User talk:Orangemike/Archive 22

Archive 15

←

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

Please comment on Talk:Galata

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Galata. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 02:15, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Great edit summary

This is a great edit summary. I've not seen you around Indic caste articles before but, believe me, the contribution that you reverted there is fairly typical. And people wonder why occasionally I get frustrated. - Sitush (talk) 03:16, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Arsion

I don't understand how one can imply the relevance on the article, sure its easy when I am saying noy to delete because it says on the talk but how do you imply relevance on the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by GamingWithStatoke (talk • contribs) 20:26, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

We don't ask about "relevance"; we ask that you explain in what way this event was notable enough to be written up in an encyclopedia for the general reader (as opposed to a professional wrestling encyclopedia)? Was it written about in the non-sport press? Does it play a role in the history of the field, other than just another promotion? Why is it of specific interest or note? --Orange Mike | Talk 20:54, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Orangemike. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Edit filter/False positives/Reports.
Message added 20:30, 9 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- Cheers, Riley Huntley 20:30, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Thanks for your help at Wikipedia:Edit filter/False positives/Reports. -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 21:19, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Thompson article...Thanks for the comment

I am personally not a big fan of Moyers but meh. He has taken some particular heat on his ALEC piece. He is criticised for helping fund the campaign against ALEC and then "reporting" on ALEC. That is why I think his use as source is tainted in this case.

"The Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethic expressly states that journalists should avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived ; and that they should remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility, and, furthermore, that journalists should shun secondary employment, political involvement if they compromise journalistic integrity.

Moyers heads the Schumann Center for Media and Democracy, which has given away $1,360,000 to groups leading the attack on ALEC. That point was ignored in four stories written about ALEC on Moyers website in 2012, even though Moyers has been criticized for his connections in the past."

For what its worth. Capitalismojo (talk) 18:55, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Boy Scouts of America membership controversies

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Boy Scouts of America membership controversies. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 23:15, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Bob Corker - 2006 ad

Hi Orange Mike, I have responded to your message and to MastCell's question about the 2006 ad on the Bob Corker Talk page. Your further thoughts are welcome. Thanks. Mark from tn (talk) 19:50, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Just to add another reminder to the above comment, Mark has responded to you on the talk page. Silverseren^C 03:04, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Question on Images

I have a question on these two images. File:Galaxy Chart Explained.png and File:FY10_Federal_Budget_Galaxy_Chart.png should I remove the fair use rationale becuase I have just approved them under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 and GFDL license according to the OTRS ticket. Should I also remove the copyright notice on the files page? Thanks, --Clarkcj12 (talk) 15:06, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Galaxy Charts

I am inquiring as to the deletion of the page "Galaxy Chart". You said that it was a patent-pending concept, which is not a correct statement. Galaxy Charts can be produced by software that is patent pending (though it is available for free online), but this is not the only way. As one of your editors said about the images, anybody could create a galaxy chart using an image editor, Excel, PowerPoint, or even with a pencil and paper, without patent infringement. Though this software may be patent-pending, the concept is not patent-pending and therefore anybody can create a galaxy chart, provided that they do not use software such as this. The concept has been published/presented publicly several times and all of these presentations have encouraged the audience to make their own charts. The page was not intended to be an advertisement, for great care was taken to stick to the facts and tell what it is, similar to other pages on Wikipedia. Please clarify why the page was deleted. --Rnehring1 (talk) 16:56, 11 October 2012 (UTC)— Rnehring1 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

The "article" contained no verifiable references to substantial third party coverage of the concept in independent secondary reliable sources, apparently because there has never been any. It contained spamlinks to galaxycharts.com and technomics.com, and could not be interpreted as anything but an advertisement for these two websites and the company behind them: in other words, promotion. See WP:UPANDCOMING and WP:TOOSOON, as well as WP:MADEUP. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:05, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

It also contained a reference to a non-profit source, https://www.sceaonline.org/awards/bestpaper.cfm, who published a paper about it on this website, or found directly at: https://www.sceaonline.org/awards/papers/2012_MMT1_paper.pdf. This organization is an independent, verifiable, third party. How does this not qualify, or do I just need to reference things differently? Thanks! --Rnehring1 (talk) 17:27, 11 October 2012 (UTC)— Rnehring1 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

That was a single microscopic discussion about a presentation and paper on a new concept, which is what conferences like that are for; this does not even begin to approach resembling the requisite substantial coverage of the subject. Look: aside from your own promotional conflict of interest, this is a classic example of a subject that is not yet notable. It may or may not be notable someday; we don't have a crystal ball, and cannot predict; but that's okay: Wikipedia does not have a deadline to meet. The only urgency I perceive is at the Technomics end. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

As per usual, OrangeMike is correct, but I tried to offer a slightly softer explanation on your user page. Corporate 20:18, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Orangemike. You have new messages at Mariepr's talk page.
Message added NightSt✷r (talk) 08:44, 12 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Please comment on Talk:Ceviche

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ceviche. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 21:15, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Alben W. Barkley

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Alben W. Barkley. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:15, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

This page is enormous!

I think you've disabled the archiving bot for five months by applying full protection to User talk:Orangemike/Archive 20. Did you mean to do that? -- John of Reading (talk) 20:59, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Didn't know that protecting an archive would mess up the 'bot. Why on earth are archives not automatically protected or at least semi-protected, since the very sine qua non of an archive is that it is not to be messed with? --Orange Mike | Talk 21:08, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

There's a 2010 proposal here, but it was rejected quite firmly. -- John of Reading (talk) 06:16, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Orangemike. You have new messages at Superbearstudios's talk page.
Message added 22:46, 15 October 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Peridon (talk) 22:46, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Imbros

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Imbros. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:15, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Graham Morse

The block seems a bit harsh and a bit self-defeating. They clearly understand that they don't know their way around our protocols and are willing to ask and listen... the block means they need to clumsily resort to email to get in touch. --Dweller (talk) 13:17, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

She's here to promote her husband's book. I feel no burning need to make smooth the path of the spammer, even if the motivation is in part spousal devotion. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:22, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

I'd suggest she's here to clean up her dad's memory, which is a COI issue, but I can work with her or her husband on it - I have a fair amount of experience working on COI and with football articles. But it's not easy to do that if they're blocked. --Dweller (talk) 13:25, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, if you're willing and able to take her under your wing, I certainly won't object to your unblocking her long enough to facilitate a CHU! --Orange Mike | Talk 13:40, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey Mike

You and I need to be friends. Drop me an email sometime: [email protected]. —Tim //// Carrite (talk) 22:40, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Jason Shulman

I've been aware of that article's creator's activities for some time. I've not made a big deal out of it for two reasons:

• He's also created a lot of useful content. I've done a ton of spam work over the last few years; I've learned not to embarrass the occasional spammer or paid editor who's also a good content builder. I just blacklist their links (spammers) or tag their articles (paid editors). {{coi}} tags are really bad for repeat business based on what I've read on off-Wikipedia message boards. In this guy's case, he seems to have been doing less paid editing recently perhaps because I've been quietly tagging his stuff for quite awhile.
• Spammers and paid editors are quick to go to sock accounts when blocked. I like to keep my eye on them; I hate it when they go underground with new accounts. I've blacklisted hundreds of domains but blocked few spammers. Article tagging, deletions and link blacklisting hurt business and discourage them more than the sanctions we employ against other problematic editors.

I'm interested in figuring out ways to quietly identify and deal with our major paid editors. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 00:57, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

I assure you I am not "Zack of wikipediawriters.com." Faustus37 (talk) 03:52, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Ira_Cook

If you would have read the page instead of deleting it, you would have known why I did what I did. The page did not need to be deleted. A re-instatement would be appreciated. --ErikVKing (talk) 04:20, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

You yourself admitted that you were copying a copyright violation, in order to re-write it. Regardless of your good intentions, that copy was itself a copyright violation, which we cannot permit to be hosted on our servers. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:45, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Bubble Tree

I'd like to know what to fix on my deleted article "Bubble Tree". Please let me know exactly what to fix so I can correct it and get the article back. Thank you so much!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Shanekim2 (talk • contribs) — Shanekim2 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

By your own admission (" this "Bubble Tree" article is crucial for my company"), this advert was for a company you work for.

1) we don't permit ads here;

2) we don't take kindly to blatant conflicts of interest. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:59, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Picture on Twitter

Thank you for answering my question on the Help desk. The picture was released by a Canadian actor on his Twitter without naming a license. What comes about in such cases? Thank you!. Iowafromiowa (talk) 10:41, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

The actor does not have the legal right to waive copyright; only the photographer can do that. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:43, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Three Kingdoms

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Three Kingdoms. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 14:15, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Control over pictures submitted

Hello Mike,

I've given images to Wikipedia in the past but not until after reading numerous pages on the subject of how the giver can control or lose control of how his work is used. Some of it applies to me and some does not. Here is my question:

I'd like some control over my images. Something other than simply turning my work over to Wikipedia and having anyone benefit financially from the sale or use of that image. As a minimum I'd like to be given credit as the photographer of such images. How can this be done?

