User talk:Gladamas/Archive 0001

Gladamas, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Gladamas! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join other new editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from other new editors. These editors have also just begun editing Wikipedia; they may have had similar experiences as you. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from your peers. I hope to see you there! Osarius (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:18, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Burlington, Wisconsin

Many thanks for the comment at the Burlington, Wisconsin article. I did revert/correct the various test edits/incorrect material-hidden vandalism? Another IP editor has raised the possibility of original research of the edit iin the Burlington, Wisconsin. This needs to be resolved. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 00:58, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

@RFD Thank you, I will look through the article. Gladamas^talk 01:02, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

I noticed your edits here. It may interest you that the same boilerplate language you edited can be found in quite a number of other articles. Interestingly, the various articles cite different sources for the very same text. This is what makes the text seem like original research. In addition, I've checked out a number of the sources and they fail verification - the statements are not supported by the sources. The editor responsible for the boilerplate text has engaged in some very problematic editing. 32.218.42.149 (talk) 04:53, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

@32.218.42.149 @RFD Indeed I see your point, but to be perfectly honest I think we should reword the section rather than remove it completely, as I did to some extent. You're welcome to edit it more if you like. As for the other articles practically copied verbatim, I think those are a separate issue than this article, but with the same response needed. Gladamas^talk 05:07, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure you really understand the situation. I'm familiar with the local history of those communities. The boilerplate content is either made up out of whole cloth or grossly distorted, then supported with phony sources. (By phony, I mean that the sources in no way support the text; the sources are real books.) At one time, the editor was using online phony sources, which I easily challenged because they said nothing related to the content. As a result of such challenges, the editor switched to using phony sources that weren't online so they could not be challenged so easily. This editing goes w-a-y beyond needing some wording modification. 32.218.34.249 (talk) 15:04, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Shaista Khan

Gladamas, I don't think there is any reason for the removal of the edit that was saved. Please don't remove because it is accurate —  unsigned comment added by 124.155.253.190 (talk) 06:11, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

@124.155.253.190 Most of your edits are fine; I just removed edits such as this because Wikipedia articles are not places to test formatting. There is a "Preview" button beside the "Save Page" button that you can use to see what the page would look like if you were to post it; alternatively, you can use the Sandbox. Thanks -Gladamas^talk 06:20, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Vandalism-user page

Hi-An IP editor vandalized your user page and I reverted the edit. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 14:15, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you –Gladamas^talk 00:55, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Demaryius Thomas

Sorry that I missed your edit correcting vandalism when I reverted several edits to the subject article. The last vandal's edit had come up on Huggle and I had not seen your edit come up yet. Thanks for your diligence in finding the last apparently clean version and correcting my inadequate effort. I am sure that won't be the last vandalism related to the Super Bowl tonight. Donner60 (talk) 02:27, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

@Donner60 It's no problem, that page's edit history was a bit strange. Thanks for patrolling –Gladamas^talk 02:29, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Rollback granted

Hi Gladamas. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Widr (talk) 11:12, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

i am reallly sorry

you can make all the edit come back but i have to tell u my home towns name is adoor and someone insulting it by calling it a viallge and badly describing it now i discoovered the people who did thats suspects name and details:(David moregano,Material scientisit) are removing all my accurate edits and making my town low i discovered that these people were making details and contents of kollam rich and i feel insulted now they made adoor town page worthless pls edit it and revert these edts by the way i am saatvik-:) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.76.39.233 (talk) 12:06, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

@106.76.39.233 I reverted your edits because they removed large portions of content from the pages you were editing, not because of the text you added. Adding constructive content without removing sections or entire pages is encouraged :) –Gladamas^talk 12:14, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For helping to keep the place clean, as you did with Ajay Maken. Safety Cap (talk) 12:34, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Active Separatist Movements in Europe

A lot of things written under certain Balkan countries on this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_separatist_movements_in_Europe seem to have no source at all to support the notion that there is an organised separatist movement within their borders or among the groups claimed.

Examples: Bosnia and Herzegovina

- Autonomous Province of Western Bosnia

There is no source. Also, Fikret Abdic is not a political party, he is a former politician who hasn’t actively been a component of separatism since the 90’s. No evidence has been cited to prove that there is an active organised separatist movement calling for the creation of an Autonomous Province of Western Bosnia separate from Bosnia and Herzegovina. Probably because there is none.

Bulgaria:

- Dobrich Province and Silistra Province

There is no source. There is no evidence cited to prove that there is an active organised separatist movement among the few Romanians left in Bulgaria calling for unification of these 2 provinces with Romania. Probably because there is none.

- Ruse Province and Razgrad Provice

Firstly, it doesn’t even say what Pomaks are trying to achieve, whether it be unification with some entity, creation of an independent state separate from Bulgaria, or the creation of an autonomouse entity within Bulgaria, it just says that Pomaks are separatists and nothing else. There is no source. There is no evidence cited to prove that there is an active organised separatist movement among the Pomaks in Bulgaria.

Croatia:

- Osijek-Baranja County

No source. No evidence.

- Dalmatia

No source. No evidence.

- Slavonia

No source. No evidence.

- Republika Srpska Krajina

No source. No evidence.

I believe that the passages in this article that I have made mention of should be removed. There isn’t any legitimacy to them, the claims lack any source, and the authors have cited no evidence to support them, and petty nationalism has no place in this article. Please keep childish Balkan nationalism out of this page. --Ivanovevichinsky34 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:35, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

@Ivanovevichinsky34 Thank you for explaining your reasons for your edit. I restored the edit; in the future, please post a short edit summary with your edits so that users know what your reasons are Thanks. –Gladamas^talk 22:55, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Gladamas

what do you mean about me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bella13608 (talk • contribs) 23:20, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

@Bella13608 I undid your edit because people read the page you edited for actual learning about history. However, you are free to edit the Wikipedia sandbox or your own personal sandbox as much as you like –Gladamas^talk 23:32, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

I think you were wrong, sorry.

UPDATE- your edit wasn't what I thought, and I completely agree with you, I put that petition in for a laugh to see if it would stick, not very long apparently, sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.43.108.184 (talk) 00:50, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

If your edit was on the Man Thing film, I can assure you I have done throrough research on that film as it was in this subsection them was moved, so I looked to see where it should belong and it is in the right place now, thank you. Sorry for inconveniences. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.43.108.184 (talk) 00:46, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

@80.43.108.184 Don't worry, I appreciate your willingness to take the jokes to the sandbox. The entire community is grateful for any constructive contributions you make. –Gladamas^talk 02:06, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Snowmen

You are quite correct, I have no intention of calling to the public's attention a heretofore-unobserved propensity of snowmen to animate and feast upon youth.

I've simply has a terrible time convincing a particular English class not to use Wikipedia in research reports, and hoped that a demonstration of this nature might set them in order. I shall use the sandbox area for this purpose in the future. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Terebey (talk • contribs) 01:04, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

@Terebey No problem. I do hope, however, that you let your class use the secondary-source links referenced in all Wikipedia articles for research –Gladamas^talk 02:08, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Why do you refuse change?

