User talk:Nagle/Archive 2014-02-12

Archive to 2014-02-12

October 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Rubashkin crime family, a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, you can place a {{hangon}} tag on the page, under the existing speedy deletion tag (please do not remove the speedy deletion tag), and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. brewcrewer (yada, yada) 04:40, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

That was inappropriate. I was starting an AfD, to contest the speedy deletion. See WP:AFD, "Process Interaction": "If it is doubtful whether a page is or is not speedily deletable, a deletion discussion takes precedence. In practice this means that a page that had a deletion discussion resulting in 'keep' or 'no consensus' should not be speedily deleted." --John Nagle (talk) 05:05, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Uh, no. You're removal was inappropriate. Per Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion, "The creator of a page may not remove a Speedy Delete tag from it" (bolding in original). --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 05:14, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

If John hadn't removed it, I would have, in short order. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 07:09, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Choosers of the Slain (John Ringo novel)

The article Choosers of the Slain (John Ringo novel) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

non-notable book

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the propos10-10-20ed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 04:25, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Israel Campus Roundtable

The article Israel Campus Roundtable has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not meet the general notability guideline. Tagged for notability concerns since August 2008.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Orangeroof (talk) 23:26, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Adllogo.jpg

⚠

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hugahoody (talk) 22:00, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Vivek Wadhwa

I have removed the prod template, but as I explained in my edit summary to the article, an AfD vote may be more appropriate - I'm not up to date on what the consensus is on notability. However, for your consideration, I'd note from my experience looking at Wikipedia bio articles that a CEO, news columnist or academic might have an article when they fall into one of those categories, while Wadhwa is prominent in all three. Harro5 09:26, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Kitten

Carolmooredc has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or kittynap their kitten with {{subst:Kittynap}}

Does Wikipedia connect to Farmville now, or what? --John Nagle (talk) 06:36, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Oink. Oink. :-) CarolMooreDC (talk) 03:36, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Response to My Talk Page and Question

Hi John, I'm responding to your welcome message from yesterday. Thank you for all of the information and bringing this possible COI issue to my attention. My intentions on Wikipedia are to provide additional biographical information that is properly sourced and neutral. A different editor posted that it would be beneficial to post new information to Talk: Lowell Milken so that someone el10-10-20se can review the information and post it instead of someone who is a representative of the person. I will be sure to do so from now on. I appreciate for your time and the well-sourced information you provided on Lowell Milken. My question is about the notice about improper and additional citations at the top of his page. Since there are currently no red highlighted citations, I'm not sure which ones are an issue and what specific information needs additional citation. If you are aware of this and would let me know, I'd be very appreciative. Much Thanks. Sarahkeen (talk) 19:35, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Billthegalacticherocover.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Billthegalacticherocover.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 11:29, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Bluestarprlogo.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:55, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

links on bitcoins

Why are you removing my links? --ThisIsNotReal (talk) 18:06, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Why are you not answering? I really dont see any problem! --ThisIsNotReal (talk) 16:03, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

See WP:SPS on blog links. --John Nagle (talk) 18:36, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Its build with Wordpress but its not a Blog, you even removed the forum link, why? --ThisIsNotReal (talk) 14:40, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Ghost (John Ringo novel) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ghost (John Ringo novel) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ghost (John Ringo novel) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. The Last Angry Man (talk) 22:23, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

ANI

Just so you'll know, I've brought a matter10-10-20 up at ANI here [1] and mentioned your name, feel free to comment. Dayewalker (talk) 23:21, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Questions to the parties on the Betacommand 3 arbitration case

Drafting arbitrator User:Kirill Lokshin has posted some questions to the parties. As you are either an involved party or have presented evidence in this case, your input is sollicited. For the Arbitration Committee --Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 13:49, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Cameralogo.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 01:20, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Apologies

I had no intentions of removing wikilinks,seems a technical error. I will reinsert the quote(it is supported by reliable source) once again without removing them.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 17:40, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Badwarelogo.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Badwarelogo.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sven Manguard Wha? 16:43, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Fixed that. See deletion discussion. --John Nagle (talk) 17:43, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Baudot code

I just replied to your comment on Talk:Baudot_code. -- 92.231.119.213 (talk) 04:38, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Reverts

Please don't revert constructive edits without any explanation. Gigs (talk) 15:04, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Teletype Model 33 typewheel vs. type cylinder

Hi John,

I just reconfirmed that all the Teletype Corporation literature calls this part a typewheel and not a type cylinder.