---

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dikjenkins1 (talk • contribs) 17:03, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

There's a template for just that purpose, which tags the image with, "The copyright holder of this file, Full name, allows anyone to use it for any purpose, provided that the copyright holder is properly attributed. Redistribution, derivative work, commercial use, and all other use is permitted." Would that suit your purpose? (I'm afraid the "[r]edistribution, derivative work, commercial use, and all other use is permitted" part is not optional.) --Orange Mike | Talk 17:21, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

My userboxen are a pathetic mess

Somebody cleaned them up once before, but this gibberish is worse than CSS code. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:24, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Is this what you're going for? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:31, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanx, but I was hoping for something more boring and tidy, in neat little rows of four or five

♠♣♥♦

¢$£¥

♠♣♥♦

¢$£¥

♠♣♥♦

¢$£¥

♠♣♥♦

¢$£¥

like that. I know it takes somebody more skilled in tabular coding than I.--Orange Mike | Talk 19:40, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, you do have exactly 40, so 10 rows of four would fit nicely. How about now? EDIT: just FYI: rows of five don't quite fit horizontally. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:48, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

The current 20 pairs is better than before, although the one off-sized box should probably go at the end of a column AND a row. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:54, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

*facepalm* Serves me right for trying to organize things with images turned off. Lemme do some shuffling and see if I can align them better; I take it they're not in any particular order or pairings? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:09, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

The current order is nice enough, but don't sweat it if you need to shuffle some, as long as the Quaker one and "read SF" are near the top. Buffy and GWB are not major current obsessions. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:14, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Okay, check it out. I may have taken some liberties with shuffling things around... :P Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:55, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

As long as I set my teeny tiny screen to display teeny tiny print, they marshall themselves marvelously. Thanks a thousandfold!

maria sachs profile

Hi Orangemike, still learning proper wiki protocol so apologize in advance if I'm making any mistakes. COI alert- I am the daughter of the above mentioned candidate. I have added additional information to the talk page on the profile- as I believe based on the politically-motivated charges the 'ethics violation" chapter on her basic profile needs to be removed. Several other Democrats running for state senate in Florida also have had "ethics violations' charges filed against them this week as it is a strategic move based on the other party. Furthermore, an allegation is not yet an official charge by the court of law, so it is not relevant to her basic profile to include details of a charge conveniently filed this week (it's a standard modus operandi for political parties to do this). With the principles of wikipedia in mind, I believe it best to bring in more senior wiki editors to review the profile rather than modify it myself. Appreciate your guidance.Bambola1242 (talk) 12:17, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Update from my earlier comment: If you review the 'talk' page on the candidate's profile, you will see a user writing: " I understand you want to scrub facts that make your candidate look bad, but just because you don't like bad things about your candidate, doesn't mean it's not true. More information of criminal activity is coming out daily. After the election, it will all back back. Stay tuned..." Could I ask a senior editor to review the profile as it is now being used as a platform for non-neutral, unbiased comments? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bambola1242 (talk • contribs) 12:27, 19 October 2012 (UTC) Hi OrangeMike am awaiting guidance and am looking through the NPOV rules in the meantime. Bambola1242 (talk) 17:07, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

To a self-promoted Deletionist

Take a look at your own wikipage, Orange Mike, for real evidence of lack of reliable sources, shameless self-promotion and lack of substantial coverage. Looks like ex-wikipedian Fastily has been replaced by another common deletionist.

An author using 3rd party references to write an article should not make it valid for deletion. It is only your less-then-humble opinion.

add925— Preceding unsigned comment added by Add925 (talk • contribs)

My userpage is by definition there to tell other Wikipedians who I am and what my positions and beliefs are. I feel it does that, with a proper level of humility and self-mockery. Your views may differ. As to self-aggrandizement and spamming Wikipedia: see our guidance on autobiography and on conflict of interest. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:33, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Unblock on hold

Hello, Mike. Usually, I am one of the more intolerant admins when it comes to anything that looks like a spamusername case. However, in the case of the unblock request at User talk:Superbearstudios, I am inclined to unblock. I can see from your comments on the user page that you are not very sympathetic to the idea of an unblock, but apart from one use of questionable language ("world famous") the edits have been purely factual corrections, and the editor does not really seem to be a spammer. At the worst, it would be a WP:ROPE unblock, followed by a quick reblock if necessary. Any thoughts? JamesBWatson (talk) 17:15, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

If you're willing to watch the guy, I won't whine; but he is really obsessed with polishing the place of his beloved studio in rock history, and I'm rather pessimistic about the results. Just keep him on a short rein re: WP:V and WP:RS, because he's the sort of nostalgic old-timer who gets whiny about what he knows, as opposed to what he can document (not that I'm not the same way myself, in private life). --Orange Mike | Talk 18:14, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

And the first step has to be a change of username. Not all promotion is sales; some is just polishing one's placeholders in history. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:15, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Electronic toll collection

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Electronic toll collection. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 12:15, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Edward C. Wall

Hi-here is a new article about Edward C. Wall. He served in the Wisconsin Assembly and was a "hard money" Democrat. You may want to take a look at it-thanks-RFD (talk) 22:50, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Colombian armed conflict (1964–present)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Colombian armed conflict (1964–present). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Page delete

Hi OrangeMike As the subject of the article I would like to request that the page Tom Hatton (actor) be deleted. The warnings on the page suggest that the article does not help Wikipedia and the warnings are detrimental to me. I am able to be contacted via skype to validate my identity. Please could you advise, Thanks Tom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cinematicwl (talk • contribs) 19:24, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Request

Hi OrangeMike As the subject of the article I would like to request that the page Tom Hatton (actor) be deleted. The warnings on the page suggest that the article does not help Wikipedia and the warnings are detrimental to me. I am able to be contacted via skype to validate my identity. Please could you advise, Thanks Tom Cinematicwl (talk) 04:51, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Slaughter and May

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Slaughter and May. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 07:15, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Democrat majority

re: Democrat majority – thanks, I would have submitted it at "redirects for discussion", but that's too much of a time-consuming bother and hassle. I don't have your powers ;) Wbm1058 (talk) 18:45, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

How about this one too: Democrat Party Controversy – thanks, Wbm1058 (talk) 18:54, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

POLL

"What is better? Ice cream, cookies, or brownies?"

(You can vote at my talk page under- POLL. Put your answer next to the bullet points. The votes will add up!) Looking forward to your answer! OH YEAH- I read your user page, and I 100% agree on what you think should not be in Wikipedia. You are probably a magnificent Wikipedian! Remember- don't forget to vote! DEIDRA C. (talk) 21:14, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Jay Paul Gumm

Hi-would you please take a look at the Jay Paul Gumm article. Gumm served in the Oklahoma Senate. The article was badly written with no citations and lots of fluff. I added 2 citations and cut most of the fluff away but it still needs work-many thanks-RFD (talk) 01:01, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Channel lineups AFD

Hello, Mike. I am contacting you because you recently left a comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of channels on Sky. I have just created another AfD, which also looks at articles with lists of channels. If you are interested, you can leave a comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/3rd bundle of channel lineups. Thanks. -- Wikipedical (talk) 03:09, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Keep up the good work. Wisconsin love!

Jamo58 (talk) 03:22, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Query about deletion

Hello, Mike. I have to disagree with you about your deletion of User:Swm-web as "Unambiguous advertising or promotion". The page did not look remotely promotional to me. In fact on the contrary I saw it as a perfectly proper declaration of a possible conflict of interest, and an undertaking to edit only in ways where that conflict of interest will not cause problems. It seems to me that that is exactly the sort of declaration that we should welcome, the more so if the user takes up your invitation to change to a new username not related to their company, as it will make the conflict of interest less visible. My inclination is to undelete the user page, but I thought it better to invite you to comment first, rather than acting unilaterally. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:23, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

If it had been a single person, I would concur with you unhesitatingly (which is why I switched the block to a softerblock). However: this account explictly declared that it was being shared by more than one person: something we forbid as a matter of policy, for copyright reasons among others. Like I said: if individual SWM people want to do this kind of thing, that's fine; but not a group. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:56, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes. I missed the point that it stated it was a shared account. Thanks. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:23, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

You will notice, though, that I restored it, then re-deleted it with a more specific and hand-crafted explanation as to why it could not stand. Thanks for the concern. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:25, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

MLPFIM fandom page move

I reverted your move on two accounts: first, while "brony" is the most common name, there are fans that don't associate themselves with that title, as well as other titles like "pegasister", so it would be improper to move it in that fashion. Secondly, the page is not just about bronies but all parts of the fans, and subsequently the reaction from Hasbro et al. to the praise they get from said fans. Yes, 90%+ are probably called "bronies" but it's not all of them and would be inaccurate to say so via putting the page at that location. --MASEM (t) 21:18, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

But isn't that violative of WP:COMMONNAME? --Orange Mike | Talk 21:20, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