I have noticed that all you do on Wikipedia is revert edits, even if said edits are indeed constructive and not invalid to the article. By removing my claims that support the main theme, you are removing the freedom to contribute to Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1:81FE:6956:2465:4162:E8B0:67EB (talk) 01:08, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

@2600:1:81FE:6956:2465:4162:E8B0:67EB I apologize, this was my mistake. Indeed, your edit was constructive, and I have reverted myself and restored your edit. Thank you for bringing this to my attention and I hope you continue to contribute to Wikipedia. –Gladamas^talk 02:01, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

IS 300 edits

Why are you taking my edits out? Are they not true for the IS 300 model? I have reason to believe my information is correct and the general public needs to know about my discoveries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joseendy4 (talk • contribs) 04:39, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

@Joseendy4 While the information you added to the article may be technically true, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and saying that the Lexus IS makes "sex noises" is not constructive. –Gladamas^talk 04:44, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Jesse Money

I made the comment on the Jesse Money article as a sincere comment, not as a joke. I was looking up her father, because I'm a classic rock fan, and I saw a link to her article. Then, when I got there, I saw the deletion notice, and thought I would add my comments, being a frequent user of Wikipedia. While I am a user, I am not one of the regular "editors" of Wikipedia. I simply do not have that much free time.

I do not know Jesse Money, but based on what is in her article, I feel it should stay and should not be deleted. That was the only reason for my comment. Plus, she is very attractive, and does have attractive breasts. The last time I checked, it was acceptable for a man to say a woman has attractive breasts and is attractive. I made my comments tastefully, not derogatory (jugs. tits, boobs, etc.), so I see absolutely no reason for you to delete or revert my comments. I feel you should reverse yourself on this matter, as I do find my comments constructive.

Just my thoughts

Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.203.168.168 (talk) 05:09, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

@72.203.168.168 Hello, and thank you for contributing to Wikipedia—you certainly don't have to be a "regular editor" to contribute. Editing a page up for deletion or speedy deletion can certainly be edited, and indeed doing so is encouraged in order to make the article better and possibly even saved from deletion. However, your edit said "she's got huge breasts, which are nice to look at"; while the appropriateness of saying such a statement in common speech is debatable, in my opinion it certainly does not belong in a Wikipedia article, since it does not add any neutral point-of-view information. This is why I reverted your edit. –Gladamas^talk 05:25, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Dunkin Donuts Park

What is the issue with my edits? I am sharing what I know from extensive research — Preceding unsigned comment added by 32.210.49.46 (talk) 16:25, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

@32.210.49.46 I removed your edits because, e.g. "[a] legal theory known as trying to get one's head out of their ass" does not belong on an encyclopedia, regardless of whether the statement is technically true. –Gladamas^talk 20:01, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Gregory K Rand

HI. There is content on my page about a Gregory K Rand, and how he is a crook. That's not me and I would like to remove it. Please allow me. Different guy and damaging information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.190.229.230 (talk) 16:59, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

@75.190.229.230 Hello, and thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Firstly, no one owns articles on Wikipedia. Articles are edited collaboratively, subject to consensus. That said, I reverted your edit because it deleted the entire lead section of the Greg Rand page. You may indeed be correct that the information in that section is wrong or untruthful; however, on Wikipedia the process for removing large sections of an article, especially the lead section, sections that already have reliable sources, and controversial sections is to go to the talk page of the article, calmly discuss your concerns, and come to a consensus with other editors about what changes should or should not be made to the article. –Gladamas^talk 20:01, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

My Warframe Article

This isn't about me. It is about my best friend. Her name was Karan. She ended up running away from her brothers and father. See her father abused her and her brothers beat her up. I remember her telling me once that her brothers raped her. I told her to tell someone, but she brought up a very important point.... THERE IS NO ONE THERE TO LISTEN.

I did what I could. I gave her money, and shelter for the first couple of days. Then she told me something else... she was pregnant. I didn't know what to do. I told her that she could continue to hide out in my room... see my parents didn't think she was a "good influence" on me. So she did, and surely enough, she stayed for a short time.

I got a call about a week after she ran away from my house. She said she was having the baby, and she wanted me to come. I told her to call the ambulance or I will. She hung up, so I called one. Well, she went to the hospital, and had the baby 2 months premature. If that wasn't bad enough, the hospital found her dad and brother, and then called them down. I felt so bad cause I knew what was going to happen. But, there was nothing to do but wait.

Well, 2 weeks later she got to leave, with her dad. I remember her cell phone calling me, and over it I could hear her crying, and screaming for help. The switch of the belt... or something, and then it was silent... I freaked and didn't know what to do. Then her dad picked up, and told me that if I said anything he'd give me the belt next, and I wouldn't be so lucky.

I was scared and didn't know what to do. I never talked to Karan for around 2 weeks. Then she showed up at the door. She was on the run. Her baby was still in the hospital, and like cowards, we left it there. We ran away from Ontario, Canada, to B.C. Life was great. We were okay, and we planned on returning for the baby once we were strong enough.

When that day came, she did return. We got the baby, and returned back home. Karen got a boyfriend, who ended up being a total jerk. She felt hopeless, and the last thing she told me, was to take care of her baby.

I didn't catch on at first. But then, when I did, it was to late. She shot herself. I took the baby, and returned home, at the age of 17, one year later. But, to my unpleasant suprise, my family had moved. I was homeless, with a child, and my best friend's dad, brothers and boyfriend after me. To this day I am still on the run from them. I would hate to see what would happen if I did accidentally run into them.

But, like Karan said, no one will help us, so we can't go home.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Now, you said my article on Warframe was not being "CONSTRUCTIVE"! That is total bull. I thought long and hard about that edit. Thats right. LOOOONGG AND HAARDD. And you know what you did to me? You took away my soul. MY SOUOL. I had to eat so many things that I got diabetus. MHM. you have nooo idea, Wikipedia is dead. - Gabe Newell. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:43:4101:6070:55D2:5E20:7AB0:7709 (talk) 22:03, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

@2601:43:4101:6070:55D2:5E20:7AB0:7709 I am sorry you had to go through that, but maybe Wikipedia isn't the best place to voice it—this is an encyclopedia, after all. –Gladamas^talk 22:28, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

May 2016

Hello Gladamas. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that you shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1) and content (CSD A3) moments after they are created, as you did at Maryacade. It is also suggested that pages that might meet CSD A7 criteria not be tagged for deletion immediately after they are created. It's usually best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks. Adam9007 (talk) 23:34, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

@Adam9007 Thank you. –Gladamas^talk 23:47, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

---

It's Elizabeth Puke for Boxes for Katje — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.18.231.29 (talk) 23:38, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

I believe there should not be any place for this kind of article in wikipedia.

