User talk:William Saturn/2016

Why my page is suggested for deletion

The criteria for deletion mentioned is that the article does not meet notability requirements.

A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject.

I believe that as a prominent physician and political activist and candidate for the Libertarian Party, this should fulfill notability requirements as evidenced by the articles about me or by me: Cleveland Magazine Modern Healthcare The New England Journal of Medicine

Phi Beta Kappa and Delta Omega honor societies are documented with independent sources.

Of course I am biased, but I appreciate your input on the deletion talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mfeldmanmd (talk • contribs) 01:03, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016

Hi William S. Saturn. Re you revert of my edit here, I was wondering where's that evidence for "years of standard practice"? Why was the article renamed exactly, so we could carry on calling it something else? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:49, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Template:United States presidential election, 2016 and go back to each successive election and see that all election years are added to campaign articles so that readers know for what election a campaign is running. --William S. Saturn (talk) 22:58, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I had no part in the rename. I merely corrected the link. This is why I was baffled about "years of standard practice". I'm a bit surprised that User:Anthony Appleyard was so bold as to make the move, on the basis of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, without an RfC. There have obviously been previous campaigns by Trump, which must all be quite well-known. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:24, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize if I wasn't clear initially. When I reverted, I wasn't referring to your change but to the move itself.--William S. Saturn (talk) 23:26, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I eventually realised, thanks. Looking forward to the RfC! Regards. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:36, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Comment: Marco Rubio

There is an ongoing RfC at Talk: Marco Rubio which you may care to weigh in on. Spartan7W § 15:09, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Really?

Really? You're making personal attacks again? Christ you are rude. I'm not a goddam plagiarist, did you not see my response to that person? Six years ago I moved content that another editor added from one article to another where it was more relevant. I did not plagiarize anything. Now instead of reverting every other edit I make to election articles, please see that the content I removed was incorrect. Full marijuana legalization is on the ballot in one state currently, and one for medical use, not 16 as the article stated. Regardless, the paragraph is not relevant to that section, as I have brought up on the talk page. Reywas92 ^Talk 03:47, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. I was probably out of line. I just couldn't resist. Hopefully something constructive will come of the discussion.--William S. Saturn (talk) 08:06, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Comment: Jeb Bush Portrait

There is an ongoing RfC at Talk: Jeb Bush which you may care to weigh in on. Spartan7W § 14:34, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jimmy Griffin photo

James D. Griffin in fact ran for president in 1996 and the Wikipedia page says so. I'd appreciate it if you would leave it there and use your mind and actually read the page. My edits are helpful and informative to the community. If you can let Fred Karger go on the 2012 election pages, you can let Mark Everson go on the 2016 election page. Please stop undoing my helpful edits. I'd appreciate it. Mayor Griffin is a hero in Buffalo and the city was proud when he ran for President in 1996. The page itself for the election mentions him, so let his image be on the page. Block me if you will, I'm trying to get the full story on Wikipedia, and you must like it 100% incomplete. From reading your comments on your page, I would like to ask you to refrain in using God's name in vein. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KittyHawk2015 (talk • contribs) 20:51, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying he didn't run. In fact, I left his name on the page. What I did was remove the image because it is non-free and there is no fair use rationale to use it on the pages where you wish to use it.--William S. Saturn (talk) 22:14, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I thin kI resolved our problem by using a photo my grandfather took of the Mayor. KittyHawk2015 (talk) 15:37, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2000

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2000 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Carbrera -- Carbrera (talk) 22:01, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Virgil Goode presidential campaign, 2012

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Virgil Goode presidential campaign, 2012 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MPJ-DK -- MPJ-DK (talk) 02:01, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2000

The article Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2000 you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2000 for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Carbrera -- Carbrera (talk) 05:01, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2000

The article Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2000 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2000 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Carbrera -- Carbrera (talk) 23:01, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Virgil Goode presidential campaign, 2012

The article Virgil Goode presidential campaign, 2012 you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Virgil Goode presidential campaign, 2012 for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MPJ-DK -- MPJ-DK (talk) 03:40, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Imperial Triple Crown