It is inaccurate to say that every fan of MLPFIM is a brony, which is what that title would imply with the content of the article as is. As such, COMMONNAME wouldn't apply since the two sets aren't equal in meaning. --MASEM (t) 22:22, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

It is my understanding that "pegasisters", for example, readily acknowledge that they are a sub-set of "bronies". --Orange Mike | Talk 23:42, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Burma

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Burma. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 05:15, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest

Hi, thanks for your comment on my talk page, but can you be more specific re the article I'm developing at User:MartinMartin226/BrHa? I thought I've excercised great caution. I am not affiliated or close to the subject, and feel he is clearly Wikipedia-worthy. What problems do you see? Thanks! MartinMartin226 (talk) 19:17, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

There's a bit too much of the "once was on the same stage with Big Name Star" stuff. There is an item sourced to a press release from the school where he would be teaching a class (schools always want you to think they are giving you a chance to study at the right hand of RockGod). There are formatting problems and such, but those are trivial. A lot of your articles just read (to me) like they were written from press releases issued by the subject, although in honesty I must admit that this one is not as bad as, say, Julie Spira. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:48, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Orangemike, that's really helpful. I'll revise this article. MartinMartin226 (talk) 20:01, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

I've done some revising; if you get a moment, I'd sure appreciate your taking another look at it (User:MartinMartin226/BrHa). Thank you!! MartinMartin226 (talk) 00:00, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Taken to User talk:MartinMartin226/BrHa, where it belongs. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:48, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you!! MartinMartin226 (talk) 12:19, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

User:Alexhernandezlaw

Role account? Thumbs up or down? - Dank (push to talk) 01:21, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

alexhernandezlaw dot com is the name of his website, so that's a role account. This is also at least twice now that he's used this account to creaqe an autobiography/advertisement for himself. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:32, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks much. I created and popularized Template:Uw-softerblock about 4 years ago, but the message has grown and sprouted all sorts of links, so I've just created a new message. I want to start with Template:Uw-softestblock, and then fight like hell to keep people from adding words and links, unless we absolutely, positively need the extra words or links ... based on my experience 4 years ago and recent research by the WMF into effective warning messages. Thoughts? What does it need? - Dank (push to talk) 01:42, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Richard Mourdock pregnancy from rape Is 'something god intended' controversy

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Richard Mourdock pregnancy from rape Is 'something god intended' controversy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 02:15, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Psyborg Corp

Hi, this article is being discussed for deletion. Since you have contributed to it you may be interested in taking part to the discussion. ZipoBibrok5x10^8 (talk) 19:15, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2011

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:2011. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 00:15, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

I am back

Bow before me Pissant as I can change my IP as fast as you can block me. My war with you Alexf and Vsmith show now increase to all out carnage in Wikipedia. Unless you say Sorry! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.135.145.3 (talk) 13:11, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Ways to improve Solomon Nason

Hi, I'm Alpedio. Orangemike, thanks for creating Solomon Nason!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. About the footnote issue: You should have footnotes on any date, to verify its accuracy...

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. —Preceding undated comment added 18:58, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Your tool is busted; only one of those tags was accurate. AND: you didn't sign your post! --Orange Mike | Talk 19:03, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Many thanks Mike for adding to the Nasonville and Lindsey, Wisconsin articles. I had been starting unincorporated communities articles and was hoping people would added to the article about history, notable people, historical sites, etc.-Again my thanks-RFD (talk) 20:01, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Any time you do one of those, would you be sure to wikilink Town and Village, to reflect the peculiar meanings those have in Wisconsin law? (Also, see my note on your talk page about the lost hamlet of Maple Works. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:05, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:RT (TV network)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:RT (TV network). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 21:15, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

User:Timattimgilbertdotcom

Upon investigation, the spamusernameblock reason for blocking Timattimgilbertdotcom (talk · contribs) doesn't seem quite right. The username is inappropriate, yes, but his only edit was an attempt to be constructive, and did not try to promote his website, but rather added a link similar to several other related links in a list (the fact that it's a linkfarm and therefore inappropriate wouldn't necessarily be known by a new user). I'm thinking this is more of a pure username block rather than a spam+username block. Since you're the blocking admin, are you OK with unblocking? ~Amatulić (talk) 23:21, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

You didn't look closely enough at it. Not only is the username promotional of his website, where he is advertising for customers, but his sole edit was an effort to advertise Aeromega helicopter school, the very company at the very airport where he teaches classes, as advertised at... you guessed it... timgilbert dot com! --Orange Mike | Talk 01:19, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Ah. Yes, you're right. Kind of indirect spamming. ~Amatulić (talk) 01:41, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Maple Works, Wisconsin

Hi-I started Maple Works, Wisconsin-RFD (talk) 12:21, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Image issue

Hello Orangemike, I think you have a grasp of process around copyright and images and might be able to help us. A novice editor recently uploaded File:Virchand_Gandhi_Sign.jpg. Since it originated at e-bay, we cannot validate the the authenticity and so it should probably be removed. And I think while the signature itself from the late 1800's would be in the public domain, the particular image probably is probably under the copyright of the e-bay vendor? Your guidance is appreciated. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:45, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Seems to me that a photograph of a two-dimensional object does not get copyright, since there is no creative element to the reproduction; that's my understanding of the law involved (but IANAL). Thus, since the author (V.G. himself) has been dead long enough, I'd say it's PD. (But the authenticity issue is entirely separate, of course.) --Orange Mike | Talk 23:54, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! The user has also requested a review of other images they have added to the article, Talk:Virchand_Gandhi would you care to take a peek? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:19, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your help regarding image uploaded by me. Still authenticity is an issue but I will try finding better source. --Nizil (talk) 10:19, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

RE:BEEBUG

Hello, Orangemike. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BEEBUG.
Message added -- Trevj (talk) 22:56, 1 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Please comment on Talk:Hurricane Sandy

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Hurricane Sandy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:15, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

User:Jonfoerster

Was it actually necessary to block Jonfoerster (talk · contribs)? He ceased making the legal threats after I had warned him that this is a ground for blocking on Wikipedia; plus, the issue seems to be resolved since the article has been deleted. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 00:04, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

In fairness, the block and the deletion happened concurrently. I deleted the article while Orangemike was blocking the account. The threat contained wording that it's retracted if the article is deleted, and the block message suggests the same, so I think it's probably fair to unblock the account. However, I'd prefer to wait for a response, such as an unblock request. ~Amatulić (talk) 02:34, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm good with that, Amatulić, as long as it's made clear that the unblock is done in spite of the legal threats, not because of them. --Orange Mike | Talk 04:49, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Miss World MFD

The sandbox page you nominated for deletion User:MWMainPage/subpage1964 was only the last one they created. see the nav box at the bottom for the other blue linked articles. add them all to the MfD? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 05:53, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

I'd say yes, but don't know any quick-and-dirty way to do so (I'm leaving for a party soon). --Orange Mike | Talk 05:55, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Syrian civil war

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Syrian civil war. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:15, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Your change to Robert Blake page

hello mikeorange. I placed this here because I assume this is how the TALK link works (not sure). Your outrageous assumption that I was being disruptive and soap-boxing is based on what? your experience at reading minds? I stumbled across and watched the Robert Blake interview on TV after not hearing about him for many years, went to PBS to watch it again because it was packed with landmarks in his life, and wrote down exact quotes out of Robert's mouth (including slang talk, PBS does not own copyright to his quotes), and found them to be very insightful into HIS character, HIS life, and HIS beliefs, not mine. Is this not appropriate? WIKI is not a cool place. I have never met the man, do not particularly like or dislike him, nor can I afford to buy his first book. Why should people waste time adding information about critical junctures in an man's life if it just going to be deleted the next day by an expert mind reader as "disruptive." Next time give a specific valid reason for deletion that took time to assemble, confirm, and post, WIKI has thousands of specific rules, use them accurately. Disruptive? If I violated copyright, say so and we can fix it, if it is opinionated say so and we can fix it. You wiped out a major event of this actor's history on WIKI. Why. Is it poorly written? I can fix that too with your help. But I am done with WIKI and its motive experts that make threats to permanently block newbies for trying to help the WIKI project. Uncool dude. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.184.98.149 (talk) 04:24, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

This is exactly how talk pages work; I've replied on yours. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:00, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 14:15, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

List of Net channels AFD

Hiya, Mike. I am contacting you because you recently left a comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/3rd bundle of channel lineups. I have just created another AfD, nominating List of Net channels for deletion. If you are interested, you can leave a comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Net channels. Thanks. -- Wikipedical (talk) 03:19, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

• Hi. If interested, see also a new AfD, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of StarHub TV and mio TV channels. Thanks. -- Wikipedical (talk) 18:49, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Line of succession to the British throne

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Line of succession to the British throne. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 12:15, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Patricia Spafford Smith

Hi-I started an article about Stephen J. Smith (Wisconsin politician) who defeated Roger Rivard in the Wisconsin State Assembly. During my research I found out his mother Patricia Spafford Smith also served in the Assembly. Therefore in order to start the Stephen Smith article I had to start the article about his mother first. This made researching and writing easy. Finding the information was easy. How are you doing?RFD (talk) 21:01, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

I'll see if I can add some more on the Smiths. I'm supposed to be cleaning my house on my day off right now.

