draft a re-write and send it to you as a userspace draft as suggested.

All the best,

Lexie Hoskins — Preceding unsigned comment added by LexieHoskins (talk • contribs) 14:27, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Better to make suggestions on the articles talk page then others can see it too. Theroadislong (talk) 14:34, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

COI template on Malaysia Airlines page

I reverted your addition per policy: The template documentation specifically states to remove when "the problem is not explained on the article's talk page".

Feel free to reapply if you can show 1) that there's a problem with the article, that 2) the editor "MAS Communications" was the cause of that problem, and 3) the problems aren't trivial for you to fix yourself. The template is inappropriate if there is no problem with the article, or if any problems aren't tied to edits by users with a close connection to the subject. CapnZapp (talk) 19:27, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Re the message below, i have spent some tiem familiaring myself with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines over the weekend, and I agree I should not have used Keith coventry's entry to test and edit (i did so because I did a lot of work on it, but that was wrong. Re Lynn Chadwick's entry, last week there was a message suggesting we merge the existing entry with entry i compiled. Is it possible for this to happen? I would be happy to do do this.

Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Keith Coventry, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. You appear to have introduced factual errors into the article by miss naming Coventry's work as Chadwick's? Theroadislong (talk) 16:50, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Grand Central Publishing - COI

Hello Theroadislong,

I recently submitted an article called Grand Central Publishing in which you took down due to "Poorly referenced conflict of interest promotion." I was wondering what you mean by that as I have tried to remain neutral in providing sources and references so individuals may learn about the Grand Central Publishing division. I am wondering if you took it down because I mentioned that within the editing comments. The reason I put that there was because I was told to create a new username that did not reference a company as that was promotion, so I wanted to clarify and state that so people may know that this article does not constitute promotion. I am hoping to hear back from you soon so that I can put the article up as soon as possible without mistakes. Thank you! AndreaJamesPublishing (talk) 15:21, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

The references are poor in that they are not reliable third party references...for instance this one [1] is a primary reference that barely mentions the article's subject. Your user name strongly suggests that you have a conflict of interest and are using Wikipedia in order to promote a business that you are involved with. Theroadislong (talk) 15:38, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

@Theroadislong: I was not entirely sure as to put for that reference. I have this one [2] which directly leads to Hachette Book Group's website. Would that be considered a more reliable source? I am not sure when [3] would be up, but I thought it would be best to include that since it had an About section rather than nothing. As for the username, would you suggest I create a new username? Alexf (talk · contribs) just posted to my talk page about that but I explained that Andrea James is my name and publishing is just referring to the industry overall, not a specific company. Thank you for your help and any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!

You really need reliable third party references, NOT primary sources to establish notability. All articles need to show that the subject has had significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, which your article did not do. User name is fine, if a little confusing. Theroadislong (talk) 19:01, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Ah alright, thank you so much. I generally thought primary sources were okay, but thank you for clarifying that. I'll make sure to put third party references as well. Thank you again! AndreaJamesPublishing (talk) 19:06, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

The Arts

Hi, this is mmmier. I appreciate the feedback, but I think you made a mistake. Where I am from, there are high schools that are specifically for the major arts, which DO include Cosmetology and Culinary. I will redo my changes. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmmier (talk • contribs) 20:16, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank you for helping me to understand better Arjayay's message to me : ) R W Royce — Preceding unsigned comment added by R W Royce (talk • contribs) 12:57, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you.

Ok dear Wiki team, thanks for the "answer" to this question (which I can only see as a reply on my talk page, not as a reply here under my question to teahouse). I am officially giving up. AIRCA is a non-for-profit organization, and the article is written in quite a neutral tone I think, without advertising or telling the world how great we are. Nevertheless, many thanks to all the people who took time into getting this article along. Pity that I did not manage to finally get this article into Wikipedia. Marita Dieling (talk) 09:23, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions while you were here, Marita! They are much appreciated! --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:06, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Marita Dieling is still here, editing Association of International Research and Development Centers for Agriculture and whilst her contributions are welcome, her conflict of interest is very clear. Theroadislong (talk) 21:15, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Personal Finance Edit

The removal of the content was completely accidental, hence why I immediately added it back. I am not sure why information was removed from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_Financial_Management in regards to WakeUpNow's PFM tool. Can you shed some light please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wake Up Now Review (talk • contribs) 17:21, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Picture on the history of nudity.