Thank you. --William S. Saturn (talk) 19:44, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Virgil Goode presidential campaign, 2012

The article Virgil Goode presidential campaign, 2012 you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Virgil Goode presidential campaign, 2012 for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MPJ-DK -- MPJ-DK (talk) 08:21, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May 2016

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on Libertarian Party presidential primaries, 2016. You've been around for quite a while and I'm sure you know what vandalism is. Come on ..... – S. Rich (talk) 05:54, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Changing around statistics erroneously and removing candidates is a form of hidden vandalism. I've seen this quite often. --William S. Saturn (talk) 05:55, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Both you and LibertyLover should stop. Use the article talk page to discuss the proposed edits. If you can't reach an agreement, then post a request to WP:3O. – S. Rich (talk) 06:05, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

After cooling down, I now see that I overreacted. I assumed bad faith on LibertyLover's part. I have apologized to the user.--William S. Saturn (talk) 07:01, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Claiming Vandalism

First off I was not the original editor of the Libertarian Presidential Primary page you claim I did vandalism. I edited everything to the facts. The candidates you restored are not real candidates as you can see here https://www.lp.org/candidates/presidential-candidates-2016/ Secondly Austin Petersen won Missouri Thirdly You changed the primary results and vote totals from the correct ones. Please stop doing so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheLibertyLover (talk • contribs) 05:57, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Amondson specifics

Since you're one of the major editors of the page, I refer you to my questions at Talk:Gene_Amondson#Specifics.3F. --Haruo (talk) 08:31, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Libertarian Convention Results

As a consistent contributor to political topics I am curious as to your thoughts on including the Libertarian Convention results by state for Template:Libertarian Party presidential primaries, 2016 and re-ordering the candidates based on these results. Being that the delegate votes at the convention ultimately decide the winner of the Libertarian primary I believe they should be the results displayed in the template (or at least alongside the votes from the previous state primary ballots which give the official popular vote). I have begun a discussion on the template talk page and would like to have a few users involved in the discussion to come to a good consensus instead of a consensus based on the opinions of only two users (myself being one of them). Appreciate any feedback and if you respond here please give me a ping. Acidskater (talk) 02:08, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Libertarian Party presidential primaries, 2016#California primary

Why did you change Waymire's color? When I made the map, there was no color for her so I decided to pick one, and I filled it in where it needed to be. And also, why change the map back to the previous one? I know my map isn't as high quality as the others, but atleast it gave the proper information.

If you want to stick with Waymire's new color, please change the map or make a new one that uses it. You will have to do this with California Libertarian primary, 2016 too. Ghoul flesh (talk) 21:49, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I had made the map and used that color when you posted the first one. There doesn't need to be a separate article for the primary.--William S. Saturn (talk) 21:51, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well there is. And if you made a map why isn't it being used on the page right now? Ghoul flesh (talk) 22:13, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:A Time For Choosing.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:A Time For Choosing.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:26, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

Hello, as you've been involved in discussing Donald Trump photos in the past, there are some newly presented photos, I wanted to let you know about a poll of support currently happening here. Please state which photo you support at the bottom of the section. Calibrador (talk) 02:59, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, William S. Saturn. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:John J. Bulten/Straw polls for the Republican Party 2008 presidential nomination

User:John J. Bulten/Straw polls for the Republican Party 2008 presidential nomination, a page which you created or substantially contributed to (or which is in your userspace), has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:John J. Bulten/Straw polls for the Republican Party 2008 presidential nomination and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:John J. Bulten/Straw polls for the Republican Party 2008 presidential nomination during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Niteshift36 (talk) 03:46, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Donald Trump presidential campaign listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Donald Trump presidential campaign. Since you had some involvement with the Donald Trump presidential campaign redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 19:05, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for notifying me. I see this has been resolved. It will probably come up as a larger issue once the 2020 campaign begins.--William S. Saturn (talk) 07:51, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]