User talk:Meters/Archive 5

A barnstar for you!

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		For your user page, which took me a lot longer to get than I care to admit. Corvoe (speak to me) 19:23, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Merger of High school into Secondary school

Sorry, but the merger of High school into Secondary school, which you supported (merely based on the fact that high schools are secondary schools, like apples are fruits), seems to be particularly ill-judged. Note that I have just proposed undoing that merger, with a quite comprehensive rationale on Talk:Secondary school#Revert merger of Secondary school and High school. Feel free to join into the discussion. Regards, PanchoS (talk) 11:30, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

PanchoS It's a pity you didn't see fit to contribute your opinions during the three months the merger proposal was open, instead of attempting to undo the merger less than three hours after it was done. Calling the merger discussion "particularly ill-judged" is a slap in the face to the people who did participate. Did you bother to read the two articles? It's quite clear that this is not a case of "apples and oranges" but rather a case of "apples" and "pommes". The secondary school article is discussing education "after primary school and before higher education". Secondary school made multiple references to "high school" and High school made multiple references to secondary school or education. Meters (talk) 17:05, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

"Didn't see fit" doesn't hit the nail. For some reason I missed the discussion or possibly didn't find the time to join in – I admit I don't really remember. No doubt it would have been better if I joined in earlier. Believe me, it would have been preferable for me, too. Only when the articles were actually merged, the changes popped up in my watchlist. Now I understand this is deplorable, but while the procedure does matter, a reasonable result is what our encyclopedic work is all about.
High schools are a specific type of secondary schools. Middle schools, gymnasiums, grammar schools, lyceums, Gesamtschulen etc. are other types of secondary schools. Finally, there are secondary schools named "secondary schools". We clearly don't need another article listing all kinds of secondary schools per country, as secondary education already does. Rather we need to be more precise in working out the specifics of the different types of secondary schools, while covering as well the country-to-country differences within the respective school types. Undoing the merger doesn't solve the deficiencies of these articles, but the merger has substantially aggravated it. --PanchoS (talk) 17:29, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Re: The secondary school article is discussing education "after primary school and before higher education".
While lacking precision, this is a basic definition of generic secondary schools. Now that you supported merging in the more specific type of high schools – what would be your argument not to merge in Middle schools, gymnasiums, grammar schools, lyceums and other specific types of a secondary school. Then again, do you believe this would improve our coverage of the topic, given that it would then be essentially redundant to secondary education which already constitutes an overview article about all kinds of secondary schools worldwide. --PanchoS (talk) 17:39, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm not getting into a long discussion here. It's counterproductive to split this between the demerger discussion and individual talk pages. As I said on the demerger propoasal, "as the articles stood when merged, the merge was appropriate." There's no point in having two articles that discuss the same concept under different names. Meters (talk) 18:20, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

delta Delta Phi Zeta

Who get to say that the page is notable or not? Isn't that just opinion? Becuase in my opinion, I do think that it is notable. Thanks. Xmskab (talk) 18:36, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

I suggest that you read Wikipedia:Notability and WP:CLUB. Your single chapter sorority does not appear to be notable. Meters (talk) 18:41, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks!

I think I'm starting to get the hang of this. :) Kailey 2001 (talk) 23:21, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

No problem. There are quite a few boards to keep track of. Thanks for pointing out that username. I agree that it was unacceptable. Meters (talk) 23:35, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Henry I. Miller

I am not Wiki-literate and I have no interest in editing except to end the harassment from others, as manifested in recent (and previous) edits to my entry. You may not like the terminology, but additions such as "Tobacco industry" and "Climate change" are inaccurate, intentionally misleading and defamatory. I cannot tolerate the damage to my reputation that such misrepresentations cause.

See, for example, my discussion of the tobacco industry claims at http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/12/a-david-and-goliath-parable/, and also in http://www.hoover.org/research/cigarette-smokescreen, where I explain that the primary hazard from smoking is not the nicotine but the inhalation of smoke. I refer to smoking as a "scourge" and observe that, "Tobacco is an inherently, irredeemably dangerous product." Those sentiments are exactly the opposite of what the editors of my entry are trying to convey. I have never received any compensation of any kind, direct or indirect, from the tobacco industry or tobacco companies.

Similarly, with regards to climate change, I do not work on or write about climate change. My connection to the George Marshall Institute ended at least 15 years ago, and in any case had nothing at all to do with climate change. Once again, its mention in my entry is simply harassment and an attempt to defame me.

I have no interest in promoting myself via Wikipedia. I just want an end to the harassment and distractions.

Henryimillermd (talk) 17:43, 31 March 2016 (UTC)Henry Miller

User:Henryimillermd If the article is about you, as it appears to be, and there are issues with the content, the correct thing in most cases is to discuss the issues on that talk page so that editors without conflicts of interest can make the changes. See WP:BIOSELF. Whether it is about you or not, anything which is a WP:BLP violation should immediately be removed. If there is any disagreement about this the venues to raise the concern is WP:BLPN. The article needs to be balanced and written in a neutral tone. However, some of the material you are removing is well sourced and does not appear to be an issue. The article should not misinterpret anything and if Miller (you?) has changed his position then a balanced article should say so, but you don't get to remove material simply because you don't like it. Continuing to edit the article while ignoring the attempts to discuss COI and content issues with you on your talk page and on the article's talk page is not helping. That's why I've raised the issue at COIN. I'm asking for a consensus that you are a COI editor with respect to Henry I. Miller.

I agree that some of your concerns over the material you removed are valid, but my talk page is not the place to discuss the particulars of your edits. Please take this to the article's talk page where the discussion has already started so other editors will see your concerns and participate in the discussion. Meters (talk) 18:14, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

I will copy this to the article's talk page. Meters (talk) 18:16, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Comments by another editor with an apparent COI

Hello - forgive my Wikipedia ignorance. I don't know whether I'm supposed to reply to your comment on my Talk page there or here.

I don't have an external relationship with Henry Miller. I've met him a handful of times over the past five years. I don't have any professional or compensatory relationship with him, his organization, employer, competitor, product, etc. He once mentioned to me the inaccuracies he felt were written about him on the Wikipedia page, and I looked into the matter and found what I believed to be inaccurate statements and/or statements unsupported by citations. Cfulbright (talk) 01:46, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Did you read the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#Writing about yourself, family, friends link I pointed you to on your talk page? You don't have to have a financial or professional relationship with him or any of his organizations to have a conflict of interest. You know him personally. Thus you have a conflict of interest. Per your own edits here File:Henry Miller and dog.jpg you know him well enough to have visited him at his home, to have taken the picture of him and his dog that is now in the article, and to call his wife by her first name. As i said on your talk page "Some of your edits are clearly not corrections of serious errors or defamation, and should not be made by you. Instead you should disclose your connection to the subject and propose changes on the article's talk page so that uninvolved editors may consider them." There were definite problems with the article, and it was indeed slanted negatively and unfairly, so I'm trying to WP:assume good faith on your part, but claiming that edits such as this are COI justified as correcting inaccurate statements and/or statements unsupported by citations" does not help. I've managed to get other editors involved and the worst of the problems with the article were quickly corrected. Any remianing problems should be discussed on the talk page. Continuing to edit the article, and commenting on the talk page without disclosing your conflict of interest are a problem.