Hi theroadislong I would like this picture to stay off Wikipedia as it is a picture of me that I did not authorise to be published.

Thanks

Justin

You can request that it is deleted. Theroadislong (talk) 19:28, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Republican Settlement

Hello Theroadislong. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Republican Settlement, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: I don't think this is promotional enough to qualify for G11, but I will take it to AfD. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 21:29, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

OK no worries. Theroadislong (talk) 07:23, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Community Chapel and Bible Training Center

Dear Theroadislong: You wrote 'Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on Community Chapel and Bible Training Center. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 16:14, 27 July 2014 (UTC)'.

My response is that saying I am not operating in good faith is another negative comment towards me for pointing out inappropreate, derogatory undertones from one or more Wiki reps to a contributor. R W Royce (talk) 23:35, 27 July 2014 (UTC) Thank you, R W Royce

I'm sorry but I don't understand what you mean by "Wiki reps" we are ALL editors and contributors, and assuming good faith is a basic requirement of editing here. All good wishes. Theroadislong (talk) 07:23, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Help me

I work for a company that just got a Wikipedia page. There are images online at the company website, but my understanding is that these are copy written content and can not be used on Wikipedia. I would like to upload images for this company. I have permission from my boss at the company to upload images that we have but I don't know what kind of evidence I need to demonstrate that permission. These images were not created by me, but by someone in the company.

I received a response about how some copy written images can be used if they are under non-free content. I don't think the images I would like to use fall under that category. So I would have to have my boss fill out the WP:CONSENT form. I read the instructions to the form and it says that a URL link must be provided to the images they are giving permission to use. But when I upload images to the Wiki Commons they are almost immediately taken down. So how does this work? Also there are several images that I would like post to Wikipedia. Would this consent form have to be filled out for every image I want?

Thanks for helping me to become a better editor.

(talk page stalker) The easiest way would probably be to attach the images to the permission email and to send that from a company email address. Then the people receiving the email will upload the images for you. As an alternative, you can upload the images to the Wikimedia Commons, tag the image page with the {{otrs pending}} template, and send the email with the URL - that will tell the Commons admins that a permission is on its way, and the files will be deleted if no permission has been received after some time (two weeks or a month, I believe). Huon (talk) 17:22, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Tricycle refs

Hello, the Tricycle refs are in either the V&A archives or the websites listed. I haven't listed refs at every point since they are largely covered at the end of the early history section. They are also uncontentious claims and (in the case of the origin of the name), I know it to be true since I was employed by the 'Trike' at that time. The previous wording may have been too 'fluffed up', but the early history is of interest. I'll go back and check what may not be reliably sourced.Pincrete (talk) 18:49, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not concerned with what you "know is true" it is only concerned with what the reliable sources say. Theroadislong (talk) 19:21, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Firstly I believe that all the named companies and productions of the early years are covered by the V&A archive, which is an immense repository of every document, letter, budget of the Tricycle up to about mid-1990's. I spent many hours about 18 months ago checking and looking for info there … …(You do not need to tell me that I am not a reliable source to anyone apart from myself and I regret saying that).

Secondly, and more importantly, why are these PARTICULAR productions singled out for needing SPECIFIC citations, none of the other productions on the page have any citation that they took place at all (they do of course have citations for comments, reviews, interviews, awards associated with them). Why are you not asking for citations for each and every theatre company and each and every production listed on the page?

Thirdly, I believe I may NOT have originally written the references to these three playwrights (I honestly don't remember), though I did partially restore them today, and genuinely believed them to be covered by the V&A archive material.

Lastly, I am quite happy to remove the text referring to the three playwrights, should you wish (in preference to trawling once again through the V&A archive and because the content isn't THAT important), but why these specific people? The rest of the early history is covered by the V&A archive and most of the productions from the mid-1990's are not covered by ANY source at all - when the matter is uncontentious - we simply take it on trust that the theatre produced play X in year Y.

Your edit is textually an improvement, however a by-product of your edit and my partial restore is that assertions are now dis-associated from their sources (all of which was originally covered by the V&A archive supplemented by the two websites listed at the end of the section.)Pincrete (talk) 21:08, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

The article states that " The company produced over 60 productions, including the UK premieres of several plays" I think the fact that they were premieres really does need supporting by reliable sources? Theroadislong (talk) 21:17, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

I believe that the 'UK premiere' claim was sourced from the V&A archive, however it isn't important enough to quibble about. I'll remove that claim, I thought you were asking for specific references for each of these productions having taken place. The 'over 60 productions' and the names of the authors was I am certain sourced from both the V&A 'potted history' and possibly also from the websites (I wouldn't have known that number!). I'll also tidy up the citations when I have time, since I muddled them up a bit when restoring material.Pincrete (talk) 23:23, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Sephora Wiki Edits Reply Reverting unexplained content removal

Hi Theroadislong
I saw that you removed Tatcha Aburatorigami from the Sephora Wiki most likely due to the source. What if I used one of these links?