Obviously, I wish the legislative and Congressional races in Wisconsin had been more productive; but it was nice seeing Mr. "girls rape easy" go down in flames along with his colleagues the "legitimate rape" guy and the "God wants you to have your rapist's baby" man. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:13, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

I had work on the Amy Sue Vruwink article; Vruwink barely made it-the election was close. Sooner or later I will have my fill of politicians articles and will go back to unincorporated communities articles and possibility Roman Catholic bishops-RFD (talk) 02:42, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

/Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Hilda_hutton/Janice_Murillo

Thanks, Mike. I know I'm slow on areas I don't visit often, but I was in the process of creating the deletion discussion. - Karenjc 00:08, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Horace Rublee

Hi-I came across an article about Horace Rublee. He was involved with the Republican Party and the Greenback movement. You may want to look at the article-many thanks-RFD (talk) 02:32, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

He was involved in quelling the Greenbacks; he was not one himself. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:50, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your helpful contribution to Freedom for the Thought That We Hate, much appreciated. :) If you're interested in that sort of subject matter, perhaps you'd like to join WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech? Thanks again, — Cirt (talk) 04:44, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Great Big Pile of Leaves

Hey Mike-- I found some possible sources for the AfD above. Could you comment on whether you think they would sufficiently support the notability of the band? I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 07:26, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Vistaprint

Hey Mike - I understand the edits that you reverted and looking at them can see the language that you see as advertorial. One thing I wanted to change on the page pertained to the Rewards section. The lawsuit was dismissed and we consolidated the text to the page including links to the judge's decision. I'd like to resubmit those changes, but don't want to be banned as per your last note.

The changes are not meant to change the tone, merely bring the article to a finite point in that section as opposed to having a run-around section.

Let me know what you think.

Thanks.

Jaykeith29 (talk) 17:14, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Same as always: take it up on the talk page of the article, and don't touch it yourself. Just because the lawsuit was dismissed doesn't mean that what this company does is legitimate. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:21, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Mordor revert?

Hi! this revert is of a link to a travel website that contains a page that treats Mordor as though it were a real place (even comparing/linking it to Brussels, Belgium). Is there a reason you find that not appropriate, even as an external link on the WP Mordor page?--IBobi (talk) 00:17, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Because we're an encyclopedia, not a collection of humorous weblinks. This link grossly failed to pass WP:EL. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:19, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. It's a humorous link directly relevant to the page. It's not a link to "yo momma so fat" jokes. What does it fail to pass in terms of that link guidelines page?--IBobi (talk) 00:22, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

"acceptable links include those that contain further research that is accurate and on-topic, information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail, or other meaningful, relevant content.... No page should be linked from a Wikipedia article unless its inclusion is justifiable according to this guideline and common sense. The burden of providing this justification is on the person who wants to include an external link." --Orange Mike | Talk 00:24, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

"...or other meaningful, relevant content." Seems pretty open to interpretation to me, no?--IBobi (talk) 00:30, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

No. Humor about an article subject does not constitute "meaningful, relevant content"; it's just somebody's idea of a joke. If you seriously disagree with me, take it up on the talk page of the article. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:35, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Houla massacre

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Houla massacre. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:19, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Martin van Buren

...was the first president born a US citizen rather than a British subject, thus the first to not need "citizen at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution" to be a legitimate presidential candidate.

And Barack Obama is the most recent president to be born a US citizen. Billyd12's conclusion is still completely bogus.--NapoliRoma (talk) 22:46, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:War on Women

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:War on Women. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 06:29, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

TTV

The new edits are up. Before you read this read the TTV talk page so you know what the context is.
1) Added citation for Cumming's investigation
2) Stated in first sentence that the group has been called TP affiliated while not self-identifying as such
3) Removed section on "purging" African American voters which was sourced to a single opinion piece. The claim that they purged minority voters is definitively a crime on several levels of government and the charge needs to be more substantiated then with a single source. Anything less then a very high level of documentation for such a charge is partisan and not neutral.
Again if you disagree with edits please remove/alter them one at a time, rather then reverting the entire head section.
Yours, 129.81.89.224 (talk) 23:24, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Crown of Castile

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Crown of Castile. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 04:15, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for helping a newbie

Hey Orangemike. I just wanted to thank you for bringing my attention to needed links in Black Man's Burden. I also added the same links in Border, Breed nor Birth. I'm just getting my feet wet on article editing, so all help is much appreciated!
Drx (talk) 21:59, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I appreciate your work on these. The only problem is that in your enthusiasm, you overlinked. When a name or term occurs repeatedly in an article, we should not wikilink its every appearance; so Tamanrasset and "El Hassan" should not have been wikilinked over and over in the article, causing what we call the "sea of blue" effect. Just link them at their first appearance in the article. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:43, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Will do. Makes sense. And less work for me! :-) Drx (talk) 14:13, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Orangemike. You have new messages at Mugginsx's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Please comment on Talk:Astroturfing

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Astroturfing. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 01:15, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Orangemike. You have new messages at Mugginsx's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

illegal immigrants

You're funny Mike! Thanks for the help! Will fix my errors. Mugginsx (talk) 15:40, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

Hello Orange Mike, I am writing to you in regards to the many problems I have been having on the article: "DPT Labs". First of I would like to thank you for taking the time to look into the matter, but I have a number of questions that maybe you can help answer. Just to refresh: you stated "Non-notable obscure corporation; we don't even have an article for its parent company, DFB Pharmaceuticals. Orange Mike | Talk 21:40, 9 November 2012 (UTC)". Currently DPT Labs has been acquired by Renaissance Acquisition Holding Company which is mentioned in the most current citation on DPT Lab's Wikipedia page. Since they acquired DFB, it is no longer the parent company. With the understanding that there is insufficient information pertaining to DFB: the previous parent company, is it necessary to include an article on a parent company if there is one? If this is the case should we include more information on the DPT article about Renaissance Acquisition Holding Company? Lastly, I do believe the nomination for deletion was brought back to the surface due to my concern on the warning regarding the insufficient inline citations. Since the nomination was voted "keep" Is this still a factor in the deletion nomination or is all settled? If so when can I see these boxes at the top of the page disappear. I appreciate your help Orange Mike; looking forward to your response and enjoy the Baklava! -Roman Sukharenko (Strategic Domain) Sdjeremy (talk) 15:54, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I mention the parent company because if a company is so small that even the bigger company it belongs to doesn't have an article, this is an indicator that possibly the subsidiary is just not that notable. "Acquisition Holding Company" means it's a shell corporation set up to facilitate the transaction, and will soon be dissolved/merged out of existence, so will never be notable.

Those tags should be removed only if and when the issues they spotlight are addressed. All our articles are works in progress, in need of improvement: these are pointers to where the work is needed most.

I'm always up for a nice baklava. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:34, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I would like to clarify the reference to Renaissance Acquisition Holding. Our client is not a “shell company”. Their corporate plan is to continue to acquire companies and brands within the pharmaceutical industry with goal of integrating these businesses while creating greater efficiency. Renaissance Acquisition Holding does not intend to dissolve or merge the company out of existence. The company is run by very accomplished and distinguished pharmaceutical executives who have the experience and expertise to build a successful business venture. Separately but related, who should I be speaking to for further clarification on the inline citation warning and the nomination for deletion? Thank you, glad you enjoyed the Baklava. -Roman Sukharenko (Strategic Domain) Sdjeremy (talk) 12:44, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

The discussion is taking place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DPT Labs (2nd nomination).

You say "Our client": have you fully disclosed your conflict of interest in this and related matters?? --Orange Mike | Talk 18:36, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Produsage

I rewrote the article as promised. I hope it makes some sense, and the notability is quite clear (lots of academic source use this term nowadays). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 22:29, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Dank#Promotional edits

Your thoughts are welcome, here or there. You always know stuff that I don't. - Dank (push to talk) 01:16, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Patrick Murphy (Florida politician)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Patrick Murphy (Florida politician). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 22:15, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Wisconsin State Legislature

Hi-I started articles for the new members of the Wisconsin Legislature. Thank you for starting articles on the candidates who had no opposition and won by default-it made it easier. One more thing-I will be away this coming week-a family wedding in Virginia-Thank youRFD (talk) 01:41, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:History of Hungary

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:History of Hungary. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:15, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

BrecksLFC

You blocked this user sometime back on username grounds, and he is requesting unblock, saying that he's merely a huge fan of Liverpool F.C..

I have never thought we should block people who incorporate the names of sports teams into their names, especially if (like this user) they aren't making edits to the article(s) about the team or anything related to it. Also, it's not immediately obvious to everyone what the LFC stands for, and I think using his last name distinguishes him enough from the organization (á la Mark at Alcoa). So I would support an unblock, perhaps with the proviso that he make clear on his userpage that he is not formally connected to the club. Your thoughts? Daniel Case (talk) 16:12, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

IF, as you say, he's not making edits to the team account, I'd go along with that. (I used to be a bit more aggressive with those.) --Orange Mike | Talk 16:47, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

I think you were hasty

...in blocking Drjoven (talk · contribs). First, the legal-threat block on the IP address expired two months ago, so "block evasion" isn't a valid reason because there's no block to evade. You should correct that, because this new account has done nothing to warrant a block.