If you are editing the article because Miller complained to you about it that is a form of sock puppetry. You should read WP:SOCK, particularly WP:MTPPT. It's more than a bit suspicious that twice now you have shown up on this article at the same time Miller was being warned for his conflict of interest in editing it. Meters (talk) 04:18, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

For you

		The Original Barnstar
		For caring about me. <3 Kailey 2001 (talk) 19:00, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

The Longest Palindrome in the world

Thank you for your corrections and deletions. I understand your point completely.You are absolutely right that there is not at all point to collect hundreds of foreign language examples to English site. It made the whole article look like a circus. On the other hand that has nothing to do with the important fact about the longest palindromes in the world. If not in Wikipedia, then where should people search information about world's longest palindromes? Media, scientific journals or other official authorities aren't at all interested in such a marginal, crazy and unique "hobby". Now English speaking world may incorrectly claim also in the future that for example David Stepehen's palindrome is the longest in the whole world with 58 00 letters. Original referring was leading the reader to see just one of those many Finnish palindromes which often are much longer than Stephens's and includes only meaningful sentences all the way. Talking about the quality is of course impossible. But if you want to get to know more if Finnish should be mentioned also in English "palindrome-Article" or not, then please really read that removed referring to Juha Kotonen's palindrome. At this very moment Finns are also translating the longest palindrome in the world into English.

I'm not going to get into this on my talk page. My comments are already on your talk page, and if you want to discuss the usefulness of your addition the correct place to do so is on the article's talk page, so that the other editors who have undone your additions can participate. Meters (talk) 03:26, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Peyton Manning "former"

Hey. When a player retires, they become a "former" player, not "retired." Look at any other player (Brett Favre, Terrell Owens, Terrell Davis). If you want to lead a crusade and get the opening line changed, go for it. But I'm just following the example set by every other former player. TropicAces (talk) 18:34, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

User:TropicAcesI'm sure that I have seen an essay that no-longer active players should be listed as "retired" rather than as "former" since former has the connotation that they have died. I'm not starting a crusade... you were the one who added the comment with the all caps yelling. Meters (talk) 18:39, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Rona Ambrose Reversion

Hello Meters,

I left the content of the paragraph intact.

I edited unnecessary superfluous and redundant material. Wikipedia discourages needless wordiness, and rather encourages short and concise content. Please see Wikipedia:Too long; didn't read for more details.

I specifically removed, "Continued opposition discontent over Ambrose's conduct led the" as this sentence is unnecessary, and redundant. I removed "Had the motion passed, a vote would then have been held in the House of Commons, and, because this was deemed to be a matter of confidence, could possibly have triggered an election.". because it is completely unnecessary. It is mere superfluous speculation. Please undo your reversion. The unsourced content I removed kept all key aspects of the original content intact, and reduced unnecessary wordiness, redundancy, and superfluous detail. Ontario Teacher BFA BEd (talk) 01:41, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Ah, where to start?

1. Please don't create talk threads on my user page (or anyone's). That's what the talk pages are for, and why I have moved this thread here.
2. As I pointed out, your edit [1] was not a minor edit, and your edit summary was inaccurate since it did not leave all content intact, as you claimed. it does not matter if you think the content was redundant, or superfluous, or speculative. You cannot remove content and leave an edit summary saying that you left all content intact. Leaving that edit summary and calling it a minor edit might be seen as an attempt to hide your changes.
3. Wikipedia:Too long; didn't read is an essay. It's not a policy (which has wide acceptance and should normally be followed), or even a guideline (which has general consensus). It's just the opinion of a number of editors, and this one is usually only used as a snarky dismissal of an overly-long talk page thread. It's not justification for your content removal.
4. Will I remove the material for you? No. You recently came off an edit warring block for something that involved Rona Ambrose, so I'm not touching this. Please follow WP:BRD and discuss the edit on the article's talk page. If the changes are good consensus will easily be reached. I would suggest that you not attempt to use WP:TLDR in your reasoning. Meters (talk) 05:39, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you very much. I had no idea I was breaking a rule. I feel badly and want to apologize. Thanks again.Lollollolll (talk) 21:55, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Note on SPI

Hi,

Just wanted to let you know that the Barnyard pecker case is almost certainly another incident of socking by LTA Sheds thus guys argh g ugh b. Their typical MO involves username violations, harassment (especially of Bongwarrior, but there are certainly others), and spamming of phony block notices. Thanks, GAB^Hello! 20:38, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Meters (talk) 02:09, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Summer

I think we should add August 15, known as "Ferragosto". --Sean Ago (talk) 22:16, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

I don't know anything about that one, but you should stop removing January dates from the southern hemisphere. Meters (talk) 22:18, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

I've just seen and read your edit; I didn't find a note about it in the page. --Sean Ago (talk) 22:19, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Try reading the lede. "when it is summer in the Northern Hemisphere, it is winter in the Southern Hemisphere, and vice versa." Meters (talk) 22:22, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Since you deleted my edit while I was logged out at work, I have to ask the question, how have you not lost your admin rights? Care to answer the question now? Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:13, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I already deleted that post once. If you want to out yourself that's up to you. I'm not a mind reader so I couldn't tell the anonymous IP was you rather than one of the many other IPs who vandalize and troll my talk page. In fact, it might have been an outing violation for me to assume that IP was you. As for discussing the edits, I have already explained on your talk page here so if you want to discuss it please keep the discussion there. I'm not going to respond to any further posting by you on my talk page on this issue. Since you deleted that thread I assume you don't want to discuss it. As for my admin rights, I am not an admin. If you think there is a problem with my edits feel free to raise it at the appropriate noticeboard. Meters (talk) 17:43, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Pro-life feminism

Hello Meters,

You have recently reverted Rona Ambrose's inclusion in the Pro-life feminism article. You have not explained why. Please provide an explanation for your reversion on the talk page. Ontario Teacher BFA BEd (talk) 22:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I did indeed give a reason. I pointed you to the talk page discussion where inclusion of this material was questioned, and I expanded on the talk page section. You are edit warring on this again. Meters (talk) 22:52, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Hillsborough - "crowd crush" vs "human crush"