Thanks
SiliconvalleygirlSF (talk) 05:57, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

What?

You might want to check my citations I'm only improving the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.199.68.228 (talk) 19:28, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

about my article kunal bahl

User:Kundan-yadav(web designer (talk) 11:53, 14 August 2014 (UTC) this article has been all created by me only why cant i only leave my name on there at the end, i cant even create my user account i cant create anything where is my freedom. i did all the hard research on kunal bahl and did this why i am not eligible to leave my name on there atleast no promotional links but i want only to put my name on there — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kundan-yadav(web designer) (talk • contribs) 12:21, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a collaborative process the article does not belong to you see rthe article history. Theroadislong (talk) 12:25, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

I have placed a CSD tag on the article as the OP is a sock of a blocked editor. If you want to keep the article please feel free to remove the tag. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:46, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Lawrence Jones business man

you have completely destroyed and removed all the information on Lawrence Jones.

Its gone from an informative piece to nothing. Any reason? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.244.189.164 (talk) 16:41, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

I addressed the concerns about neutrality and what is left is now reliably sorced please take any concerns to the talk page. 88.108.252.152 (talk) 17:34, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Not sure what link you are referring to.....

From your message, you wrote "If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it." I'm not clear on the link you are referring to. If this is just a generic message you sent I won't worry about it.If its important please clarify. My main purpose was to update the existing links to Orton that someone else put on Wikipedia and were referencing pages that are no longer available. (Just like the current external link to Seger Cone Temperature Equivalents is a broken link... It goes to a site with a"Page not found" message. I would think people would want someone to fix it if they could) Maybe we will bump into each other on one of the talk pages. Thanks. Wikitherm (talk) 01:56, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

I was referring to this edit [4] whic added two spam links to your company. Theroadislong (talk) 07:43, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Salvage the sinking ship - Halo Business Intelligence

Theroadislong, I hope you're having a good Tuesday.

Something unfortunate has been brought to my attention. I created the Halo Business Intelligence page without having a personal connection with the company a while back. And now, other users have made changes without my knowing and it is now being considered for deletion. C:Fred had helped me create Halo BI's page and he approved my initial unbias creation. Can I revert the changes that other users have made and salvage this mess? I still have the basic layout saved in my sandbox and am willing to dumb the article down to avoid any hint of promotional tone.

-Daniel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniel Bachar (talk • contribs) 17:39, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Your original version appears to be worse than the current version as far as promotional content is concerned so probably not a good idea to revert. Theroadislong (talk) 17:43, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

undoing my edits

I am trying to update the page and respond to the criticisms of your editors by removing "advertising" sounding language and adding references. Please stop undoing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.242.217.3 (talk) 18:56, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

BUT you are also removing the entire lede section and adding inappropriate in line external links. Theroadislong (talk) 19:30, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Peter Chippindale, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chris Mullen. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:16, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

August 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Peter Chippindale may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• accessdate=19 August 2014}}</ref> His suspicions convinced [[Chris Mullin (politician)|Chris Mullen)]] to investigate and led eventually to their acquittal.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:31, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

re. Cullen surname

Thank you for your message but as for adding unsourced material, firstly, the information I removed was wholly inaccurate and pertains to a different surname originating in another part of Ireland and therefore has nothing to do with the origins or meaning of the name Cullen. Secondly, my surname is Cullen and i live in the heartland of where that name originated...county Wicklow in the east of Ireland. The Irish language for my name is Cuilinn or sometimes spelled Cuileann. This in English translates as 'holly tree'....something my family and Irish scholars have always known, so really all ive done is corrected wrong and unsourced information left by someone else...but if somehow you know best... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wwireland (talk • contribs) 12:26, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

You need to find reliable sources that back up your knowledge, are there any books that mention this or online articles? Wikipedia only reports on what reliable sources say. Good luck.Theroadislong (talk) 12:30, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Theroadislong,

Thanks for the welcome to wikipedia.