Second, as I wrote on Talk:Robert O. Young, if it's indeed the same person (which I suspect), he's obviously exhausted his options (vandalism, legal threat, attempt at AFD), and is now finally trying to work with the community. For that purpose he should be welcomed, not blocked. I was actually looking forward to engaging him in a debate on the talk page. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:53, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Corrected. Thanks for drawing that one to my attention; but I doubt you will be able to make any sense out of this crackpot's theories. (And his grammar, spelling, etc. are pretty pathetic for somebody claiming to be a doctor!) --Orange Mike | Talk 13:37, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

You're probably right, but for now he's commenting on article content, which is fine. ~Amatulić (talk) 16:03, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

António Damásio

Hi there Orangemike. I just stumbled over António Damásio while patrolling CAT:EP, and it looks like you added pending changes protection to it at the same time as fully protecting it back in August. I'm assuming this was a mistake, but I thought I'd check with you rather than just removing the pending changes protection. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 13:28, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

"do not use on articles per RFC result" - not sure how that one snuck through on me. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:35, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:United States

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:United States. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Joel C. Rosenberg

You know what, I just scrubbed that entire section on his "predictions". Ace-o-aces (talk) 14:29, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Joan Crawford

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Joan Crawford. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:15, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

block of political blogger User:Boriswatch

Hi. I noticed that you blocked political blogger User:Boriswatch today, apparently on promotional/spam grounds. I can see that he is involved in a political argument over Boris Johnson's New Bus for London but I can't see that he is adding links to his blog, or otherwise promoting himself. Boriswatch is the guy's online handle. Secretlondon (talk) 19:28, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Seems to me that the username still promotes the website and his other Boris-watching activities, so falls under promotional. If he disagrees, of course, he's more than welcome to appeal for an unblock on his talk page; I'm proud to say we have a whole corpos of folks who watch out for such appeals. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:26, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Art Pope

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Art Pope. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 13:16, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Should Bjorn Bertoft be deleted?

Hi Mike. I just became aware of Bjorn Bertoft, which clearly appears to have been created by the subject, User:Bertoft2012. The article, created today, seems to be not only a blatant promotional autobiography, but also fails to establish the subject's notability or importance. I don't know how to handle articles like this, so I was hoping you could do whatever is appropriate. Thank you very much. --76.189.101.221 (talk) 11:12, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Tau Epsilon Phi

Hi I was not sure how to contact you. There is a user on the Tau Epsilon Phi wikipedia page that is trying to overule your fine work. It is a user by the name of TEPs4Justice who is Nathaniel Broughty and is trying to undermine the fraternity. I am a concerned parent and former member and this 'Legal' Bumfodder needs to be removed and stopped and lock the article if need be. Thanks for your encoragement and understanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.30.31.115 (talk) 00:36, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Mike I was referred to you by another parent. I agree with the above, that legal stuff needs to stay out of the fraternities wiki entry. It makes it very difficult for parents to research the fraternities. Bad enough we are already scared about hazing and other issues at hand. Not to mention that it appears to be a violation of NPOV because so many people are posting specific individual names and using it as a way to creat personal attention to themselves. Lock the thread without legal and control this as you elegantly do. (I follow your edits for some time :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.222.164.241 (talk) 02:11, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Frank Marshall Davis

Mike - Apparently, TRPoD reverted "my recent edits to Frank Marshall Davis as they didnt seem to be supported by reliable third party sources with a reputation for fact checking and accuracy and presenting content in a neutral point of view."

You then informed me, "Please do not insert fringe or undue weight content into articles, as you did to Frank Marshall Davis. An article should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject. Please use the article's talk page to discuss the material and its appropriate weight within the article."

Questions. The internet source that I cited had page after page of a reputed Davis FBI file. What constitutes non "undue weight" content? If there is an FBI file on Davis and it indicates he was a member of the Communist Party of the US, why would that be so heavily resisted by people such as yourself. Facts are facts and as Senator Monnihan used to say, "While you are entitled to your opinion, you are not entited to your own facts."

Question. What constitutes "reliable sources" for such assertions that Davis was a member of the American Communist Party? I have no particular ax to grind with Davis, and I don't "blame" him for his political beliefs or positions. I am only interested in factual accuracy. I do NOT want to get into an editorial war with you or anyone else on Davis's alleged membership in the Communist Party. Obviously, the far right wing of the Republican Party and other Conservatives have used this communist party affiliation to attack Obama indirectly by his associations with Davis. OK - so what, once again, facts are facts. Its a FACT that the Obama removed all reference to Frank Davis, by name in the spoken audio version his auto-biographal book, "Dreams of My Father" In his original book he mentions Frank over 20 times. As for myself, I am not a right-winger, I'm a political independent. I am interested in only one thing, here - the facts.

Question. If Davis turns out to be undeniably a documented member of the American Communist Party, then why would you or anyone else be seeking to hide this information under the cloud of this neutrality business or POV discussions except to advance some other pro-left agenda and to protect President Obama from uncomfortable facts. FACT - I voted for Obama in the past US presidential election. I'm not anti-Obama. I AM pro-facts. Again, facts are facts and they can be proved. Hope we can come to an agreement on the facts, however uncomfortable they may be.

Question. Why would you consider the book, "THE COMMUNIST: FRANK MARSHALL DAVIS: THE UNTOLD STORY OF BARACK OBAMA'S MENTOR" to not objectionable? The author is a PHD and a college professor and the book is well documented and sold via Amazon as opposed to some "lunatic fringe" site? SimonATL (talk) 08:58, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

1) Neither usasurvival.org nor discoverthenetworks.org is even remotely a reliable source.

2) You don't understand how Amazon works. They sell all sorts of useless, incompetent, boring, pornographic and/or psychotic crap: they don't care, as long as they get their money. Having your work available on Amazon is no more an indication of reliability than having your own webpage, or selling your songs at iTunes. The Communist is a hatchet job by an ideologue with a blatant political agenda, and again is not considered a reliable source by any reputable historians. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:50, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Francis Bacon (artist)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Francis Bacon (artist). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Need a non-involved admin's eyes

{{helpme}} Need a non-involved admin's eyes at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amikeca Reto. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:38, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

I have done a procedural close and suggested separate AfDs. JohnCD (talk) 18:01, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

David Brodbeck

Mike, David Brodbeck has zero citations (other than a broken link to one website). More importantly, I was unable to establish notability while doing an in-depth search for sources. I found nothing. He's a college associate professor with a degree in psychology, but not a clinical psychologist. I'd rather have someone with your expertise make the determination on how to handle this. Thanks. --76.189.101.221 (talk) 01:43, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Dear Orangemike,

Recently, I contributed an article to Wiki originally entitled 'The Hall Affair, Gosport' which I understand you edited down to 'Hall Affair'. Might I respectfully request that the original title be reinstated on the following grounds, please - 1. that as an ordinary noun 'hall' cannot stand alone in the singular without an article, and that by its being preceded by the definite article it takes on the character of a proper noun. The name of the building in question is The Hall, not Hall. after all. 2. The appellation 'The Hall' is a common one for old buildings throughout the UK and that to distinguish it from numerous other examples of the same name. the name of the town be appended to avoid confusion. ie Gosport.

Thank you, and I hope you see the validity of my remarks.

Kind regards.

Peter — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bastions (talk • contribs) 17:19, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Political activities of the Koch brothers

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Political activities of the Koch brothers. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 08:15, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

As a Wisconsin resident and union worker, I'd better recuse myself on this one. --Orange Mike | Talk 08:17, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Frank Curto

Mike, Frank Curto is clearly not notable. He was merely a longtime employee of a city department, which earned him some local honors, but that's the extent of it. I'll let you decide what to do with it. Thanks. --76.189.101.221 (talk) 06:43, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

You removed a PURELY FACTUAL ADDITION

I have put back the FACT that you removed. <attack on living person redacted> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.99.182.136 (talk) 16:17, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Caitlin Kelly