Hi,

I've left a longish reply at User talk:Crystal.seed#Hillsborough - the short version is that an editor restored the term "human crush" to the article some time ago. As an editor who expressed a preference for "crowd crush" I thought you might like to be made aware of this. There are some suggestions in my reply over there. Personally, this is the limit of my involvement (although I tend to agree also) since I'm teetering on the edge of letting Wikipedia become a time sink once again (this is why I only edit as an IP these days) and am about to pull back from that edge. Good luck, if you choose to get involved. Cheers. 2.25.105.253 (talk) 04:29, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Someone else put it back to "human crush" again. Consensus seems to be supporting that version. To me it seems a better term. They are not synonymous. A stampede does not necessarily result in a crush, and crushing incidents do not always start with stampedes. The article the link redirects to (Stampede) does a fairly good job of distinguishing the two. I agree with the suggestion at Talk:Stampede#Stampede_vs._crush that we're probably at the point where human crushes should be forked from stampedes. Meters (talk) 21:48, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Rona Ambrose a "Prominent feminist"?

Pls see Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Rona Ambrose--Moxy (talk) 04:24, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. Meters (talk) 16:46, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Labor Day and summer

I've a question about this. According to informations, on September 1 autumn begins: so, already the first day of month is fall season. Summer is from June 1 to August 31. It appears like a contraddiction. --Sean Ago (talk) 18:37, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

I've never edited that page as far as I know, and I see no problem with it. It says 'Labor Day is called the "unofficial end of summer"[8] because it marks the end of the cultural summer season (summer scientifically ends at the September Equinox anytime from September 21 to 24).' There's no contradiction there. It's clear the reference is not to the scientifically defined summer of the Northern hemisphere (June solstice to September equinox}. Meters (talk) 20:27, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

A beer for you!

For diligently addressing vandalism to the Adolf Hitler's bodyguard page by you know who (he-who-shall-not-be-named) NotaBene 鹰百利 Talk 19:51, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Sir of Ma'am. I'll save it for the next hot day. We certainly don't need usernames such as that one. Meters (talk) 19:55, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

"Sanitizing" a page

It is to bad that you saw fit to (for lack of a better word) "sanitize" our local high schools Wikipedia page. The way it was before quite literally thousands of local residents (I've got over a dozen calls just this morning) enjoyed the page and used it for reference. Now the information displayed is so generic as to be almost useless. Nothing that was removed was harmful or untrue, and was actually being used by coaches and administrators.

The edits that were present on the page prior to the deletions was much more "encyclopedic" about the high school's community than what is now presented. Hermanns 99 (talk) 18:35, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

User:Hermanns 99 Really? Thousands of local people are viewing this page and more than a dozen have phoned you about it this morning alone? Strange, given that Rio Rancho High School averages less than 25 views a day, Or didn't you know that we can see how many people actually view a given page?

I didn't sanitize it. I brought it into line with the applicable guidelines. It's not a case of the information being harmful or untrue. It simple isn't worth mentioning on Wikipedia. Again, read WP:WPSCH/AG. This in't your school's webpage. If you want to list all sorts of material that isn't of interest to general readers I suggest that you create a web page for the school where you can put whatever information up that you desire.

User:Meters So you no longer wish to discuss it but simply remove it from your talk page? If that is the case than we need to proceed to one of the conflict resolution options on Wikipedia. I will be moving this to conversation to the Dispute resolution noticeboard — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hermanns 99 (talk • contribs) 21:01, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm perfectly willing to discuss the edit, but I see no reason to leave your copies of material on my talk page, especially after I have already removed it once. If you want to discuss the material removed from the article then bring it up on the article's talk page where the other editors involved can participate. Conflict resolution is not an option until a serious effort has been made to discuss the edit. Sorry if I didn't take your hyperbole about thousands of people from the little town using the page as a serious attempt to argue that this material should be in the article. Usually junk such as that and personal attacks are not a sign of someone who wants to actually discuss the issue. If you read the links and don't agree then take it to the article's talk page. Pinging User:John from Idegon , the other editor who removed the material today. Meters (talk) 21:13, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Continued on User talk:Hermanns 99 and Talk:Rio Rancho High School]] Meters (talk) 00:43, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Left a message in a similar vein at article talk. Let's please take it there for continuity. PS. Please consider archiving? I edit from an Android and trying to copy over my edit conflict crashed Chrome. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 01:03, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the reminder and the nice explanation. Meters (talk) 01:17, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

User:Hermanns 99 called our edits censorship and has decided to no longer participate in Wikipedia. Unfortunate that he wasn't interested in contributing content that could be used. Meters (talk) 01:14, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Have you by chance looked thru his contributions for the "2 or 3 other school articles he maintained", or was that just more hyperbole? John from Idegon (talk) 02:56, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

User:John from IdegonI don't know about "maintaining" but he did some work on Montezuma-Cortez High School one day two years ago. I have not checked them all but many of them were useful small tweaks. Nothing was sourced and there is a bit of puffery. He was probably also editing as an IP as some of the IP's tables look very much like the problematic ones we just dealt with. The individual athletic results should go, and the Music sections needs some trimming, sources and clarification on some undated claims. Meters (talk) 03:22, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm not done with Rio yet, but I'll add the other to my to do list. I actually noticed Rio about a month ago but it obviously needed so much work I was trying to wait til I could go at it on a pc. Androids are great for most stuff but when you need to use multiple Windows, they suck. Thanks for your help. John from Idegon (talk) 04:21, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm updating the athletics section league divisions but i think I'm going to eliminate most of it. It doesn't make sense to list the divisions for just a few of the many teams they have, and the divisions are all over the place, changing with boys' teams/girls teams and each sport. Meters (talk) 04:26, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Not really sure what you mean by divisions. Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan have enrollment based classification designated by letters. However, the actual enrollment basis for each class changes nearly every year and in some cases the names of the different size levels have changed numerous times over the decades. Also there is no naming convention state to state. An A school in one state may be the same size as a 6A school in another. It is so confusing as to be meaningless. If you take a look in my sandbox I have a format that I made for Indiana schools that works well for any state that has conferences. Some apparently including New Mexico do not. Keep up your great work Meters. You are an awesome asset to the school's project and to Wikipedia as a whole. If you ever feel masochistic enough to stand for RfA, I would wholly support you. John from Idegon (talk) 05:09, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

That's what I concluded. The athletic divisions for different team sports vary from 5A to 3A (sometimes not even the same for boys' and girls' teams in the same sport) so it's not worth making a big deal of what division a few of the teams are in. Your sandbox looks good so I'll model the coverage after that.