Check Teletype Corporation Bulletin 1184B pages 27 - 29 (figures 29 - 31) as an example... 73 Wa3frp (talk) 16:31, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

And just a nit regarding your edit comment: The *SR 32 and 33 were upper case only machines and did not support 96 different printable characters. You may be thinking of the 38. Jeh (talk) 19:08, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite Hello Nagle. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released. Please click HERE to participate. Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts. You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 02:31, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Removal of contact info at ANI

I've been away for a couple days, so wasn't able to participate in the discussion of Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Promotional_email_for_.22wiki-pr.com.22 when it started. It is well-established that we do not include contact information. I removed the contact information, and left an edit summary, but did not post about it, because I didn't see an obvious place to do it. However, I wanted to let you know, so we could discuss, here or there, if you disagree.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 13:41, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

There is no right of privacy associated with commercial spam, or with advertising in general. As for Wikipedia policy, it is not "well established that we do not include contact information". WP:OUTING only applies to the identities of Wikipedia editors. Here, no Wikipedia account was associated with the problem. It also says "There is no community consensus regarding the posting of private off-wiki correspondence." Such a proposal was made, but failed to achieve consensus. See Wikipedia:Private correspondence. Deletion of material in AN/I is generally inappropriate. Thanks. --John Nagle (talk) 16:39, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Battle Cry Campaign for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Battle Cry Campaign is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle Cry Campaign until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. GrapedApe (talk) 01:33, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Baudot_code#Gray.2BReference

Hello, I answered your message in Talk:Baudot_code#Gray.2BReference.

Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.75.160.141 (talk) 21:02, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Bigg Boss 6

On Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bigg Boss 6 you commented on the quality of the article's content. Therefore perhaps you would like to contribute to a discussion at Talk:Bigg Boss 6#Summaries concerning the quality and quantity of plot-related content. —Psychonaut (talk) 11:52, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Bitcoin as a Ponzi Scheme

Hi there. Please be advised proposals are being solicited for replacement text for the discussion you entered at Talk:Bitcoin#Fundamentals. prat (talk) 23:24, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

References to 'Hairmail' and Astroturf

Hello Nagle, I'd appreciate any help you can provide to remove the sentence about marketing Hairmail and Astroturf postcards at Line 50 of the Mail art page. Neither Vittore Baroni nor myself, the original authors of the article, (nor any other mailartists we've mentioned this too) know of these postcards, and the 'Range of Activities' section doesn't detail specific artworks, it's a general overview of the most common art forms used in Mail art. The sentence states that these postcards were 'marketed', but this would transgress one of Mail Art's oldest tenets, that 'Money and Mail-art don't mix' (Lon Spiegelman c.1980). Also, the associated Reference (9) is unavailable and cannot be verified without a paid Washington Post subscription. The addition of these examples does misrepresent Mail art by suggesting commercialism and by including two unknown or little-known examples. I would be very grateful for your help in removing the sentence. Keithbates51 (talk) 09:42, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

See Talk:Mail art for reply. --John Nagle (talk) 19:33, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Vivek Wadhwa

I'm not sure why you are being so aggressive about and to this BLP subject, but I'd recommend that you back away from it. It's unseemly and not the right way forward.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 18:58, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Please list the exact edits to Vivek Wadhwa to which you object and explain in detail your objections thereto. My last edit to this article was on 12 October 2012. Thanks. --John Nagle (talk) 21:50, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Editing Milken

John: A year ago, you added Milken's prisoner number to this biography page. As I read the previous edits from that time, a consensus among Wiki editors was reached that that information should indeed not be added, and it was removed. Now, a year later, you are again attempting to add this information, citing a reference that does not support the edit. Please explain your reasoning. Thank you. LarryWeisenberg (talk) 00:31, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Referred to WP:ANI re paid editing issue. --John Nagle (talk) 06:22, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Pontiac1961.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Pontiac1961.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:31, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Buick1961.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Buick1961.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:37, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Carnival Cruise Lines, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mahe (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:18, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Files missing description details

Dear uploader: The media files you uploaded as:

• File:German-sdkfz7.jpg
• File:Israelprojectlogo.jpg
• File:Stopbadwareyellowalert.png
• File:Pontiac1961.jpg
• File:Buick1961.jpg
• File:Woodruff1.png

are missing a description and/or other details on their image description pages. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the images, and they will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the images may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 01:22, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:German-sdkfz7.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:German-sdkfz7.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [email protected], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [email protected].