Caitmks (talk) 21:39, 29 November 2012 (UTC)Hi Orangemike This is Caitlin Kelly of Caitlin Kelly Designer Swimwear. I'm writing to inform you that I am a living person. It has been brought to my attention that an industry profesional has tried numerous times to create a page about me. What an honor! However the page has been taken down and after many attempts to find out why, she has received nothing but two word answers. I've read through your page and know you have helped newbies successfully contribute to Wikipedia, but for some reason, with my page this has not been the case. Yes I have gained incredible recognition in the online world for my strides in the cut throat industry of fashion, which I believe was referred to as "crap blogging" however there are other references she tried to provide such as Women's Wear Daily, Swim Journal, The Amsterdam News, Real Estate Weekly, HRH Backstage Magazine, New York Magazine to name a few. I've also been nominated for the Cooper Hewitt National Design Award and Cranes 40 under 40. I have to say, learning that someone would take time out of their day to submit my information to Wikipedia was again an incredible honor, however after her experience and frustrations, I'm a bit taken aback. Knowing how hard I have worked to make a name for myself in an industry filled with heavy hitters, to hear the two word comments from both you and your peers questioning the validity of who I am and what I do, is insulting and hurtful. Not everyone is trying to submit "crap" to your site. I respect your passion to keep the site true to fact however just because you haven't heard of my line or my strides in the fashion industry doesn't mean I don't belong on Wikipedia. I hope that you will reconsider and help Thmwalker successfully add "Caitlin Kelly" to the Wikipedia family. Thank you for your time. Caitmks (talk) 21:39, 29 November 2012 (UTC) Caitmks

1) Nobody denies you exist; I'm sorry if you understood otherwise

2) Nobody says that you could never be notable; it could well be that you already are

3) NOBODY WHATSOEVER has the right to inflict language like (and this is a direct extract from the "article", mind you), "Right-brained and ambitious from the start, she dove head-first into the world of fashion by attending precollege high-profile design programs... These programs pushed her harder than she had ever been pushed creatively, but she flourished under the pressure and scrutiny. As a result of her hard work and unwavering tenacity..." This is a reference work, intended to be filled with verifiable information presented in a neutral, matter-of-fact manner. Instead, your advocates give us this pseudo-inspirational promotional rah-rah junk, unfit for any publication designed to be read by people past the age of 12 or with IQs over 90.

4) As long as Thmwalker or other well-meaning friends keep dumping ad copy into our pages, the ad copy will be deleted; and any further efforts to spam Wikipedia with promotional pap could lead to your name being blocked from recreation. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:48, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Orangemike, Thank you for your speedy reply. Can you tell me what portions of what was submitted need to be removed so that the page can be safely added? I apologize if my bio came across as promotional. Thmwalker was only using information from an interview I had done with her. She did not intend to spam Wikipedia. Thank you for you constructive comments. I hope that we can work together so that everything is done by the book. Caitmks (talk) 22:32, 29 November 2012 (UTC) Caitlin

It would be best NOT to start from that previously unsalvageable version and start fresh with what verifiable facts can be found in reliable sources, those with a reputation for fact checking, accuracy, and presenting content in a neutral point of view. I did a search on news.google.com and books.google.com, two of the basic places where appropriate on line information meeting the criteria can generally be found and came up with no hits for a Caitlin Kelly designer. So, unless you can provide significant coverage about Kelly in such sources, the result will be no article. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:42, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Caitlin, I'm not sure if anyone has referred you to WP:AUTOBIO, but you should fully educate yourself on it. As it explains, autobiographies are strongly discouraged. I realize you said that it was actually an "industry profesional" [sic] who tried to create the article, but you didn't indicate if it is someone with whom you have a personal connection or if you assisted them in the creation of the article. Either of those would be strongly discouraged, as well. If you are truly notable, it is likely that someone will eventually create an article about you. But, as with any Wikipedia article, it should be someone who is totally independent of the subject (in this case, you) so that there can be no violation of the conflict of interest guidelines. --76.189.101.221 (talk) 03:35, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi and thank you for your reply. Thmwalker is a writer for the examiner who I met in September while presenting at Fashion week. Her relationship to me is totally independent from me as we met one time for an interview. I had nothing to do with her submission and was emailed after the fact, which again I was excited about. No one had referred me to the WP:AUTOBIO page, so I thank you for that as well. My bio was written by a professional with a BFA in writing. She also ran the bio by her colleagues, maybe it has too much fluff for wikipedia. I have read through WP:AUTOBIO and understand the points. Thmwalker used parts from my bio which can be found on my website and on google along with various articles written about me which can also be found on google and hardcopy format. I apologize and thank you for your time. Caitmks (talk) 14:42, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Part of the problem here is a culture clash: fashion writing puts a premium on the very kind of language we despise and reject here, and that kind of language taints the entire topic: it's like coming to a faculty reception at Columbia in a Lady Gaga stage costume, then wondering why nobody takes your comments on the sociology of the garment trade seriously! A BFA/MFA writer is not a good candidate for our style here: a M.A. in history or B.S. in chemistry would be a better choice. As The Red Pen of Doom and our anonymous colleague editing from IP address 76.189.101.221 suggest, the previous wording was so completely alien to how we work here that there is nothing we can really salvage. Also: fashion blogs are generally not considered reliable sources in the way that some factual content (not the gush, please; we abhor the gush) from WWD or Vogue would be. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:57, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Caitlin, please understand that Orangmike is not only an extremely experienced editor here, but he is also one of our many great administrators. To put it simply, he really knows what he's talking about. As an aside, I just wanted to mention something about Examiner since you brought it up. As I'm sure you've heard, beyond the primary threshhold of a subject having to be notable, content in articles must not only be worthy of inclusion (encylopedic), it must also be supported by reliable sources. As you'll see at WP:PUS, Examiner is not accepted as a reliable source on Wikipedia because they lack editorial oversight; it falls within the category of "Sites that appear to be news media but aren't". --76.189.101.221 (talk) 18:39, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle

Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited

Seattle Public Library

Date Saturday, December 8, 2012 Time 10 a.m. – 3 p.m. Location Seattle Public Library Meeting Room 1 on Level 4, Central Library, 1000 4th Avenue, Seattle WA, 98104 Event An editathon on Seattle-related Wikipedia articles with Wikipedia tutorials and Librarian assistance on hand. Hashtag #wikiloveslib or #glamwiki. Registration http://wll-seattle.eventbrite.com or use on-wiki regsistration. Yours, Maximilianklein (talk) 03:41, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of indigenous peoples

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of indigenous peoples. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 06:18, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Augustus Barrows

Hi-I came across 'Progressive Men of Montana,' which has a biographical sketch of Augustus Barrows. He settled in Montana Territory where he had a ranch. He died in December 1885 and was buried in Chippewa Falls. You need to look at the book and use it in the article.Thanks-RFD (talk) 20:21, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Note pg. 993-994 of Progressive Men of Montana book-he died on December 20, 1885-thanks-RFD (talk) 20:27, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination

--Orange Mike | Talk 15:43, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Tau Epsilon Phi

Hi you have been part of Tau Epsilon Edits for some time. I am not sure who to talk to. There is a user on the talk page who keeps intentionally deleting my content. It is new and a valid point and he is just deleting it for the sake of deleting it. Please help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Opthamologist (talk • contribs) 20:47, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Augustus Barrows at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 01:39, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Vyborg–Petrozavodsk Offensive

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Vyborg–Petrozavodsk Offensive. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 04:15, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Figure it out, Mike

You're a very smart guy, Mike. You can figure it all out, can't you? Maybe everything isn't the way you imagined it was. Maybe you've been told lies that keep you busily working, while a very select few others profit from your dedication and labor. 2001:558:1400:10:840E:D85:4973:41CA (talk) 20:21, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Courtesy notification

Hello, Orangemike. This is a note to let you know I have mentioned you in a new thread at ANI. The subject is the activities of editor user:AccuracyInPosting. Here is a link: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Asking someone to review my actions at Ralph Drollinger. Best wishes, -- Dianna (talk) 04:21, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

slander and attacks for my folly.....

• You recently wrote: "I thought it was a good thing to disclose potential COI, but it has brought me nothing but slander and attacks for my folly."[1] It has taken you a while to realize this, and hopefully your eyes are open a bit now to the situation. Will you be altering how you perform administrative actions related to potential COIs on Wikipedia now that you have come to this very true realization? Cheers -- Eclipsed (talk) (email) (coi) 08:10, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

• Since we're here: I am sorry if you felt slandered and attacked, possibly also by me, but I personally think it has been very good of you to disclose your COI (even if I doubt it would have changed anything). --Cyclopia^talk 11:26, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

• Mike. Working at that independent bookshop would only give you a COI for that independent bookshop topic in Wikipedia. Bias is not a COI and your views on independent bookshop vs. Amazon is nothing more than a disclosed potential bias against Amazon. Where you wrote, "I thought it was a good thing to disclose potential COI, but it has brought me nothing but slander and attacks for my folly."[2] You could have wrote, "I thought it was a good thing to disclose potential bias..." Just before I posted here, I came across another article created by "I have a disclosed COI" who left out all the negative information on the topic, but touted the WIRED source as the reason why the topic meets GNG.[3] This was the same COI matter you listed at MfD (see my post below on this talk page). As for Eclipsed's request to "altering how you perform administrative actions related to potential COIs on Wikipedia now that you have come to this very true realization," I think you need to keep the same vigilent approach to protecting the encyclopedia. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 13:19, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