The Quran Begins with the words of Merciful "In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful:" Therefore I tried to find the most cruel statement in this book but unlike Bible Deuteronomy 22:21 "Stone to death" I could not find there was statement about cut off the hand but with the modern advance technology this statement can not be compared with cruelty. After each harsh verse I found the verses about forgive and mercy. I believe there should not be any place for this article in wikipedia.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/08/danger-religious-fundamentalists-just-muslisms.html

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/09/0925_TVkoran.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kabir-helminski/does-the-quran-really-adv_b_722114.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kalhoro2000 (talk • contribs) 00:29, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

@Kalhoro2000 I believe you, and thank you for contributing. Wikipedia has a neutral point-of-view policy, meaning that articles shouldn't espouse any one particular viewpoint. This is why I reverted your edit. However, you are encouraged to edit pages so that they display a neutral viewpoint and not one *completely* opposite your own. –Gladamas^talk 00:34, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Bozoljac

I have no idea why you delete the edits. I simply added Bozoljac's nickname and you delete it. This is a nickname he is referred to, worldwide. I don't think your knowledge of tennis is sufficient to challenge me on this point.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.96.17 (talk) 12:46, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

@82.43.96.17: Hello, and thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. You are correct, I do not no enough about the subject to justify reverting your edit. "Bozo" is a personal insult in English, which is why I undid your edit as vandalism, but I see now that you made the edit in good faith. I have not restored your edit because another editor has also reversed an edit you made to that page, but I will not stop you from making the edit again. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Happy editing! –Gladamas^talk 03:18, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Cenobitic monasticism

I removed that external link because it did not work.

<quote> Object not found!

The requested URL was not found on this server. The link on the referring page seems to be wrong or outdated. Please inform the author of that page about the error.

If you think this is a server error, please contact the webmaster.

Error 404

www.documentacatholicaomnia.eu Apache/2.4.16 (Win32) OpenSSL/1.0.1p PHP/5.6.11 </quote> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:0:f84:da30:2d21:5220:f67b:6587 (talk) 17:15, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

@2601:0:f84:da30:2d21:5220:f67b:6587: Hello, and thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. The reason I reverted your edit was because your edit removed parts of the page other than the dead link. I have removed the link from the page. Thank you for helping Wikipedia and I hope you continue to edit! –Gladamas^talk 03:38, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Cutler, Maine - Legal challenges to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

On May 29th you Undid an edit that blanked a section of a page, Cutler, Maine. The blanking of the page was just, as the the information removed was regarding the "Legal challenges to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act", and in turn had no direct mention or regard to the town of Cutler, Maine(at least not any more than any other town or city in the US). If one finds that such info should remain on this page, then it should be necessary to add the section that was removed to every article about a specific US town. Vladashram (talk) 20:29, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

@Vladashram: You are correct, and thank you for reverting me. –Gladamas^talk 10:07, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Tom Roberts

Hey Gladmans,

I didn't make an edit to Tom Robert's page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.144.96.188 (talk) 11:09, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

@1.144.96.188: Hello. Your IP address made this edit to the Tom Roberts page, however it is possible that your internet was randomly assigned an IP address of someone other person, who made that edit. If so, you may avoid further confusion by creating an account for yourself. Cheers! –Gladamas^talk 06:43, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Racism in the UK: Edit

Hi, my edit was about removing informality. kinda seems informal and thus I removed it. Melcalcimag (talk) 03:38, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

@Melcalcimag: Hello, and thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. I reverted your edit because it removed half of the word "allegedly", and thus I assumed it was either a test or accidental edit. You are more than welcome to edit the page (and perhaps remove the entire word) if you think it improves the article. Thanks for bringing this to my attention, and helping Wikipedia –Gladamas^talk 04:05, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

You are welcome. WineMel (talk) 22:01, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Muslim honorifics

Hello, Gladamas! I noticed your edit summary characterizing an edit you reverted as a personal attack or incivility. You were right to revert, but insertions like these are usually good-faith expressions of piety. See WP:PBUH; if Huggle doesn’t have a corresponding boilerplate message, please use a custom ES so as to direct users to the relevant guideline, which I guess falls under WP:NPOV. Otherwise it will come across as rather WP:BITEy to those who are merely following the stylistic norms of Islamic literature.—Odysseus1479 03:56, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

@Odysseus: Haha yes, thank you for notifying me. You are correct that it was the wrong edit summary. I accidentally clicked "Personal attack or uncivil behavior" in Huggle instead of "Editing tests" in the edit summary list, which is right below it. I realized my mistake and changed the template on the user's talk page, but didn't create a dummy edit on the original page. Perhaps I should have. Thanks –Gladamas^talk 04:14, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

I wouldn’t bother going to that extent, as long as the user gets an apt explanation it’s no big deal. I just thought you might not be aware of this practice, mistaking the abbreviation for something rude.—Odysseus1479 04:21, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of "Online visual merchandising"

Online visual merchandising, a page you created, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is obvious advertising or promotional material..

You are welcome to contribute content that complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. Jim1138 (talk) 06:58, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

@Jim1138: Hi, I never created that page. Perhaps you're confusing me because I made this edit? –Gladamas^talk 01:35, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

I must have, I would assume that I got your user name from the article page history. We may never know... Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 05:14, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Friends

Can we be friends? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.15.123.97 (talk) 14:59, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

@94.15.123.97: I don't have a problem with you personally, just edits that don't help Wikipedia. Cheers –Gladamas^talk 03:11, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

yo

stop saying i made that page i didnt — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.225.219.68 (talk) 03:28, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

@8.225.219.68: Perhaps not, but in this case I believe the page violates policy, and thus it would probably be better if you contested the deletion rather than removing the speedy deletion template entirely. Thank you. –Gladamas^talk 03:51, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Flying Horse Inn

I am afraid I don't see what you are talking about. I think I have made enough edits not to need to test things.

I corrected two typos and in doing so I accidentally hit a wrong key, so the second edit was to correct that. I don't know what you deleted because my final correction still stands.

86.4.241.27 (talk) 00:16, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

@86.4.241.27: No problem at all. I simply warned you because your intermediate edit looked like an editing test, and so I wanted to inform you about the sandbox. Cheers –Gladamas^talk 06:06, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Alectryon excelsus

I couldnt find any evidence of titoki having a use eg used for floorboarding etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dusk1969 (talk • contribs) 15:28, 26 June 2016

@Dusk1969 Hello, and thank you for your contributions, and I hope you continue to contribute to Wikipedia. Wikipedia's notability guidelines state:

If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list.