Thanks for the vote of confidence. Much appreciated. Meters (talk) 18:27, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Usernames for attention

I fixed two of your reports. It looks like you misspelled each of the user names. 1 2. Brianga (talk) 17:13, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Whoops. Thank you. Meters (talk) 17:15, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Disappearing Palestine

Hi Mr/Ms Meters, No no, you have it back to front - if you have a look at my edits, and those of others, you will see that I have included Palestine, then others have removed it, without comment or explanation. I don't understand why someone else - not me! - has been doing this. Hurunui99 (talk) 02:34, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

I did look at the edits. That's why I asked you what you were doing. You deleted the 2016 data for Palestine here and then you did it again here and complained that people were vandalizing the article by removing the Palestine data. As I said on your talk page, look at what you are doing, or stop messing around. Meters (talk) 04:28, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For getting rid of the vandalism on my userpage Flow234 (talk) 21:54, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Canadian law? (thread on Richardson family murders moved from my user page)

I was under the impression that Wikipedia is immune from a government's law, especially from one that takes orders from a country 3,000 miles east. Plus we already know her name. It's not like Canada's gonna sue Wikipedia for a spoiler alert on something that's already been spoiled.StjJackson (talk) 23:02, 25 May 2016 (UTC) (thread moved from user page by Meters)

User:StjJackson

1. I've moved this from my user page. Please leave any posts for other users on their talk pages, not their user pages.
2. It's also a good idea to link to the article in question.
3. As for the crack about taking orders from England... the US lost the War of 1812. Get over it.

Yes, many of us know her name, and no, Canada is not going to sue Wikipedia, and it seems unlikely that a Canadian editor would be prosecuted for making such an edit, although they probably could be. The point is that as a youth offender her name was (and remains) protected under Canadian law, and Wikipedia generally follows such restrictions. Sorry, I can't find the link for that. WRT this particular article, as I already said on your talk page "Wikipedia is not including it under an OTRS ticket. It has been repeatedly RevDel'ed from the article." You are not allowed to just reinsert something that has been removed under WP:OTRS. If you want to contest the OTRS removal then follow the instructions on the linked page. There is strong consensus that this material will not be included on this page, and even that the material will not even be left in the edit history. Did you even look at the extensive discussion of this issue on the article's talk page? Meters (talk)

I'm an American editor, and many people have used the girl's name. I believe that a juvenile's name has to protected under Canadian law too. I think we should protect the page so no editor can plaster the girl's name, but we should reconsider it by reading the Protection Policy at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Protection_policy. Therefore, I deeply regret editing the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevinmuniz115 (talk • contribs) 18:37, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Traveled vs travelled

does my edit count as vandalism? i did not mean it to — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmkkmmkmmmmm (talk • contribs) 16:02, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Added a header for what I assume is the edit you mean [2]. Don't worry about it. It was not vandalism. I undid it as a good faith change of spelling in an article on an American topic from the American standard spelling to a different variant of English. The notice on your talk page was just an explanation of why we don't change spelling variants that way. Meters (talk) 20:04, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

User:Mmkkmmkmmmmm I forgot to say that you are free to remove the message from your talk page, since you seem to be worried, but no-one is going to pay attention to it. You made a small, very understandable mistake, and I pointed out why we don't do that. Unless someone makes a habit of doing this it's just info for the user. Meters (talk) 21:42, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Bob Ogden

He's really not minor I like lolz (talk) 04:08, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

As I said in my edit summary "minor fictional character who does not even warrant his own article". If the character does not warrant an article then he does not warrant an entry in the DAB page. Even if he did need a DAB entry it would go in the fictional characters section of Ogden (name) rather than in Ogden. You've been undone by two different editors now. Leave it alone or take it to the talk page if you must. Meters (talk) 15:45, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

James William Webb-Jones

I am in the process of finding links for all the information on the 'Webbjones' page. Please stop deleting information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Webbjones (talk • contribs) 03:46, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

It's not just the fact that it is unsourced. Much of it is trivia that we simply don't need in the article. We don't need to know who his non-notable cousin was, for excample. Thsi material has been removed by more than one editor, and you have been warned for edit warring. Continuing to reinsert this material without attempting to discuss it on the article's talk page may lead to a block. Meters (talk) 03:51, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

This information is being provided in response to requests from British Columbia, inc. from other members of the family, into the family of Richard Moody, for whom there has existed a page for years. Links are being found. Stop deleting information re. topic of which you are ignorant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Webbjones (talk • contribs) 04:06, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

It doesn't matter. It does not belong in the article. You are edit warring to add unsourced material that does not belong in the article in the first place.

Please learn to indent and sign your posts.Meters (talk) 04:09, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

It does belong in the article, because the article is being edited to satisfy the wishes of the family of Richard Moody. The sources are being collected. Do not delete it again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Webbjones (talk • contribs) 04:20, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

What the family wants to see in the article is not what determines the content. I suggest that you create a web page for the family, where you can include whatever you wish, without having to be concerned with providing reliable sources or any of Wikipedia's other policies. Meters (talk) 04:25, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

SmartTrack

I'd invite your comment on this, since you edited {{Metrolinx}}. Thanks. --Natural R_X 13:16, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

answered on article talk page. No opinion on the material, I was just reverting a vandal and self-admitted sock. Meters (talk) 18:39, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Vestavia Hills High School