• P.S. I've been seeing more and more article cite to Amazon pages as a source. I thought it was odd since Amazon clearly is not a reliable source and people in the past just seem to know not to cite to Amazon in Wikipedia or it didn't occur to them (It never occured to me to cite to Amazon). I'm surprised to learn about the connection between the Wikimedia Foundation and Amazon.com.[4] I also love going to independent bookstores. The stores have a look and feel that seem to provide a rich sense of connection to the books, their authors, and the book topics through the years. I'm not sure what it is. But what I walk into an independent bookstore, I get a unique feeling that does not come from anywhere else. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 13:44, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

• Seconded. You don't have a COI, Mike, you have a personal opinion (one which, as a fellow bookseller, I happen to share). The only folk on Wikipedia who don't have such opinions are the ones whose usernames end in "-Bot"... It has no bearing on your admin actions, unless you happen to make them on a page about the bookshop you actually work for (and even then, I'd trust you to adhere to NPOV). Chin up, move on, keep up the good work, etc. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:39, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
  • As a bookseller, perhaps you are the only one who understands (although Uzma gets it too). I feel like I've been mugged by the equivalent of, if not Holocaust deniers, at least hardcore birthers screaming "Where's the birth certificate?". And all Jimbo wants to do is get huffy about how nobody could possibly suggest that a Randite might be seeking to make money off of other people. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:53, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
    • For what it's worth, I think you were right to express your view. Gave me food for thought anyway. Really hope you are not seriously considering 'giving up'. 'Nil desperandum...'and all that. RashersTierney (talk) 14:26, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
      • Bruce Sterling wrote a novel, Involution Ocean, whose characters include the mad Captain Nils Desperandum! --Orange Mike | Talk 14:32, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
        • You wouldn't happen to know where I could pick up an old copy per chance :- ) RashersTierney (talk) 14:52, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
      • Likewise glad you mentioned it. Looking at coincidences like this, where course changes that benefit corporate entities coincide with large donations from those same entities, is a vital part of citizenship. Andreas JN466 15:32, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I think COI is the right word; if someone wants to influence Wikipedia in order to fulfill their personal objectives (supporting small bookstores), that's a COI. If someone wants to use Wikipedia as an outlet for their anti-PR sentiment, that's a COI too (our articles on PR topics are very imbalanced). On the other hand, I am careful not to show my COI in that I have a desire for Wikipedia to have more balanced portrayals of PR and business topics, but I should be careful not to whitewash them.

The COI guideline makes it sound like COI is an on/off switch, but most people I've talked to agree there are shades of grey, where an outside interest isn't "more important" than Wikipedia's goals, but may still have an influence. Very few editors have completely sacred and pure objectives - we all edit for a reason - something motivates us that isn't 100% pure.

As for Orange's treatment of COIs, I have been a Talk Page stalking for a while and - from time to time - show a softer approach to a COI he was particularly harsh to. In most cases, I end up regretting it and realizing I should have let him do his thing. So I don't know. Corporate 16:34, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Amazon vs. Google

Round 2. Viriditas (talk) 09:08, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Ubet, Montana

Hi Mike-I added a county template to the Ubet, Montana article. I also let Coal town guy know about the article. I came across a photo of a postmark for Ubet, Montana and Coal town guy might be able to add it to the article. I also checked some ghost town websites and no mention about Ubet, Montana. Finally, you will probably will have to add citations to every paragraph in the Augustus Barrows article since it is up for DYK. It is a DYK guideline. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 12:24, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Rokform

Hi Mike. Your Rokform MfD listing was closed, and the matter moved to AfD. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 13:05, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for AfDing for me Orange, but I meant to AfD for article-space, so I could pass along a consensus decision to Rokform. It's in the right place now. You're welcome to comment of course. I noticed your AfD comment from the Misc hasn't been moved over, but I didn't want to move it for you obviously. Corporate 16:06, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Gerald page

Hi I saw your comment on the page I created. There seems to be some confusion with regards to the page I created. I called my account I setup GeraldUK however that is not my name and the article is not about me but about a long established business in the UK. I was advised by another Wikipedian to change my account name so as not to confuse but I don't know how to do that. I have also gone through the content in the page and its informative with referral links to none bias sources I'd appreciate your help in trying to get the page live thanks, Dee — Preceding unsigned comment added by GeraldUK2012 (talk • contribs) 15:34, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Dee, we don't want people writing articles here about their companies, since they are unlikely to maintain the mandatory neutral point of view. We also don't permit company accounts, since only individual human beings are permitted to have accounts here. If Gerald Eve is actually notable, then some individual editor who is interested in the company will create an article here, which will be judged on its own merits, just as articles on anything from Ubet, Montana to The Goodies to Apple Inc. have been. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:43, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I haven't seen the page, but a quick Google News search reveals some trade publications like Property Week, but mostly just covering routine executive appointments and press release re-writes. I'm not sure the subject would pass muster. Corporate 16:03, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Turkish people

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Turkish people. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 02:15, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Augustus Barrows

Hello! Your submission of Augustus Barrows at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:26, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

White flight

Hey Orange Mike, I see that you completely eliminated my revisions on "White Flight." Forcefully injecting your point of view into issues and shifting blame or writing in an accusatory tone is generally something that should be avoided in this forum. Your version of the article implies that the only reason white people leave "culturally rich" area is because of racism, I think my version, that they want to retain their own culture makes more sense, at least from a white person's perspective. Take some introspection for a moment and think about why Jewish people choose to segregate in their own communities; if you do it because of racism then, fine keep your changes. Additionally, "neutral tones" when it comes to policies created based on actuarial numbers and risk statistics do not qualify as "perceived" or as it is used in this article as an opinion; they are based on sound payback principles. take care of yourself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.162.0.41 (talk) 21:06, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't know who you are, but I'm amused to hear you lecture a Tennessee native like me about "a white person's perspective". You're using a military ISP: you on active duty, or a fobbit, or a REMF? I've got a great-nephew going back to Afghanistan for a second tour of duty soon: everybody calls him "Bubba"; I don't need your lectures about how people like me feel. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:14, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Turkish invasion of Cyprus

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Turkish invasion of Cyprus. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 00:15, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Noobermedia

Hello, Mike! Apparently, according to you, Noobermedia isn't worth mentioning to the world. Thus, until Noobermedia can be worthy of Wikipedia's consideration, can you or someone delete the Noobermedia account, completely? The problem is that when people Google Noobermedia or look it up in Yahoo, which people do - all the time, the "Noobermedia - Wikipedia" link comes up. When people click on the link, it reads that the account has been deleted. It looks bad. I won't want NooberMEDIA being upset because a fan tried to give them a voice on Wikipedia and you guys could care less. It just looks really bad for them (Noobermedia).— Preceding unsigned comment added by Twiz500 (talk • contribs) — Twiz500 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

We don't have any control over what appears in search engines. If this subject is actually notable, then the notable information about it will appear in search engines, and the promotion will gradually fade down the result pages. We appear high on search engine results because we volunteer editors exert a great deal of effort to ensure that articles are about already notable topics, not about things that might be big someday maybe perhaps; but we are actively hostile to any efforts to abuse our service for promotional purposes. (Ironically, now this discussion will also appear in search engine results.) --Orange Mike | Talk 15:36, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Just curious what represents notoriety? Wikipedia seems to have several articles pertaining to old websites that most people have never heard of or athletes of whom don't have superstar status. What level of notoriety will Noobermedia have to reach in order to have a page? They already have Yahoo articles and is the first visual advertisement search engine of its kind. It's unique. Why would Wikipedia fight to keep a unique and notable entity from being in its encyclopedia? And, the argument of what may be big someday is irrelevant. Noobermedia is already known. Do they have to be bought out by Google to become known? If so, how bias is that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twiz5000 (talk • contribs) 16:12, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Our guidelines for assessing the notability (not "notoriety") of websites are to be found at WP:WEB. Also, just because a website is "old" (hey, I started out to be an archeologist: to me, "old" means 100,000+ years B.C.E.) does not mean that it was not notable in its day, and thus does not merit an article in an encyclopedia. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:43, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