This is true even if the article is about a very obscure topic. That being said, it is only a guideline and you are more than welcome to debate whether the article should exist on its talk page, but I would advise not doing so in the article itself, since it impacts readability of the article. This is why your edits were reverted. If you have any more questions please don't hesitate to ask. –Gladamas^talk 23:10, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

red army fraction

by the hell, who has changed "fraction" to these funny word "faction"? RAF = Rote Armee Fraktion = Red Army Fraction please correct this word in this article M.Waller (talk) 22:46, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

@M.Waller Hello, and thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Apparently sources refer to the group as both the "Red Army Faction" and "Red Army Fraction". I updated the article to reflect this and thank you for bringing this to my attention. –Gladamas^talk 23:22, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

@M.Waller, I recommend reading faction and fraction. Sometimes German->English translation is not straightforward; see false friend. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:04, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Sorry

Forgive me for my vandalism and thanks for editing me. I am new. Please don't block me from editing. From now, I will be more attentive. Sharif The Tiger (talk) 22:56, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

@Sharif The Tiger No worries. I hope you continue to constructively edit Wikipedia. Articles won't improve unless people like you help out! –Gladamas^talk 23:29, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Hey Gladamas

Thanks for the heads up. I'm improving the article to make it more accurate, God willing. And you'll see that my last edit was more neutral to contain both opinions.

May God bless you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6000:F502:7800:1109:CD34:64D3:D81A (talk) 02:57, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

@2605:6000:F502:7800:1109:CD34:64D3:D81A Thank you. Your revised edit is great –Gladamas^talk 03:01, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Ezra Lee

Gladamas - is there some legal issue with false information about me and my family. I said I want this page gone. It is not true information. How can I prove I am Ezra Lee ? I did not start the article. This article is basically against the law and I have been calm about it for a long time but my edits can't be proven and newspapers are making mistakes and it's not an article I want. so what now - to remove it ? is there an email that works ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ezra Lee (talk • contribs) 03:48, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

@Ezra Lee Hello, and thank you for bringing this to my attention. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and we cannot delete an article simply because the subject doesn't want there to be one. However, you are more than welcome to remove libelous, untrue, and/or unfair content from the article about you as well as from any other articles. There is no need to prove your identity to do so; just please don't completely blank the page. I hope this helps, and if you have any other questions or concerns please don't hesitate to message me here. Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia! –Gladamas^talk 04:06, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Ok so I deleted the content of the page because nothing I do gets sorted ! I have changed parts of the article many times but only to have someone revert it because the statements are in the newspaper but the newspaper article references are WRONG ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ezra Lee (talk • contribs) 04:37, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

@Ezra Lee May I ask what sections of the article (and what sources) are untrue in your opinion? Quite honestly, I don't know whether it is (or should be) acceptable or not to remove content from an article that is sourced but that you personally know to be incorrect (as the subject of the article). To be honest this situation is unusual and the Arbitration Committee's 2005 decision establishing WP:BLPEDIT (the policy I linked above) didn't cover this issue in my opinion. Thus, I am going to ask for a third opinion on this policy from a Wikipedia administrator. I would appreciate if you hold off on editing the article until he/she responds. Thank you. –Gladamas^talk 05:09, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

The user above (User:Ezra Lee) claims to be the real-life subject of the article Ezra Lee (musician). If possible, I would like clarification of the WP:BLPEDIT policy and 2005 Arbcom decision that established it to understand whether the subject of an article can remove content from the article about him/herself that is sourced with a reliable source, but is nonetheless incorrect because the source (in this case a newspaper) made a mistake. Thanks –Gladamas^talk 05:09, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Ok thank you for investigating. I wont edit it. but let me now put here what is wrong for you..

 "He has issued five studio albums, Preston Rockabilly #2 (2008), You Can't Stop a Freight Train (April 2009), Cashed Up 'n' Crazy (2012), Coal Fired Man (14 December 2012) and Motor Head Baby (2014)." - I have six albums (Boomerang Boogie 2015).

Ed is also a country blues musician and has played bass guitar in Johnny Green's Blues Cowboys, alongside Pete "Flash" Sheedy (Lee's uncle), on lap steel guitar.[5][4] - Pete 'Flash' Sheedy is not my uncle. Just the guitarist in Johnny Green's Blues Cowboys.

Live albums[edit]

Ca$hed Up 'n' Crazy (2012) – Edjumacation Records[12] - It is not a live album

and when I try to update past 2014 I get reverted ?

AND I WROTE THIS MYSELF - SO WHY CAN'T I NOW CHOP IT OUT AND WRITE A MORE UPDATED RELEVENT SECTION ? The Reverb Nation Americana chart shows the band at number 1 in Australia and number six world wide. The band has been interstate to Perth, WA and Adelaide, SA, and Ezra Lee is performing at The Rhythm Riot Rockabilly Weekender in November in the UK and an American tour is planned for April 2016. The band has a large following and is known for their spontaneous antic with chairs being broken, rolling on the floor and jumping on tables and pianos. The sax player, Mark can regularly be seen back-flipping off stage while the band play to have a dance or lead the audience in a Congo line. There have been two kick drums even on occasion two full drum kits for drum battles with other bands. Ezra Lee & The Havoc Band also have had guests from Hank Elwood Green on slide guitar and T.K. Reeve on Harmonica and double bass. Since the band has started Ezra has been performing on the honky-tonk upright pianos or the beat up grands that fill the dance halls and that is what shapes the bands sound, Rock 'n' Roll, Blues and Country are a major influence on the bands songwriting with there most popular Americana song "My Baby Don't Lie To Me". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ezra Lee (talk • contribs) 05:42, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

these things might seem like small things but when I am not able to correct them they become more annoying. Especially when other people, newspapers write about it and only get information until 2014. I need to mention my other records to promote them. Newspapers use Wikipedia as my bio now instead of going to my websites ! www.revebnation.com/ezraleehavocband or www.facebook.com/ezraleeandthehavocband or www.ezraleehavocband.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ezra Lee (talk • contribs) 05:50, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Further information

Gladamas: hello. I have tried to explain some of the same issues you're addressing here to the above user (and other users with similar claims): from about July last year. If you see the related article's talk page and the user's talk page you will see that I have tried to explain how to address those issues.

I don't believe blanking the article content or the related talk page's content is justified.

I don't believe the article contains unreliable claims about the subject. However any content can be improved by supplying suitably verifiable and relevant information, which I have asked this user to provide.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 00:32, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia:Username policy, this user's name may present problems both for the user and for other editors. There is an implication of Wikipedia:Ownership of content in its use which is echoed in statements made at the article's talk page and herein above.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 00:41, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Request_for_comment/Extended_confirmed_protection_policy

Hi Gladamas, I collapsed the section on your proposal - if I missed something that needs to be addressed in that RfC, please feel free to revert me! If something is broken and editors are not able to make edit requests please let me know and we will get all the right people engaged to fix this. — xaosflux ^Talk 16:46, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

@Xaosflux No, you are correct. Thank you –Gladamas^talk 00:22, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi.!!