Should be on article's talk page, not here

Hi Meters, Since you have made previous contributions to the Vestavia Hills High School entry, could you please review the last two reverts of my edits by John from Idegon on the page? I have asked him to explain the reversions on his Talk page, but he has ignored the substance of my questions. On the Talk:Vestavia Hills High School page, other users have been instructed to make direct changes to the entry, as long as additions are cited and substantiated. Apparently I am not allowed to do so. He keeps reverting even the smallest of my edits, stating that I must obtain permission from a consensus on the Talk page for every edit. For some (if not most) of the edits in question, the improvement is self-evident (for example, Birmingham currently remains misspelled in the mascot controversy section). For others I have cited conformity with comparable content on other school pages, or provided full citations as in the following two examples: The school received the national Blue Ribbon School of Excellence from the United States Department of Education in both 1990-91 and 2009. Based on data from 2013-14, the school was recognized as a Silver Medal high school by U.S. News & World Report. The creation of an independent school system in 1970 was a landmark event in the city. Since the early 1990s, the quality of the schools has been treasured and supported by local businesses as the city's greatest asset. No editor should be allowed to treat anyone as a second-class citizen, nor to enforce double standards on the content of comparable school pages, or minimal requirements for contributions to be accepted. Every direct edit can and should be evaluated on its merits. I believe John from Idegon's behavior is a harmful representation of Wikipedia's culture and community, and I don't know how many pages he is doing this on. I would like to avoid a reversion war. I would like to correct a few outright errors in grammar and spelling on the page. I would also like to correct suboptimal writing and composition on the page, though that ventures into the realm of opinion. I would certainly like to add fully cited information to the page without fear of reversion. So I would very much appreciate if you could take a look, because he will not justify his actions. Thank you in advance for your time. Doppelstern (talk) 12:40, 11 July 2016 (UTC) References Content disputes are handled at the article talk page. What was your previous username? John from Idegon (talk) 16:55, 11 July 2016 (UTC) User:Doppelstern I agree with User:John from Idegon. This should be discussed on the article's talk page where any other interested editors can see it and participate if they desire. It does not belong on John's page, and certainly not on uninvolved third parties' talk pages. John from Idegon has told you that, User:Ohnoitsjamie has told you that, and now I'm giving you the same advice. I have not looked at the edits yet, but I will be happy to discuss any issues that are raised on the article's talk page. Note that John from Idegon is a very experienced school article editor and your characterization of him is verging on a personal attack. Please read WP:AGF and WP:NPA. As i said, I have not looked at the edits yet, but certainly the Over the Mountain Journal Rotary Club source above does not even come close to justifying the statement "The creation of an independent school system in 1970 was a landmark event in the city. Since the early 1990s, the quality of the schools has been treasured and supported by local businesses as the city's greatest asset." Meters (talk) 22:38, 11 July 2016 (UTC) User:Meters Please, please, please look at the edits. Regarding this particular citation, the "city's greatest asset" text before the citation comes from the Wikipedia entry's archived edit history. The supporting article starts off with, "For 25 years, the Vestavia Hills Rotary Club has been supporting the math and debate teams – as well as the Interact Club – at Vestavia Hills’ middle and high schools with an annual fundraiser." The amount of funding provided to each team is $40,000 - $50,000 per year. This is not a commonly known or published figure; I know because I captained the math team and travelled extensively with both teams to annual competitions around the country. I haven't looked hard yet, but I would very much doubt that figure is publicly disclosed anywhere. People don't talk about money like that in Alabama. (For comparison, Stuyvesant HS has about $80,000 in cash on hand for this year.) I can substantiate the fact that each individual ticket to the annual fundraising event cost $55 as of 2012, and ticket proceeds are also supplemented by a silent auction and corporate donations. People only live in Vestavia Hills city limits because of the schools. There's nothing else there, besides manicured lawns and sky high property taxes (which again go towards the schools). In consequence, the residents of the city take great pride in those schools. Doppelstern (talk) 10:32, 12 July 2016 (UTC) References What part of "take it to the article's talk page" do you not understand? I said I would look at any issues that are raised there. It is not appropriate to raise these issues on an uninvolved editor's talk page. Meters (talk) 19:42, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for helping me how to move a page I'm so thankful 💕💕💕 brb after 4 days ✌🏻️✌🏻:) Itsjk (talk) 00:23, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

I didn't help you. You were edit warring to make a cut and paste move. If you don't know how to do it either ask or leave it alone. Meters (talk) 00:24, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

It was not a cut and paste move, it was a page split. Random86 (talk) 00:33, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

It was done via a cut and paste with nothing to show where the edit history was. Meters (talk) 00:35, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

I know, and I corrected that. But, that is not called a cut-and-paste move and the message you left didn't apply to this situation. Random86 (talk) 00:41, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

User:Random86 Ah yes, I see. That is a much better template. Thanks. Meters (talk) 00:42, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Completely my fault.......

Thanks for fixing that edit on J.Cole. Didn't even think about the ref break when I accepted the change. Completely my fault. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" (talk) 05:43, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

No problem. Mistakes happen to all of us. Meters (talk) 05:44, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

About the edit you made to User:Successmedianews

Hi. I just noticed that an edit you made at the aforementioned page. Just for future reference, you might instead want to tag the page with {{db-u5}} at the top, so that the promotional material may be properly deleted. Thanks! HeatIsCool 15:43, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Parrs Wood

It's hardly what I would call a reliable source is it? CalzGuy (talk) 04:03, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

User:CalzGuy Give it a rest. All the source is being used for is to show that the student attended the school. The school's website itself is a perfectly reliable source to show that. It would not be a reliable source to use to show that the student was notable, but we're not using it that way. If you don't like it feel free to add one of the dozens of other sources that state she attended the school. I've already wasted time doing your work for you once. Try doing it yourself this time. Meters (talk) 04:34, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Don't get me wrong. I believe that she went to the school. I just don't believe a reliable source as yet confirms it. If you know of one, then either add it or send me a link to it and I'll add it. I've had a look and can't find any.. CalzGuy (talk) 07:35, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

You should reread the guidelines on reliable sources. The school's website claiming her as a former student is a perfectly reliable primary source for her attendance. As WP:RS saya, "specific facts may be taken from primary sources." There are only two primary sources for attendance: the school system, and the student. Any secondary source (and there are many of them in this case) is simply repeating information that originally came from one of those two primary sources. There's no scholarship, interpretation, or bias involved in this simple statement of fact, and the information is not contentious. There's no reason not to use the school as a source for attendance by a student.

I suppose a third party claiming personal knowledge of the person's attendance could be a third source of the information, but that doesn't strike me as a reliable source. Meters (talk) 16:48, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

WP:SELFSOURCE specifically says that they can be used but only "It does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities)" CalzGuy (talk) 21:50, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Really? You want to apply that to a school webpage stating that a particular student attended that school? I think many editors will disagree with you on that. Meters (talk) 21:53, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

It think this would fall under "It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply." Meters (talk) 22:06, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

So why is this an exception? Is this actress so important, or the school so important that the exception should be made? To me there is nothing particularly pressing about this case over hundreds thousands of similar ones? Why not just amend the guideline to fit? Because many editors will disagree with you if you tried? It's horses for courses. Notable Alumni sections are notoriously poorly sourced right across WP. There really isn't any harm in requiring good sourcing there. CalzGuy (talk) 08:10, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Did you read the part about "best treated with common sense"? In my opinion it is already adequately sourced, and common sense says that a school stating that a person attended their school is a sufficient source to show attendance. You're free to add another reference you consider better if you like. If you want to argue this any further please take it elsewhere, where other editors can respond. Meters (talk) 19:34, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

I have to say that allowing a school website to be used as a reliable source for anything meaningful about its relations with 3rd parties is certainly not common sense. It's extremely foolhardy. CalzGuy (talk) 23:56, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Read my last response. I'm not going to discuss this further on my page. Meters (talk) 01:57, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

OK. Sorry. Missed that. CalzGuy (talk) 07:02, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Re:The 'Other Account' (Maybe)

I spotted your comment over at Gamerdude2000's talk page. Coincidentally, I think I may have answered to your question you asked:

• By the way, since your account was created exactly 2 minutes before you made your first edit to the article in question today, perhaps you would like to tell us what other account or accounts you have used in the past, since you claim to have discussed things with admins before.