Could you provide further explanation as to why the links from the BBC and The Guardian are not considered reliable sources?

The company has been trading for over 10 years, distributing its products in over 100 countries, and is a key manufacture in their industry (Kitchenware), so it seems strange that they would not have a wikipedia page.

Thanks Welshmikewarwick — Preceding unsigned comment added by Welshmikewarwick (talk • contribs) 16:38, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps, you could assist me ...

USER REPLIED: Mellow greetings and many thanks, User talk:Theroadislong for your comments. I have devoted long hours over the past few days familiarizing myself with Wikipedia. I have been through this issue comprehensively with others over the weekend. I have previously submitted the article for checking. I am using the utmost care in maintaining neutrality in view point. All entries are diligently being referenced and cited to facilitate authencity. I have changed my user name to User:Sampajanna 08:50, 24 August 2014 Acalamari (talk | contribs) moved page User:WarrenRodwell to User:Sampajanna without leaving a redirect Perhaps, you could assist me with this. WarrenRodwell (talk) 15:46, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Revisions

You keep deleting the External links I put on The John Bunyan and Elstow pages. The links I added are not, as you assert, spam links, they are all links to reputable sites directly relating to the subject of these Wiki Articles - How can a link to Bedfordshire Record Office, for example be regarded as spam? I have been the main contributor to the Bunyan and Elstow Wiki pages for several years and I created most of their content. The link to the local historian (Myself) is also not a spam link - I am the former curator of Moot Hall Museum and an acknowledged expert on the History of Bunyan and Elstow. I provide a FREE service, sharing that knowledge - eg. people who think they may be related to John Bunyan wanting to check their family tree, to see if the connections they have made are accurate. Who are you to say that I should not add relevant links?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Moothallelstow (talk • contribs)

Adding links to yourself or organisations with which you are connected is considered spamming. Theroadislong (talk) 18:00, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

DJ Colette wiki page - COI question

Hi Theroadislong,

I'm a big fan of Thomas Ian Nicholas, so I check both his page and his wife's (Colette) every so often and noticed the COI tag on her page today.

I did some research and was able to add sources for all the info that was added by the now deleted user.

I tried to undo their work and add it myself in an effort to have the COI tag removed and that's when I realized that I needed to drop you a line.

Please have a look at the page. Let me know if there's anything else I can do to help clear up this tag.

Thanks so much :)

(Mona1975 (talk) 06:46, 25 August 2014 (UTC))

spelling it out

I thought I'd made myself clear; I'm not interested in editing or contributing in any way, manner, shape or form to this site anymore.

A Baron

I am trying to edit the Bone Clones page and it has a note about the issues that the page has. I have tried to address those issues but the note has not come off the page. I am having trouble understanding how the language on the page sounds like an ad. I have revised it and any more information removed will not give enough information about the company. Do more editors beside myself need to contribute to the page in order for that note to be taken down?

Mtabencki (talk) 17:02, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Link removed

Just curious as to why you removed the hyperlink to the Jupiter Campus Library. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wthowerto (talk • contribs) 20:41, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't use in line external links. Theroadislong (talk) 20:52, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Your unexplained reversion in spite you did understand that it was a good faith edit

Dear fellow, I've corrected an obvious logic mistake in the "Yazidis" page:

- "worshipping Adam and Eve despite God's express command "not" to do so (Michel Hervé Bertaux-Navoiseau (talk) 08:40, 3 September 2014 (UTC))

Your edit was signed, we don't sign in article space and please don't accuse me of edit warring with a single good faith edit. Theroadislong (talk) 09:32, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

So, why didn't you tell me how to sign? Second, your affirmation: "Your edits do not appear to be constructive" is all the more arrogant as you are obviously wrong (I assume you are overburdenned with work(?). Please take some rest) and makes me doubt your own good faith.Michel Hervé Bertaux-Navoiseau (talk) 09:44, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Well, okay, Wikipedia, if you want to link to pages full of incomplete and false information. Be my guest! I tried to do correct that. But if you want to keep posting false information on wiki pages, please do so! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Digicammuseum (talk • contribs) 17:04, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

r | prev) 21:06, 5 September 2014‎ Theroadislong (talk | contribs)‎ . . (4,982 bytes) (-72)‎ . . (Reverted 2 edits by Subtitlemeplease (talk): Spam. (TW)) (undo | thank)