I want to become a good editor in Wikipedia could you tell me how.? And could you recommend me some steps.? James Macdaman (talk) 13:07, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Primary school leaving examination edit was correct

"The next section is on continuous writing, which accessItalic text candidates of their basic writing abilities and language thought process" Access was used originally, if you read it as a sentence, or in context, it does not make logical or grammatical sense. I changed it to assesses because the PSLE is first and foremost, an academic exam for 12 year olds in Singapore, one which I took several years ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.45.111.2 (talk) 15:21, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

reinstate my factually correct addition to huey morgan

now — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.9.53.197 (talk) 21:36, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Gladamas. 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)

Extended confirmed protection policy RfC

You are receiving this notification because you participated in a past RfC related to the use of extended confirmed protection levels. There is currently a discussion ongoing about two specific use cases of extended confirmed protection. You are invited to participate. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 16:10, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Move request

A request to change the title and content of a comics article has begun at Talk:X-Men (film series)#Requested move 7 April 2017. Any interested WikiProject:Comics editor may comment there within one week. --Tenebrae (talk) 02:41, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

re john finnemore

Dear Gladamas I understand entirely with your decision, but I don't necessarily agree as the addition I made was only light-hearted, pertinent to one of Finnemore's best know characters, 'Arthur' from 'Cabin Pressure' which I thought would be nice. Apologies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.77.82.229 (talk • contribs)

@79.77.82.229 Hi, I appreciate the thought you put into your edit. Wikipedia depends on people like you to make each article the best it can be. That said, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a place to publish opinions or jokes. Your understanding is appreciated, and I hope you continue to contribute! Thanks –Gladamas^talk 01:11, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Shinsuke nakamura

Dear Gladamas, I appreciate reaching to me, to let me know of the reverse you did in the page of the wrestler Shinsuke Nakamura, but, if i'm correct the name of the move is now know (since he appeared in the WWE) as Good vibrations, that's the reason why I changed it. If I'm not correct I apologize — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.178.225.77 (talk) 21:48, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

You are correct and I restored your edit. Apologies and thank you for bringing this to my attention –Gladamas^talk 22:00, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Llama

hi, sorry, my friend was using my computer and added to a change on the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chewbacca.wiki (talk • contribs) 00:32, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

@Chewbacca.wiki If you want to appeal your block you can post {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} on your talk page. Cheers –Gladamas^talk 00:55, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

i forgot to send you the sources for my edit.

sorry i forgot to send you the links to the information to the sources i found on the person page.

http://sofa-king-cool-magazine.com/andrew-bryniarski-gives-official-response-to-gunnar-hansen-comments/

http://www.chron.com/entertainment/celebrities/article/Texas-Chain-Saw-fans-enraged-over-actor-s-6619779.php

these are the resources i used as reliable sources. am very sorry for not sending you the souces i got the info from. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tristan462 (talk • contribs) 01:05, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

@Tristan462 No problem! Nearly all new editors don't know Wikipedia's verifiability policy when they start. Don't let it discourage you! This page is a great guide for adding citations. For now I'll add the links you gave me here to the article you edited. Cheers! –Gladamas^talk 01:26, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Confused...

I am a former journalist/sub-editor and a wargamer of some 45 years standing. I own about 300 dice of various types.

I performed an edit on the page called 'Dice' adding the average dice (numbered 2,3,3,4,4,5) and a link to an article describing such. An email from yourself confirms that I performed this edit but when I checked that edit has disappeared again, leaving the subject of average dice not covered by Wiki. What did I do wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.170.212.137 (talk) 00:46, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

@86.170.212.137 @CopernicusAD Personally, I see nothing wrong with your edits. I'll be bold and revert CopernicusAD's revert of your edit, but I would recommend contacting that person and discussing it with them, since they reverted your edits, not me. We do appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia even if we come off as off-putting sometimes Cheers! –Gladamas^talk 04:10, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Sorry.

Why did you keep changing my present past switches, it was wrong. I apologize for my vandalism. I’ll be constructive from now on. P.S ( I added more information I. Matthew, cause it was sort of a major cat 4 hurricane Ilikecakenexjdu (talk) 00:46, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

@Ilikecakenexjdu No problem. I apologize for mistaking your current edits for vandalism. Thank you for constructively editing Wikipedia –Gladamas^talk 00:52, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you, once again for correcting me. I don’t really know what I was thinking. If you could review the information and fix any errors and typos I made? Would be much appreciated. Thanks. Ilikecakenexjdu (talk) 00:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

@Ilikecakenexjdu Your edits are great! Be bold and don't worry about making mistakes, as other editors will fix them later. If you really aren't sure whether something is acceptable or not, you can refer to Wikipedia's manual of style and policies in a nutshell. Feel free to talk to me anytime for advice or help! –Gladamas^talk 01:06, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Lauren Book

No sorry i need that content removed as it is not truthful and this person is getting harrased a lot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matkakuk (talk • contribs) 02:13, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

@Matkakuk Hi. The biographies of living persons policy says that "[c]ontentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion" (emphasis added). The criterion for inclusion of notable information in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. In other words, as long as a factual (non-opinion) claim in the article is relevant to the topic, and has a reliable source, it can and should be included, regardless of whether it shows the person in a positive or negative light. Feel free to remove all claims in the article that don't meet this criterion, but in my opinion the "Controversy" section as a whole should be included, as Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. –Gladamas [talk] 02:43, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Rich Piana

I was changing because it's the truth — Preceding unsigned comment added by Megatam (talk • contribs) 22:18, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
please help me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Megatam (talk • contribs) 22:29, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

@Megatam Hi. According to Wikipedia's policy, "any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material." You must include reliable sources when adding information, as the threshold for inclusion is verifiability, not truth. In addition, you removed information that already had inline citations, without giving a reason. This is why I reversed your edit. You are welcome to add information to the article if you find and add a citation that supports your claim. –Gladamas (talk) 22:43, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

I have an official link from his YouTube page but I'm new and don't k ow where to put the citation.

Tammy

https://youtube.com/-1kd0IZjEFw Official cause of death — Preceding unsigned comment added by Megatam (talk • contribs) 22:59, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

@Megatam No problem, thank you for finding that reference I added your info to the article. –Gladamas (talk) 23:19, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Graham v Florida

Sorry i was only trying to fix a date and show where i found the date. It should be December 2004 not 2003. https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/08-7412# — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.137.102.3 (talk) 04:19, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

No problem, I fixed the markup for the reference you added. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 04:39, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Gladamas. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

== Pigoen ==

"smoking weed using a bong" is clearly not meant to be serious ... even if the rest of the article sound plausible.--Cahk (talk) 11:47, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

@Cahk Fair enough lol. A redirect might still be useful though –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 12:13, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Paivin spb

There really isn't any point in giving a level-three warning to a user after a final warning, and with a clear record of four instances of vandalism in the last few days. You're doing a very useful job of fighting vandalism, but please take the time to check the user page before deciding on a warning level. The automated tools are useful, but not foolproof. --RexxS (talk) 11:58, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