I'm not 100% on this, but I suspect that it could be User:NoahTheKingOfWikipedia. He was permablocked 3 days ago, and gemerdude appeared yesterday, but what caught my attention were the use of the term "banned" as opposed to blocked and the use of the term "troll" for veteran editors/admins, along with a short and combative contribution history. Right now, its all circumstantial, and since there'll be no further edits from either account it seems unlikely that we would accumulate enough evidence to take this to SSP, but for the sake of humoring a question I thought I'd offer an opinion. TomStar81 (Talk) 06:50, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I was not at all surprised when the account was indeff'ed. It had the definite smell of something from under the bridge. Meters (talk) 16:52, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Suwannee High School

I am trying to add material that showcases the accomplishments of a beloved teacher and mentor at our high school. He is given no credit on the page Ky362620 (talk) 18:15, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

I know what you are trying to do, but as I have already said in my edit summaries and on your talk page, your additions are unsourced, they are full of peacock terms, and we don't list non-notable staff members. Read the links I provided to you on what type of material goes into high school articles. Meters (talk) 18:53, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Editor's Barnstar
		For all your patience. People notice. Thank you! KDS4444 (talk) 12:57, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

User:KDS4444 Appreciated. There's no rush on that one. I keep hoping that the author will come back and add esome independent sources to bring it up to article class, but it's looking doubtful. Meters (talk) 17:54, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Green Mountain Anarchist Collective

User: Keith Richards 1871 Thanks for explaoning you POV. Those images truly do include a printed rejection of their copy rights. Perhaps I did not put the right 'clicks' into teh uploads. But again, I have them (in paper) right in front of me. Not sure how I can redo them right? However, I did add notes to all those images stating that they reject copy rights. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keith Richards 1871 (talk • contribs) 05:06, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Just go to the images and change the license you used. You cannot claim that you own the copyright and that they are your work just because there is no copyright on the images. I still suspect that Wikipedia cannot use the images since you say that they cannot be used for commercial purposes, and because from what I have been able to find the Collective not only does not apply copyright to their own material but they reject the use of copyright by other people so that the Collective can reuse material as they see fit. That means that we cannot be certain that the material really is copyright free. Meters (talk) 17:27, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Striking cmt about reuse since that was someone else reusing the Collective's material. Meters (talk) 18:36, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

I've requested deletion of the images since the licenses are invalid. Meters (talk) 23:41, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for the info regarding minor edits. The definition regarding Islamic extremism is taken from clarion project which is accused of inciting hate crimes against Muslims and has close likes to Israel. So, I used pro Muslim source to balance it. The article is mostly sourced to anti-Muslim websites which makes it highly biased.

Aou00000 (talk) 14:35, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Vestavia Hills High School

Same editor, different subject. Eyeballs please. John from Idegon (talk) 04:26, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I've been watching that. The cheerleading ref was deficient as it was (no year, no sanctioning body, no mention of whether this was local/regional/state/country, etc). The home site gave more info about the group, but I'm not convinced that this is really the national cheerleading body. It seems to me that this might be similar to the situation where I live (outside the US). A for profit group has pretty much taken over the cheerleading sport. They organize competitions, contract with schools to provide coaches, etc.

The claim of a national baseball championship is also not reliably sourced. An obit that claims a title is not a reliable source, but there may be something to it. I saw a similar claim for a national baseball championship on another school article. The ref was better in that case, but not sufficient to show that the team was actually a school team rather than a town team. If the editor can provide info on what group sanctioned this supposed national title we can evaluate whether the title should qualify, and look for a reliable source. Meters (talk) 19:50, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

He replied, I replied. It appears some unnamed source declared them a national champ based on their aggregation of rankings from various sources. I don't see that as a national championship. I proposed a what I think is a very reasonable alternative. John from Idegon (talk) 20:35, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Sorry. missed the talk page thread or I would have replied there. Your suggestion looks good. I'll cmt on the talk page. Meters (talk) 20:41, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Gorilla Sandwich

Hi, most of the reliable resources in the Gorilla Sandwich article were removed by an earlier editor. I restored it today as much as I could one of the links was blacklisted "beforeitsnews" so I couldn't use it as link. There are 3 citations from a Huffingtonpost editor that refer to the Gorilla Sandwich [3]. I don't know what happened to the Patent Silly blog but here is a blog that refers to it [4]Vonlandsberg (talk) 05:15, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Not interested. Your new ref is just another blog. I wasted enough time going through the existing references, none of which were worth anything. If you restored sources that had already been removed by another editor I assume that they were even worse than what was left. Obtaining a patent isn't notable. Being held up to ridicule as a ridiculous patent without any form of usefulness does not help. Meters (talk) 06:46, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Bancrofts School

Hi Meters,

You reverted the changes I made to the Bancrofts School Wikipedia page. If you could kindly put it back to the way I had it. The picture I removed which you put back in was in fact the incorrect crest of Bancroft's school and I replaced it with the correct one. I am the school historian and archivist and having worked at the school for 40 years can certify that the crest I uploaded is correct.

Thanks, Jdbrom00 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdbrom00 (talk • contribs) 18:30, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

User:Jdbrom00 I didn't remove your image. You deleted the existing image here without replacing it with anything. I simple restored the original image since the article had none. Looking at the page history, User:Zackmann08 had previously undone your change of images, and you then removed the original image again but did not restore your desired image. You should probably actually look at what effects your edits have on an article.

The file you were attempting to use is no longer on Wikipedia, so I assume it was deleted for some reason (my guess would be copyright or licensing issues) so there is no point in asking me to restore your image. If you have the right to give Wikipedia permission to use the image and don't know how I can help with that. By the way, since you work at the school you have a conflict of interest making edits to the school article. Please read and follow WP:COI. Meters (talk) 21:33, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Thread moved from unprotected talk page. Meters (talk) 21:20, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Jacque Fresco

Greetings, Meters!