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:21, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Whenreligionbecomesevil.jpg)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 06:37, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

False alarm. Wikipedia database corrupted and misreporting backlinks. Reported to AN/I. John Nagle (talk) 19:23, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

November 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Moller M400 Skycar may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• included a ride in the M400X as the top gift of the campaign. The Moller crowdfunding campaign] is expected to end on January 4, 2014.<ref>{{cite news |

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:42, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Electronic Frontier Foundation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page EPIC (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Betacommand is back

Hello. I am contacting you because you are one of the editors/admins who is still active now, and was aware of the notoriously disruptive editor User:Betacommand, a.k.a User:Δ (Delta). As you probably know, he was eventually banned after a third arbitration case, due to the way he conducted himself in the pursuit of his main interest on Wikipedia, WP:NFCC enforcement.

What you may not know, is that he has evidently returned and has been editing as User:Werieth since 2012, in violation of that ban. After just a year, Werieth is already causing the same sort of disruption that Betacommand did - you may experience some deja vu by reading reports made about Werieth such as the one at the top of this AN archive. There are already several others. A quick perusal of Werieth's contributions will also reveal the same Betacommand-like self-assured approach, grounded in the belief that their edits are always "100% correct and 100% according to policy" (when the reality was that he made basic errors and pushed policy boundaries at a rate that, while acceptable in ordinary users for a time limited period, was found to be unacceptable in an editor with the edit rate and communication issues Betacommand had, especially given their inability to change)

I and others have already tried to expose his return via these sock puppet investigations, although as you can see, it's not getting far. That's not for the lack of an answerable case though - you can see the latest summary in this post. Most of the obstruction can be put down to the usual dysfunctional and counter-productive aspects of Wikipedia governance, which of course will always aid experienced WP:GAMErs like Betacommand.

But you may or may not be surprised to learn that the people obstructing this investigation the hardest are three admins whose own conflict of interest with regard to Betacommand/NFCC is best demonstrated in their own words - Black Kite (repeatedly deflects attention away from Werieth and onto accusers), Kww (blocks accusers, and has already unblocked Werieth once) and Future Perfect at Sunrise (has basically declared all out war on anyone who even whispers that Werieth might be Betacommand).

The purpose of this post is to raise awareness about his return, and hopefully persuade one or more of you to resubmit that SPI with the evidence I'm sure you will be able to compile using your own knowledge of Betacommand's characteristic traits. At the very least to prompt you to put his talk page on your watch lists and regularly review his contributions (although obviously, don't waste your time trying to deal with any issues you see on the flawed basis that he is just any old user).

Also obviously, you should also raise a red flag every time you see one of those three admins trying to further suppress the inevitable exposure of his ban evasion. If his return is to be covered up for an unnecessarily long time, it should at least be done simply through general incompetence, rather than obvious COI based abuse of the tools/trusted position of admin. A few emails to the arbcom members who dealt with Betacommand also probably wouldn't go amiss - if ordinary admins aren't bothered about this particular user's return (and you will remember, blinded by their enthusiasm for having someone, anyone, perform NFCC enforcement edits, a great many of them were unwilling to even admit his particular approach to that necessary work was a problem),

Betacommand's clandestine return to Wikipedia is bad enough as it is given that he has simply resumed where he left off in the NFCC enforcement field, with several users already having wasted a lot of time having to deal with him as if he were a legitimate user. But obviously the nightmare scenario if the cover-up is allowed to continue for another year, is if Werieth/Betacommand decides script assisted batch editing is not fast enough for his liking, and decides to take an altogether faster approach - possibly even trying to beat his "record". On the top and under the line (talk) 22:26, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Whomever Werieth (talk · contribs) is, they seem to be reasonably competent at what they're doing. I looked at their last 100 edits, and while they are rather bot-like, they don't seem to be wrong. John Nagle (talk) 01:28, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Swenzy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Black hat (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Truste

Hi John, you have removed some of my edits made to the Truste page stating they were pulled from a paper in Kazakh. Can you please explain. All content was checked for copyvio and external links were only to NY times. Belmond (talk) 04:07, 30 January 2014 (UTC)Belmond

Your edit: [2]. The link in the edit: [3]. From the link: "Guarding Online Privacy: Privacy Seals and Government Regulation Scenario, MADAN LAL BHASIN, Professor of Accounting, Department of Accounting & Finance, Bang College of Business, KIMEP University, Almaty, Republic of Kazakhstan". That's not the New York Times. It's a survey article on seals of approval. The text in the edit doesn't reflect the article. John Nagle (talk) 06:51, 30 January 2014 (UTC)