@RexxS Huggle (the semi-automated tool I'm using) only fails to detect warnings if a non-standard template or message has been used, even over different months on a user's talk page. Given that non-standard-template warnings are very rare, and that the worst that could happen is skipping warning levels, I feel it's somewhat a waste of time to check every reverted user's talk page given that I'm reverting ~20 ~5 people a minute. My warning on User talk:Paivin_spb has been removed. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 12:11, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

I understand your desire to keep vandalism in check, but three seconds just isn't enough time to do due diligence. The problem with relying on automated tools to determine warning levels is not confined to non-templated messages, such as mine was (for good reason), but the tools also fall short in cases of previously repeated levels and multiple headings within a day or two of each other – examples of both of which are visible on User talk:Paivin_spb. Your faith in Huggle is misplaced because Paivin spb already had three templated warnings in April before you gave your uv-3 warning (not to mention my final warning, which I felt was better delivered manually). --RexxS (talk) 12:42, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello mr xd

ur very interested in the male gender xd

waddesden best house — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.92.183.210 (talk • contribs) 05:22, 2018 April 26 (UTC)

? –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 12:26, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

how much autism do you have to have to spend 24/7 editing wikipedia and following users not signed in just to revert their edits? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.92.183.210 (talk • contribs) 05:28, 2018 April 26 (UTC)

Concerning Dan Biederman

Hello - the article titled Dan Biederman has been subject to some, for lack of better word, harassment. Some person insists on inserting a one-sided account of the subject's public stance on a complex issue, in this case, street vending. Subject, Biederman, has been involved in public space management for 40 years. Street vending has occupied a very small proportion of his time and effort. I have removed the passage several times, and will continue to remove it as the writer seems to bear a personal animus and does not attempt to be impartial. By all means, please step in and end this harassment.Skeptiktb (talk) 12:36, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

@Skeptiktb Hi, thanks for messaging me and improving the encyclopedia. Wikipedia's policy for content inclusion is verifiability, not truth. If a passage has a reliable source cited then it may be in the article, regardless of how it makes the subject of the article look. Simply removing the content because you disagree with it isn't allowed. On the flip side, feel free to tell the other side of the story in the article, provided you also cite reliable sources to back up your claims. Regards –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 12:46, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for thanking me. I appreciate it. Rock on. UnsungKing123 (talk) 13:00, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

@UnsungKing123 You're doing a great job contributing to the encyclopedia! You take constructive criticism well and I'm sure you'll be a fine asset here –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 13:03, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Welcome

Klgd98 (talk) 07:51, 27 April 2018 (UTC)Thank you for welcoming me and for the thank you. I really appreciate.

@Klgd98 No problem, thanks for contributing! Feel free to ask me anything if you have editing questions –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 08:04, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello can I ask something? How to remove an article if its redirected to another? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Klgd98 (talk • contribs) 08:13, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@Klgd98 Do you mean how to delete an article, or how to change or delete a link to an article? –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 08:19, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

You can also visit the actual redirect page like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Page_title_here&redirect=no –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 08:21, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Klgd98 (talk) 08:24, 27 April 2018 (UTC)like an article was redirected to another article. If yoy click the article a different article comes out.

@Klgd98 You can edit a redirect by visiting the redirect page directly. For example, if I wanted to edit The moon (which redirects to Moon), I would click The moon, then after it redirects, click "The moon" where it says "(Redirected from The moon)" on the top-left of the page below the title. Alternatively, you can go to https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_moon&redirect=no and edit that page.

If you think a redirect should be deleted, you can go to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion and begin the process there. I recommend reading the guidelines on redirects first. Only administrators have the power to delete a page, so you need consensus before they'll agree to that. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 08:40, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Klgd98 (talk) 08:45, 27 April 2018 (UTC) Thank you so much that is so helpful.

Bear Bryant

Do you have any evidence that proves i am wrong? There is plenty proving i am correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DillyDilly52 (talk • contribs) 09:22, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@DillyDilly52 Hi, Wikipedia has a policy that states that all content should be written from a neutral point of view. Saying a person or team is the "best" is not neutral. Regards –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 09:26, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@Gladamas i see your point, but as i stated, there is more than enough evidence showing that Bear Bryant is the best, look at how he turned Alabama around, he made Kentucky football relevant. Show me someone who is better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DillyDilly52 (talk • contribs) 09:28, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

@DillyDilly52 Being the "best" is an opinion, not a fact. As WP:NPOV states, "Avoid stating opinions as facts. Articles must not take sides, but should explain the sides, fairly and without editorial bias. This applies to both what you say and how you say it." The evidence for an opinion doesn't matter; Wikipedia only presents the facts. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 09:34, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Poétique du cerveau

By the way, ould you please kindly upload the DVD cover which is here? Many thanks and kind regards!--79.176.44.173 (talk) 10:05, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

 Done Take a look at Poétique du cerveau –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 10:53, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

A great many thanks!--79.176.44.173 (talk) 10:53, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Annang People and Copyright

Hi, could you please show proof that text in the Anaang people article infringes on your copyright? I'm reverting your edit until you do so, but if you show proof I'll remove any infringing material. Regards –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 04:04, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

I do not know what you mean by proof. I originally posted this article "Annang" from my book Annang Wisdom. In 2017, the wiki page was vandalized and references to my books and articles removed. The title of the article was changed from Annang referring to the culture, history and geography of the place to Annang People. I quickly brought this to the attention of wikipedia and reported the vandalism. Nothing was done as the culprit or culprits continue with their activities. I want this removed immediately or I will go to court to defend my right. The burden should not be on me, but on the vandals. Additionally I need the identity of this individual who committed this vandalism so I can address it properly. I have been a wikipedian from the early days of this project and need answers. Dr Ette Ezekiel Ette, Ph.D. (talk) 06:08, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Feel free to source information in the article by adding inline citations, citing your books. If you wish to move the article to another (or previous) title, I would develop consensus at the talk page before doing so, but if no one objects within a reasonable time span, feel free to move it back yourself. However, blanking the page rather than discussing the issue on the talk page is unproductive. We should solve this dispute with discussion (and mediation if needed) on the wiki.