Apparently User:Snakeinass is back, this time using Jondondonhehe; several posts of the same phrasing as before were added to the Jacque Fresco Talk page. I've undone them, and was going to open a Sockpuppet investigation, but the "how to" on that says to reference the sockmaster's account, and I'm not sure what that would be. You seem to have been dealing with this yoyo for a while; can I prevail on you to address this most recent sockpuppetry? If you don't have time, I'll try this weekend, but I have to get back to my actual paid job now LOL.

Best regards,

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 14:58, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I have to admit that I do not know the original master's account name either. This has been going on for so long that editors who recognize the edits just delete him on sight. That often happens with long term abusers. Meters (talk) 17:14, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Zounds. Makes me wish I had the resources to go after this character properly.

Thanks anyway,

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 20:19, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Explanation

The school has told us they would like for the article to be deleted. They have requested that I delete it. I don't personally know how to delete an article, but I am expected to and I am trying to do so. I am unsure how to request its deletion without inserting that tag at the top of the article, and the school, I believe, expects it down immediately. Nayakm (talk) 20:31, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm afraid Wikipedia does not care if the school wishes Plum Grove Junior High School be deleted. There are no obvious issues that justify a WP:PROD or a speedy deletion. As I've already told you on your talk page, the only venue left is to take the article to WP:AFD and attempt to convince th ecommunity that the article should be deleted. Note that arguing that the school wants the article deleted will get you nowhere. See WP:DELETE for valid deletion reasons. And if you continue to blank the article you will likely be blocked. Meters (talk) 20:37, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

I don't see any deletion reasons that match the circumstance. This has to be deleted or I, as well as the other contributors involved, can get into trouble. What should I do?I am sorry I am posting this twice, but I don't know if you'll look at my talk page.Nayakm (talk) 21:01, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Duplicate thread continued on user's talk page. No need to continue posting here. Meters (talk) 21:14, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Watertown, et al

I think I've taken care of all the overhead work on centralization at Watertown. Undecided on putting a notification at WT:WikiProject United States. Input? This could turn into a cluster. Armenians have a very strong sense of nationalism and actually view themselves as a race. If you want a hint as to what I mean just type Armenian into the archive search at ANI. I've got an IRL story of dealing with this. If you're interested I can email you. John from Idegon (talk) 01:26, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

John from Idegon Commented on the specific issue on the talk page. I expect this to get consensus fairly quickly, so it probably isn't necessary to list it at US wikiproject to deal with these specific edits; however, listing it there would get a wider audience and general consensus on transliterating US place names. I think it's worth doing for the bigger picture. Meters (talk) 02:59, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Royal Grammar School - Public Controversies

Hey,

I've edited your message on the talk page to include my responses, hopefully this will explain to you the changes I have made. I hope that we can therefor agree that adding the Maths paper section back in will be ok?

MattIPv4 (talk) 19:27, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Do not insert replies in the middle of someone's talk page posts. It makes it impossible to follow the threads. I will refactor your replies. I do not agree that the math section should be in. Per WP:BRD it shoulf remain out until consensus is reached on the talk page. I have removed it again. Meters (talk) 19:34, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, wasn't sure how I reply to posts, think I've got it now. Could you explain more clearly on the talk page why it shouldn't be added? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MattIPv4 (talk • contribs) 19:35, September 15, 2016 (UTC)

Just stop for a minute. I'm too busy fixing all your mistakes. Sign your posts, and stop spreading this discussion out over three different talk pages. Meters (talk) 19:37, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Fangusu LTA

After some thought, I have created a WP:LTA page for Fangusu: Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Fangusu. Since you're one of her favourite targets, I thought you might have some input. Cheers. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 01:01, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

I will definitely add my thoughts. Thanks. Meters (talk) 01:02, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Ivanvector Nice job. I can't think of anything you missed so far. If I do I'll add it. Meters (talk) 01:06, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Self-adhesive stamp

Hello Meter:

Thank you for reviewing my edit. I fully understadn that you need a good and independent source. I provided the reference of Avery Label Emplyee magazine. Than was deemed not independent. I then provided the reference to Form 10K SEC (which follows government thruthfullness in reporting guidelines). However that was also not accepted as independent. I have now provided a reference from Thhe University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology (UMIST) Journal entitled: "Journal of Chemical Proceedings", July 1988 which states: Alumni Shams Tabrez sucessfully developed a physical chemistry adsorption technique while working at Avery label in Azusa, CA (on assigment from MicKinsey and Company) a new epoxy formulation (with novel resins) applied to the backside of a postage stamp to allow immediate fixation and resistent to normal pressure, moisture and handling. Not sure what else can be provided. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bombay 1000 (talk • contribs) 15:52, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

No need to duplicate this topic on my talk page. Will respond in the thread already started on the article's talkpage, where the other editors involved will see it. Meters (talk) 17:49, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

A beer for you!

For allaying the confusion out there at the AfD. Nairspecht (talk) (work) 20:16, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Finnish and Polish palindromes

Hi Meters! Even the English readers should know something about foreign palindromes, I think. It's important to understand, that palindromes can be palindromes both spoken and written (while English is in that way pretty dyslexic). And can You show me a never-ending English palindrome? The article is Palindrome, not English palindrome, so carefully selected and very popular examples of other languages should be there. Tom of Finland is the best known Finn in the States, so the humour should not be forgotten. And when You watch the page view statistics, You see the people like to read something new. Risto hot sir (talk) 21:17, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Take it to the article's talk page Talk:Palindrome. Non-English examples have already been discussed there, and have been removed form the article multiple times. Or just write your material into the Finnish Wikipedia where is belongs. Meters (talk) 23:03, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

In fact, we've already discussed this on my page at User_talk:Meters#The_Longest_Palindrome_in_the_world. I told you then that I had made my comments on your talk page and that any further discussion should be on the article's talk page. Don't bring this up on my page again. Meters (talk) 23:07, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Wow....and I thought my obsession with the minutiae of railroading was obsessive. John from Idegon (talk) 02:20, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Yup, months of trying to add detailed info on Finnish palindromes to this article. Meters (talk) 17:28, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

I haven't written that "Longest palindrome" stuff. Risto hot sir (talk) 19:59, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

I didn't say you had. I said you had spent months trying to add Finnish material to this article, which you have. You are an WP:SPA on the subject of Finnish palindromes that has been active on this topic since June, and have made no article edits outside this one article other than to attempt to create and article about yourself and add links to that article. I suggest that you read WP:COI. And please stay off my talk page. This topic is under discussion on the article's talk page where it belongs. Meters (talk) 20:21, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daddy Issues

I got your message and I'd like to undo/delete my comment on that page for the reasons you cited. How do I do that? Can you do that for me? I apologize for sloppy editing and comments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwhelpton (talk • contribs) 06:15, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

No problem. I'll do it for you. Meters (talk) 06:20, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Why can't my comment, as well as your response, be completely deleted? Neither adds to the discussion and clearly I was in error. It seems punitive to leave it with the strikethrough for all to see. This does not seem to be in the spirit of Wikipedia and if it remains as is, I will have no interest in ever participating again, nor will I continue donating funds to support an enterprise with policies in place that punish a simple (and newbie) mistake with public embarrassment.Jwhelpton (talk) 15:32, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

It's not meant to be punitive or embarrassing. You asked me to strike it and I did. It's not at all uncommon for editors to strike AFD comments when they change their minds or realize they have made a mistake.