Bit confused why you flagged this as Spam? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Subtitlemeplease (talk • contribs) 21:40, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Because it appears to be promoting a company "Sold Secure is the premier testing and certification house for security products" This is not what Wikipedia is about. Theroadislong (talk) 21:53, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi

I work for a site that reviews comic conventions

www.comicconventions.co.uk

No conflict of interests. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Comicconsuk (talk • contribs) 13:02, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

September 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Jake McGann may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s and 2 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• '''Jake McGann''' (born 1991)[[cn}} is an [[English people|English]] actor. He is the second and younger son of actor [[Paul McGann]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:19, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Cognitive computing

Background

This definition of cognitive computing was developed in mid-2014 by a cross-disciplinary group of experts from BA-Insight, Babson College, Basis Technology, Cognitive Scale, CustomerMatrix, Decision Resources, Ektron, Google, HP Autonomy, IBM, Microsoft/Bing, Next Era Research, Oracle, Pivotal, SAS. Saxena Foundation, Synthexis, and Textwise/IP.com. This project was led by Sue Feldman at Synthexis and Hadley Reynolds of NextEra Research. It was sponsored by CustomerMatrix, HP Autonomy, and IBM. The goal of the project was to define how cognitive computing differs from traditional computing and to provide a non-proprietary definition of cognitive computing that could be used as a benchmark by the IT industry, researchers, the media, technology users and buyers.

Definition

Cognitive computing makes a new class of problems computable. It addresses complex situations that are characterized by ambiguity and uncertainty; in other words it handles human kinds of problems. In these dynamic, information-rich, and shifting situations, data tends to change frequently, and it is often conflicting. The goals of users evolve as they learn more and redefine their objectives. To respond to the fluid nature of users’ understanding of their problems, the cognitive computing system offers a synthesis not just of information sources but of influences, contexts, and insights. To do this, systems often need to weigh conflicting evidence and suggest an answer that is “best” rather than “right”.

Cognitive computing systems make context computable. They identify and extract context features such as hour, location, task, history or profile to present an information set that is appropriate for an individual or for a dependent application engaged in a specific process at a specific time and place. They provide machine-aided serendipity by wading through massive collections of diverse information to find patterns and then apply those patterns to respond to the needs of the moment.

Cognitive computing systems redefine the nature of the relationship between people and their increasingly pervasive digital environment. They may play the role of assistant or coach for the user, and they may act virtually autonomously in many problem-solving situations. The boundaries of the processes and domains these systems will affect are still elastic and emergent. Their output may be prescriptive, suggestive, instructive, or simply entertaining.

In order to achieve this new level of computing, cognitive systems must be:

1. Adaptive. They must learn as information changes, and as goals and requirements evolve. They must resolve ambiguity and tolerate unpredictability. They must be engineered to feed on dynamic data in real time, or near real time.

2. Interactive. They must interact easily with users so that those users can define their needs comfortably. They may also interact with other processors, devices, and Cloud services, as well as with people.

3. Iterative and stateful. They must aid in defining a problem by asking questions or finding additional source input if a problem statement is ambiguous or incomplete. They must “remember” previous interactions in a process and return information that is suitable for the specific application at that point in time.

4. Contextual. They must understand, identify, and extract contextual elements such as meaning, syntax, time, location, appropriate domain, regulations, user’s profile, process, task and goal. They may draw on multiple sources of information, including both structured and unstructured digital information, as well as sensory inputs (visual, gestural, auditory, or sensor-provided).

Cognitive systems differ from current computing applications in that they move beyond tabulating and calculating based on preconfigured rules and programs. Although they are capable of basic computing, they can also infer and even reason based on broad objectives.

Beyond these principles, cognitive computing systems can be extended to include additional tools and technologies. They may integrate or leverage existing information systems and add domain or task-specific interfaces and tools as required.

Many of today’s applications (e.g., search, ecommerce, eDiscovery) exhibit some of these features, but it is rare to find all of them fully integrated and interactive.

Cognitive systems will coexist with legacy systems into the indefinite future. Many cognitive systems will build upon today’s IT resources. But the ambition and reach of cognitive computing is fundamentally different. Leaving the model of computer-as-appliance behind, it seeks to bring computing into a closer, fundamental partnership in human endeavors.

References

The Answer Machine. By Susan Feldman. Morgan & Claypool, 2012.