There is no need to take drastic legal action. Wikipedia is designed to mediate and solve disputes between users. In addition, you are unlikely to win any such suit: under the Terms of Use, by editing Wikipedia you irrevocably agreed to license your contributions under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License and the GNU Free Documentation License. You could also get banned from Wikipedia if you continue making such threats. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt that this issue can be solved amicably here first. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 02:00, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Force One COPYVIOL

the article about Force One is a copy, and like a brochure! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.98.124.189 (talk) 09:36, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Just give a reason for your edit in the edit summary when you delete content. Thanks –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 22:36, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Dee Dee Warwick

Hi

I changed the statement about DDW being an open lesbian in the 60s and 70s. This was not so, indeed it was all clandestine, as many articles about the new Whitney documentary detail. The reference cited on the DDW page does not suggest this either, but rather that the singer sexually abused Whitney H, not that she was known as a lesbian. The statement (true or not) is also in the wrong place in the essay, suddenly appearing under her early career. Thanks. Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.138.145.252 (talk) 08:06, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation, I restored your edit. Please use an edit summary next time, and thanks for contributing! –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 08:12, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

FYI

Re this, it's common that admins will add template to the top of the talk page for anonblocks and school blocks. It's equally common that sometimes they won't leave templates at all, for whatever reason. No big deal, but just to let you know. Widr (talk) 09:18, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

@Widr Cool, thanks –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 00:23, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Answer

@MyStori Cool. Please provide an edit summary next time. Thanks! –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 09:06, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

whats the issue

im just helping you work the correct things out — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hudson3126 (talk • contribs) 11:30, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

@Hudson3126 You removed content without explanation, or were otherwise unconstructive, as seen here: 1, 2, 3. After several warnings you were blocked. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 17:01, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Pomorska Street

Hey,

This whole Wikipedia is a nightmare for me. Can't get ease around anything and contacting anyone that does any comments it's like knoking on Matrix door w/o the Key men.

All the articles I create are to support the main page of http://www.mhk.pl - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Historical_Museum_of_the_City_of_Kraków.

They will be completed as of end of June (all branches) with photos and reedited text but I tried the sandbox and can't get along with it. It's like swiching from Windows to MacOS.

Today I'll finish all branches and start editing the contect.

This Pomorska street is no longer needed so it can be deleted as it has been merged as I was sugested with Pomorska — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wojciech.pospula (talk • contribs) 12:27, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

@Wojciech.pospula Hi, sorry about reverting you. As you were the only editor at Pomorska street, per WP:G7, you were completely allowed to blank the page as a deletion request. Feel free to message me and I can help you contribute or edit relating to Pomorska, or help you create a new article entirely. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 17:19, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

I have never left a message before.

I don't understand how to ping you or whatever.

You messaged me telling me that you removed my edit because I did not adequately explain it.

I made the edit previously with an explanation, and some other user restored it without explanation. Therefore I switched it back to the identical edit (removal) without further comment. Then apparently you put it back. The offending part is glaringly biased and opinionated and that's why I removed it, and I'm sick and tired of what few efforts I do put into helping make this community good being reversed because of the intense liberal bias among editors.

So please put it back the way you found it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Houstoneagle (talk • contribs) 02:51, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

@Houstoneagle You're correct that the article should remain neutral (per Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy). I recommend discussing on the talk page with other editors how to achieve this. Note that if there is a neutral, reliable source supporting a statement, it may be included in the article. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 17:24, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "joseph digenova". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 27 June 2018.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 03:25, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning joseph digenova, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 13:22, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

Advice

Thanks for the template — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.39.237.138 (talk) 13:05, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Gladamas. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

“Peaceful”

Peaceful is a matter of perspective. There is no consensus that the protesters were peaceful or not. Therefore it would be folly to insinuate that there is. All that readers need to know os that they were protesting. Inputting bias into an article is not something that Wikipedia should do. Leave the information ambiguous. 216.53.168.61 (talk) 00:49, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

This is a false equivalence. Every reliable source says that the protest was peaceful, please stop pushing your Nazi agenda. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 00:56, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Reliable source such as? 216.53.168.61 (talk) 00:58, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

For the record, neutral is saying nothing. Not neutral is saying peacefully or violently. You must recognize neutrality goes both ways. 216.53.168.61 (talk) 01:05, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

[1]: "A 32-year-old woman died and at least 19 people were injured Saturday when a car crashed into a crowd of peaceful protesters leaving a "Unite the Right" rally that officials had declared an 'unlawful assembly.'" [2]: "An Ohio man has been charged in connection with driving a car into a group of peaceful counter-protestors during a white nationalist rally on 12 August 2017, killing a 32-year-old woman and injuring at least nineteen others before backing away at top speed and driving off."

WP:NPOV states: "All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." Additionally, WP:NOR says: "Wikipedia does not publish original thought. All material in Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable, published source. Articles may not contain any new analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to reach or imply a conclusion not clearly stated by the sources themselves." I'll add references to the article citing these websites so these policies apply here. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 01:12, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Source 1 is a statement of the opinion of the authors of the article, Doug Stanglin and Gabe Cavallaro. Source 2 is a statement of the opinion of the author of the article, Brooke Bonkowski.

These articles are not credible. They are not held to any sort of standard outside of what the news organization is willing to publish. To really show my point, where did these journalists get their information from? Where are their sources? 2600:1006:B12C:825E:C911:B537:823B:8CDD (talk) 01:31, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Man that Vandalism Def-con bar is cool!

HurricaneKappa (talk) 03:30, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

@HurricaneKappa Oh, thank you! Check out Template:Vandalism information#Variants and show the gallery to see different versions of that template. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 03:41, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Also check out Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit if you want to learn how to help out. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 03:44, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Remove of submarine page to top

I removed the submarine collum to put it on the top so it will follow other EU country page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.136.118.88 (talk) 04:44, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

No problem. In the future, it's a good idea to leave an edit summary to your fellow editors know. Thanks for contributing! –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 21:00, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Nokia 5230

Sorry about those edits on the Nokia 5230 - they were by accident.Theperson50 (talk) 21:43, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

@Theperson50 No problem. Feel free to edit constructively in the future. Also, you are free to remove notices from your talk page (they're not vandalism, they're informing you of a problem with one of your contributions) but that won't make the issues they were informing you of disappear. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 21:52, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Sorry

I am sorry for blanking the page --144.132.17.55 (talk) 06:40, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Apology accepted. Edit constructively in the future and you'll have no problem from me. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 07:03, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi, about my new page

This is about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Alyssa_Victoria_Hope

What would make the article have a more "neutral" point of view? I tried to present it neutrally. This person is being used as a fundraising tool by activists who conceal her background and I think it is fair that the background of why this person is in prison in the first place was given, since they are casting her as a "political prisoner". Normally maiming a deputy for 15 minutes for fun is not an act of political dissent...