It's not appropriate to remove a comment that has already been responded to, especially in this case where your addition needs to remain so that other editors can assess if this is a case of an editor attempting to manipulate an AFD. A brand new account is created and opens an AFD minutes later. That's very odd. The new account was apparently opened solely for the purpose of opening this AFD, and the fact that the editor knew to open an AFD suggests that the editor has had at least limited prior experience editing Wikipedia. That's not in itself a problem. There are legitimate reasons this could happen.

A few hours later an editor with a grand total of one unrelated article edit and three unrelated talk page edits from more than three years ago appears and adds a totally spurious deletion rationale (an unsourced, irrelevant claim that that the band's name is a trademark/copyright violation) to the AFD. Also very odd. More suspiciously, the editor inserts his comment into the original poster's AFD rationale and does not sign the addition, making it appear that this may be an attempt to pad the original AFD reasons. After I refactor the new addition and point out that the new reasons are incorrect and invalid, the user blanks them twice, asks me to strike them, and then blanks them a third time after I have struck them at his request. This last time he also blanks my comments. This is more than odd. This material needs to remain ion the AFD so that other editors can decide for themselves if this is a case of !vote stacking by means of WP:sockpuppetry or WP:canvassing]]. Meters (talk) 17:07, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

And now you have come back and attempted to remove this posting from my talk page. Meters (talk) 17:08, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

I asked you to delete it completely, not strike it so that it is still visible to all. Seems I should have the right to delete my own comment. I have no idea what you are talking about with respect to a new account -- this is my account that I've had for some years and this was my first attempt at a comment/edit. As I said, I was clumsy and did not intend to step on anyone else's comments/edits. Again, I did NOT ask you to strike my comments/edits, I asked you to delete them! Haven't I the right to delete my own comments? I have no idea what you mean by sock puppetry, and I assure you that "vote stacking" is not involved here -- simply a misunderstanding, inappropriate comment (which you quickly pointed out) and clumsy attempts to undo everything I'd done and restore the page to the way it was before I made any attempts to edit/comment. I came back here because after 3-4 attempts hours ago, asking you to completely delete my edits/comment, there was no response. Clearly I got your attention by the only way I know how. Now, can we please just restore the page in question to its original state, deleting my comments completely? Jwhelpton (talk) 17:20, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

No. The strikeout is appropriate. Deleting it is not.

I can see your edit history. It is exactly what I listed above. Before this AFD issue you made one unrelated article edit more than three years ago, and three unrelated talk page edits more than three years ago. So which is it? Do you want to be treated as a newbie making mistakes as you asked above, or do you want to be treated as a Wikipedian with years of experience?

I'm done with this. Please stay off my page. You've blanked material from the AFD four times and from my talk page once. You're on your final warning. Leave it alone or an admin will be deciding if you should be blocked. Meters (talk) 17:30, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

One final question -- sincerely asked because I don't know -- why was the strikethough of my comment appropriate while deleting it wasn't. Can you point me to the policy/protocol/process where this is spelled out? I genuinely want to know why.Jwhelpton (talk) 22:08, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Why do you insist on spreading this out over multiple pages? You make personal attacks on me on your page, and then immediately post a polite request on my page? For the second time, stay off my page. I've spent enough time on this. I had already responded to your AFD comment. Deleting your comment removed the context for my response. See WP:REDACTED. Meters (talk) 22:28, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Bob.smith.69

Two questions

1. Did you go/work at Kenston High School?

2. If the previous question is no, why do you care about some random high school Wikipedia page? And why can't I added whatever I feel makes the page better myself?

Please answer or alert me in my talk page so I see the notification. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bob.smith.69 (talk • contribs) 00:20, October 10, 2016 (UTC)

User:Bob.smith.69

1. Please learn to sign your talk page posts, or at least don't delete the signature that signbot adds for you.
2. As the big blue box at the top of my talk page says, there's no need to start a new thread here about something that is already under discussion on your page. I posted there, and I'm watching there. Coming here to start a new thread and then asking me to go back to your page to tell you I've responded is even worse.
3. It is irrelevant whether I go to the school, and you are not allowed to ask other editors about personal information that might help identify them.
4. Read teh link I left on your talk page. That's why I left it. Your edit is against the high school article guideline. It's a WP:BLP issue to identify lower level staff by name, and a question of what is useful for people reading the article. The article is not written to inform people attending the school, but for general readers who might want to learn about the school. Thus information about lower level staff members (assistant principals, and the web master, in this case) is not included. If you wish to write whatever you want about your school without having to worry about Wikipedia's rules then I suggest that you do so elsewhere. There are places you can obtain free webspace. Meters (talk) 00:47, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Recent

I'm thinking in total that AfD for CRYSTAL might be the wa to go. Something strange about this one. The guy stopped editing for exactly one year and just started up again. Hmm. John from Idegon (talk) 07:25, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, which article is this? I thought I had a Crystal Springs school article on my watch list but I don't see it.

I'm packing it in for now, but I'll comment on the 3RR case if it has not already boomeranged by tomorrow. Meters (talk) 07:33, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

The article that is the subject there is the article I am speaking of. Sorry to be cryptic....it's way too late for me too. John from Idegon (talk) 07:39, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

I must have been more tired than I thought. It seems pretty obvious what you meant now, after a sleep. I initially thought that a WP:CRYSTAL AFD would not be appropriate on the basis of the $70 million in funding already arranged, but closer reading of the sources shows that this initiative may still fall through. The funding has been offered, but there isn't even a memorandum of understanding yet, let alone a legal contract, and one City Commissioner is against the idea, so it does seem to fall under CRYSTAL. It will be notable if it does happen, and we should know soon whether this initiative will continue, so I would suggest the userfication of this article until we know for certain, rather than outright deletion. Meters (talk) 18:53, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

On second thought (sorry, I don't have much experience with CRYSTAL cases) this may well qualify for an article as is. It depends on how we interpret "anticipated events" in " All articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred." The material is well sourced, and the plan will certainly be notable if it happens. Meters (talk) 19:04, 10 October 2016 (UTC)