Smart Machines: IBM's Watson and the Era of Cognitive Computing. Columbia Business School Publishing by John E. Kelly III, Steve Hamm

IBM's TrueNorth processor mimics the human brain by Daniel Terdiman. http://www.cnet.com/news/ibms-truenorth-processor-mimics-the-human-brain/

Surfing Toward the Future. By Peter J. Denning. Communications of the ACM, Vol. 57 No. 3, Pages 26-29 10.1145/2566967

Cognitive Computing: Beyond the Hype By Susan Feldman and Hadley Reynolds. http://www.kmworld.com/Articles/News/News-Analysis/Cognitive-computing-Beyond-the-hype-97685.aspx

Cognitive Computing: Why Now and Why it Matters to the Enterprise. By Guy Mounier. KMWorld, Sept. 2014

Another Face of Cognitive Computing. By Jennifer Zaino May 27, 2014http://www.dataversity.net/another-face-cognitive-computing

Ferrucci, D. et al. (2010) Building Watson: an overview of the DeepQA Project. Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, Fall 2010, 59–79.

IBM Watson. Jeopardy full episode day 1. (2011). http://www.youtube. com/watch?v=qpKoIfTukrAandfeature=related

IBM Watson. Jeopardy! - Watson game 2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v= kDA-7O1q4ooandfeature=related

IBM Watson. Jeopardy! IBM Watson day 3 part 2/2. (2011, February 16). Retrieved July 26, 2012 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6oS64Bpx0gandfeature=fvwrel

Will IBM’s Watson Usher in a New Era of Cognitive Computing? Scientific American. Nov 13, 2013 |By Larry Greenemeier

What is cognitive computing? IBM Research. http://www.research.ibm.com/cognitive-computing/index.shtml#fbid=BrUXYNtK6-r --Susan E. Feldman (talk) 17:35, 9 September 2014 (UTC)Susan E. Feldman

Hi,

I am trying to sort out my wikipedia page and I saw you removed all of my updates that I did, please could you add them back please as I am in the process of going through the page.

Thanks

Charlotte — Preceding unsigned comment added by CharlotteDevaney (talk • contribs) 12:28, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

FYI

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cambridge_International_Examinations&action=history Specifically that the COI editor wrote a draft at User:LexieHoskins/sandbox/Cambridge International Examinations, submitted it to AfC, and then when it was declined as existing pasted her copy on top. Revent^talk 19:25, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

York Theatre Company

Please explain to me what is being advertised or promoted? The information on this page is wrong and I am trying to update it. Every update in the right direction is immediately taken down. For instance The York Theatre Company Opened in 1969 NOT in 1993, we moved spaces in 1993 but DID NOT OPEN in 1993. there is also a long history that I am trying to add and CITE from our webpage, which is not soliciting any money or assistance from anyone. And if our history is considered to be promotional then all wikipedia pages of all businesses should be taken down as they are doing the same thing.

THANK YOU Brian Cummins Company Manager The York Theatre Company. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianjcummins (talk • contribs) 20:24, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

When you have a clear conflict of interest it is best to make suggestions on the article's talk page, all content will need to be backed up with references, preferably third party sources and not your own website. Statements like "intimate, imaginative style of producing both new and classic musicals has resulted in critical acclaim, multiple awards and recognition from artists and audiences alike." is most definitely promotional puffery! Theroadislong (talk) 20:28, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Edit of Screen Printing page

You reverted to the original wording, stating "Clearly Not First Usage" but you did not cite why you personally believe this to be true. As a researcher and published author of over 40 books on screenprinting, I can tell you that your premise is certainly untrue. It is stenciling that was from China and Japan, not screenprinting. The article is on Screenprinting - NOT - stenciling. I have extensive research by many (including my own) within the screenprinting technologies to show that much of what is on the page is incorrect.

I would appreciate your allowing the truth of the matter to be published, not some misguided belief, without proper references.

Bill Hood — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bill Hood (talk • contribs) 22:31, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Your references were all dead links? Theroadislong (talk) 06:09, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Ovolo Hotel - Speedy Deletion

Just wondering, what is the difference between the content on Ovolo page and any other hotel page? There is no over-the-top and flamboyant language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DGoldfeld (talk • contribs) 09:38, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

The article is stuffed with promotional external links and external links to local facilities, Wikipedia doesn't use any in line external links. Each hotel's room sizes are given and future properties are advertised and if the photographs are genuinely yours then you probably have a conflict of interest too. Theroadislong (talk) 14:21, 19 September 2014 (UTC)