All of the citations in the page and background are legit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scottinfukie (talk • contribs) 06:41, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

@Scottinfukie That draft looks neutral to me; I would add a {{Infobox person}} template if I were you. The reason I reverted this edit is because studies have shown systemic differences between how black and white people are treated in the criminal justice system in the U.S., when controlling for other factors. Thus, adding "purported" would give undue weight to one point of view. I have no problem with the neutrality of your edits as long as you follow the WP:NPOV policy, as it seems (to me) you have done for that draft. Feel free to talk to me if you have any other questions or concerns. (Sidenote: you should sign your talk page messages with four tildes, like this: ~~~~. Thanks) –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 07:03, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Not sure if I'm doing this right but OK I have added the template. The "disparities" thing as written seemed less than neutral to me (disparities in what? number of law enforcement interactions, treatment by law enforcement) but not going to belabor itScottinfukie (talk) 07:16, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you

I'm sorry for the inconvenience regarding Calum Scott wiki page, since many vandals used sexual preference as a tool for vandalism. I didn't read the whole reference for Calum's personal life & after reading a few times I realized that I have made a mistake. Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by 36.72.213.123 (talk) 10:15, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

No problem, that's understandable. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 00:35, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Kara Mia

The reason why I deleted content from Kara Mia is because it is unreference and it is a vandalsim. DerpyFace123 (talk) 06:30, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

@DerpyFace123 The content you deleted from that page was referenced, but I don't know enough about those topics to know if the information was true. Don't be surprised if someone else reverts those edits. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 06:36, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

clock tower edit

are you with typo team or something?

bradleyagin 21:40, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

@bradleyagin Nope, I just help revert vandalism sometimes. What edit are you referring to? –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 15:16, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

clock tower it needed a typo edit bradleyagin 23:37, 3 January 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bradleyagin (talk • contribs)

2019

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

Hello Gladamas, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019. Happy editing, bradleyagin 21:49, 18 December 2018 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

bradleyagin 21:49, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

@bradleyagin Thanks! –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 15:16, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

December 2018

I'll take off December 2018 since I don't have a citation for the date or that it was an employee party, I'm not sure how I would get a citation for any of this. Speaking of citations, Ashdown's page says he has a wife and 3 children but where is the citation for that? Actually almost all of the information on Pete Ashdown's page does not have citations. What am I missing? AftonStillwater (talk) 06:29, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Skerray

Hi, Sorry for not explaining, it is the first time I modify something on wiki and although I don't know how to "prove" what I change, I do it in good faith and to the best of my knowledge. I live in Skerray myself and can testify that the museum is not there any more (The Skerray Historical Association is no longer functioning), and like I wrote the first time round, this is now a wee gallery at the moment which exhibits paintings and art work from Rhona Graham, Meg Telfer and myself. The "community of artists and tree planters" mentioned are mostly gone too... Although I did not change that as there are still a couple of artists and a bit of tree planting is starting again. I should add there is no school in Skerray. The school house has been made into accommodation (4 flats). "dwellings are expected to be converted to holiday homes": well, this is the case now. I am a postie and calculated that about 40% of houses in Skerray are empty/second homes/holiday lets. Not sure how to "prove" what I say... I just live here and know! Is that good enough? Aurore — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.65.82 (talk) 23:04, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

No worries! Thank you for explaining the reasoning for your edit, I went ahead and restored it. The reason for my original reversion is that sometimes certain people like to randomly blank sections of articles just to have fun, so I mistakenly assumed you were doing the same. I do appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia. Next time these kinds of misunderstandings can be avoided by having a very short (like, four word) message in the edit summary explaining why you're deleting stuff that has references. Again, thank you for helping Wikipedia and I hope this incident will not dissuade you from editing in the future. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 23:44, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

February 2020

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made to User talk:2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. ——SN54129 09:11, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

@Serial Number 54129 My bad. I saw an edit that removed 80% of an article's content (including multiple references) and I reverted it without checking the page's revision history. I'll be more thorough in the future. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 03:34, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Deleting Text

I did indeed accidentally deleted the Curved Saws context. I apologise for the fallacy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.7.110.4 (talk) 19:38, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

No problem, mistakes happen. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 19:40, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Edit Reversion

The paragraph was removed because it was inflammatory, in particular the sentence about suicide is not referenced in any sources, please revert your reversion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HT1985 (talk • contribs) 19:53, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

@HT1985 I removed the offending sentence about suicide as unrefereced and a possible WP:BLP violation. However, the other parts of the paragraph are impartial in tone and have citations to back them up. If you believe the information to be false, please cite a source to back up those claims. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 20:06, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

I reworded, added context, and improved the inline citations in that section. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 20:35, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Amnesty International are not a human rights organisation

Amnesty International are not a human rights organisation. They support murder in the form of abortion. Human rights apply to all humans, especially those who are unable to speak for themselves including unborn children.

Pregnant ladies cannot use the term pro-choice, as they have already made that choice by choosing to have sex. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.42.15.170 (talk) 19:00, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia is written from a neutral point of view. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 14:52, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Factual accuracy

With regard to recent edit changes within the subject of walking football, these changes had been made with without accurate development origins associated with walking football, and key facts had been omitted. I am concerned that this will repeat in the very near future. I have attempted adjust the development of the game with factual information with regard to the origins of the game's value and success. 94.192.253.89 (talk) 11:40, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

I reverted your edit because it removed all of the references from the page as well as the end section. It is OK to fact-check, but removing content for no reason is not OK. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 14:52, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

My edits

Man you are rude aren't ya? I tried to take the high road with my edits, but now I guess its time to take this to the boxing ring. I'm reporting you to the anti-vandalism league of Wikipedia. But you do have another option. Undo your reverts on Mountain States or I will have to take futher action. I am a part of the undercover Wikipedia anti-vandalism squad. So please, undo your reverts before I lose my s#%*! 71.204.209.54 (talk) 22:45, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Jimmy Dore

Hi. I am glad that you are endeavoring to keep the information on Wikipedia neutral. However I find that the article on Jimmy Dore is not completely neutral. Qoutes from CNN and Bellingcat are fine, but neither of these organisations are unbiased.

Quoting CNN's opinion that Dore is a conspiracy theorist is not fact. It is opinion.

Dore is reported to have received support from a "pro Assad" organisation which casts doubt on the veracity of his claims. But there is no balancing argument or investigation into the funding/sponsorship of Bellingcat or CNN.

I look forward to futher correspondence with you.

Sincerely,

2003:C7:6715:700:30E0:DC9:4DC8:391F (talk) 05:45, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for messaging me. Per this Wikipedia content guideline, "[n]ews reporting from well-established news outlets is generally considered to be reliable for statements of fact." Note that the source for the sentence you edited is a news article, not an opinion piece. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 08:58, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Message

I never made any edits to the Kalinga War page. Please do not send me such messages in future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.177.58.165 (talk) 13:24, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Your IP address made an edit to that page more than 4 years ago. I'm sure it wasn't you; IP addresses are assigned by Internet Service Providers on a rotating basis. You can create a free account to avoid any other irrelevant notices. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 07:16, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Brien Holden Vision Institute

Hi there

I made the changes to the page because they contained inaccurate information. I'm external counsel at BHVI and have now logged in using that address. My confirmation address - within Brien Holden Vision Institute - is "[email protected]".

Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Externalcounselbhvi (talk • contribs) 00:54, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Re: Antifeminism

Please do not revert changes to the article Antifeminism. The content that was removed from the page is highly offensive and vulgar. Wikipedia has no need for such content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.138.224.140 (talk) 20:30, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Please discuss this on the article's talk page. –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 20:32, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:46, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry it wont happen again — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandie Quinn (talk • contribs) 17:25, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Sandie Quinn No worries. Feel free to make constructive contributions :) –Gladamas (talk · contribs) 17:30, 8 March 2021 (UTC)