In reviewing your guidelines for WP:WEB, I found this: "However, smaller websites can be notable. Arbitrary standards should not be used to create a bias favoring larger websites." It appears that the decision to add an article is based solely on the discretion of administrators. There isn't a true protocol or even point/merit system. It's either a consensus or personal evaluation as to whether this or that merits "notability". What you're saying is a) Being the first visual advertisement search engine (or VASE) on the planet isn't notable, b) The fact that the founder is Black American, in an (IT) industry where Black Americans are shunned, isn't notable, c) The fact that the site is in talks with Apple and Twitter to become a minority partner isn't notable, d) The fact that a VASE is a direct competitor of Google's advertising system and will cause a clash between the two isn't notable, and last, e) The fact that Noobermedia was founded (Houston, TX) outside of Silicon Valley or the West Coast isn't notable. Why is it when people, of whom are in a position of power, fight so hard to stand in the way, when all they have to do is simply say yes? Mike, the decision to not allow the Noobermedia article is yours. It's not because of Wikipedia. It's not because of "notable" clauses or guidelines. It's because you feel that particular company isn't worthy of your attention. You simply choose to say no, when all you have to do is say yes... and the world continues to advance for a small company in Houston, TX. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twiz5000 (talk • contribs) 17:05, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Again, I ask, is there any way to remove Noobermedia from Wikipedia, completely, until the corporation is considering worthy of Wikipedia's attention? It looks terrible to see people entering NooberMEDIA into the Yahoo search engine and when they click on Noobermedia's Wikipedia page it says "03:24, 4 December 2012 Nyttend (talk | contribs) deleted page Noobermedia (A7: Article about a company, corporation, organization, or group, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject)". That looks horrible. It makes it seem as though Noobermedia is some worthless crud of a business that not even Wikipedia could care about. It's insulting to them. As a fan of their service, I was just trying to give them what they deserve. Wikipedia could care less. I understand. However, this harms Noobermedia to have their business rejected openly, like that. When Wikipedia feels that Noobermedia is worthy of mentioning (like "Fucked_Company"...SMH) you guys can add them, correctly. I feel responsible for hurting their image. Twiz5000 (talk) 13:42, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately, no, we have no control over what appears in search engines. What has appeared in Wikipedia in the past is part of the historical record of the building of this encyclopedia itself, and will not be deleted: "By clicking the 'Save Page' button, you agree to the Terms of Use, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution..." (emphasis added). --Orange Mike | Talk 13:48, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Everything is a fight. It's always an uphill battle. But, ultimately, I hope Noobermedia has their day. I hope they look back on the days when they were shunned and they say, "They tried to stand in our way. They failed." It's unfortunate that so many people are placed in positions to deny others. I only ask you, "When you leave this Earth, someday, will it really have mattered that you fought so hard to keep Noobermedia out of Wikipedia? Really?" If you say yes, I only have sympathy for you. Twiz5000 (talk) 14:18, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Just curious to know what Gianna Michaels brings to the table that warrants her having a Wikipedia page? What makes her notable or than the fact that she has sex on camera? Twiz5000 (talk) 02:09, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

1) We call that the "other crap exists" argument; it does not fly, because we are talking about two different articles, each to be judged on its own merits.

2) You seem to have missed the part of my userpage where I declaim, "I believe that many articles here (including not only new ones but many existing ones) are violations of our standards: how-to guides and game manuals, fan trivia, in-universe fiction summaries, obscure porn actor biographies, politician self-aggrandisement, memorials, original essays masquerading as scholarship, etc." Gianna Michaels has won some awards that people in her industry take seriously; that does not mean I wrote or edit the article about her. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:16, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

So, essentially what you just said is there is no excuse as to why Gianna Michaels (a woman who simply has a lot of sex on camera) has an article over Noobermedia (the first advertising search engine in internet history)? Wikipedia has no real protocol or process that determines why an article exists other than if you were in some sort of recognizable news - for more than a minute, or you were acknowledged (signed to, partnered with) by the likes of already-known Wikipedian-brethren (e.g. Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Myspace, etc) you're pretty much a shoe-in. As I said earlier, it's an uphill battle. There are far more people doing their very best to stand in your way than those of whom are trying to help you. Goodluck to Noobermedia! I only feel bad because it seems as though I just tainted their name. People will now look at their Wikipedia article (or removal of) as a slap in the face from Wikipedia. It does nothing but hurt their image. If Noobermedia is reading this, I'm sorry. Just trying to help. Twiz5000 (talk) 14:27, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Twiz5000, step down from your soapbox and read our notability guidelines. These are community standards on what enters in WP or not. I don't necessarily agree with all of them, but that's how it works. It's not matter of "standing in your way", it's that we have long standing policies and guidelines and we tend to stick to them. --Cyclopia^talk 14:40, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Cyclopia, it is better to be on a soapbox than on a pedestal playing God. And, it is a matter of standing in someone's way. When you deny the first advertisement search engine in internet history the right to be in Wikipedia, but allow a woman that does nothing but have a lot of sex on film the right to be in Wikipedia, you're saying the search engine isn't worthy, whereas a person having sex on camera is. That isn't following protocol. That is choosing whatever you (the administrator) deem worthy of inclusion at your own discretion. What this boils down to is that Noobermedia got the wrong administrator assigned to it. Had it been the person who handled Gianna Michaels, it might have made it. Simply put, I tried to include the internet's first advertisement search engine into Wikipedia and Mike said it isn't worthy. No need to make excuses for Michaels (a person who simply has sex on camera) being in Wikipedia. It's odd that you guys think Michaels having a lot of sex equals notable. Oh, well. Noobermedia will have to part the Red Sea before it is considered worthy of inclusion. That or it will have to become a notable company in the porn industry. Twiz5000 (talk) 17:56, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Twiz, there is no "right to be in Wikipedia." If the press thought something like an advertisement search engine was notable, then they would write about it, and we could have an article. I think that the press has so far reacted like most normal human beings, thinking "Why on earth would I search for advertisements when they are already so ubiquitous as to constitute a form of intellectual pollution and a threat to human sanity?"; and nobody has bothered to do a followup to discover the rationale behind such an unappealing concept.

Be that as it may: there are trade journals and fan magazines for this woman's industry who have found her of interest and written about her. So far, nobody has done the same thing for Noobermedia. Why is that so difficult for you to grasp? --Orange Mike | Talk 18:05, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Once again, we're dealing with your (Wikipedia's) opinion. They just launched in October.. and at least 20,000 Twitter users felt the need to follow them over just one month. The concept of searching for advertisement isn't what Noobermedia is about. It's about having an avenue to find what someone wants to find. You can go to Noobermedia, click Apparel and immediately see over 50 places to find the clothing you're looking for. You can't even do that with Google. I think Noobermedia thought that going to one place to find what you want rather than relying on free floating, dull, and vague advertisement (commercials, signs, ad banners, and etc) would be more effective. If so, I agree with what they did and are doing. Stay-at-home parents and the 30+ generations - for the most part - like things like Noobermedia. They are helpful and free. Put it to you like this, wouldn't you rather choose when you want to see ads, rather than have them thrown (unwillingly) at you, while driving, watching tv, and surfing on the internet? But whatever you do, allow some laughable news sites in the porn industry to write a few articles about a person who has a lot of sex on camera and Wikipedia is all over it. I get it. You don't like the concept of Noobermedia, but the concept of a woman who has sex on camera is appealing enough to make your Encyclopedia. Makes sense, given the lack of defense Wikipedia offers up in regards to allowing people who have sex on camera to have articles. Twiz5000 (talk) 21:00, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)And Wikipedia's opinion is the only thing that matters when it comes to which subjects qualify for an article here and which don't. If you want to change Wikipedia policy on that, there are avenues to bring it before the Wikipedia community for discussion. But as it stands right now, some subjects (yes, including some porn stars) meet Wikipedia's notability requirements, other subjects (including Noobermedia) do not.--ukexpat (talk) 21:11, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Twiz5000: you seem to have convinced yourself that there's some grand conspiracy against Noobermedia. That is not the case, despite your pointless, irrational, and inaccurate posts. You have been pointed to Wikipedia's notability guidelines several times. Those guidelines were developed over several years, resulting from community consensus reached by multiple interested Wikipedia editors in determining methodologies for qualifying a subject as notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

The simple fact is that Noobermedia thus far has not met the applicable guideline for web content, found at WP:WEB; while you are irrelevantly comparing to people who appear to meet the notability guideline for people which is defined at WP:BIO. Arguing about a different page isn't going to change that the article at Noobermedia did not meet the notability guideline at WP:WEB at the time it was deleted.

If you want to change that, then read WP:WEB, learn what is required to meet that threshold, and then find third-party reliable sources that can demonstrate how Noobermedia meets that threshold. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 23:06, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Ukexpat, it's funny that you consider my argument so pointless, irrational, and inaccurate that you felt the need to... respond to it. Barek, I don't feel the need to continue this semi-debate. I have no control over what is deemed worthy and what is not. Eventually, Noobermedia will be in Wikipedia. That's inevitable, despite certain people's efforts (here) to keep it out. I will let them speak for themselves. I just feel bad (and hope they don't try to sue me) for trying to help them out. It was my mistake in thinking they were worthy of Wikipedia's database. Unfortunately, they have to pay for my mistake. Twiz5000 (talk) 15:21, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Re: Advice

Hello: Thank you - I understand the issue you stated. The thing is, I do not agree that the original research or that the synth guidelines are being broken. If you read the entire contents of my posts (particularly what is on OhNoItsJaime's talk page) - I think it should be clear. I do not think everyone agrees that this statement violates the rules, and that is why I posted the RFC. Also, it has not even been 1 day since that sentence was added (than quickly deleted by Jamie) - but if the consensus is that I need a source for this - I will need more time to find one. The statement about "my own experience with these 2 conditions & pure logic make the connection obvious"... applies to how obvious it is to me in daily practice...and why I was frustrated with the behavior of the other editors. If I need a source to cite the obvious on wikipedia, then I will try to find one. If I cannot find one, then the net result is an article that is missing important information - which I suppose will satisfy everyone here...but not people who are actually suffering with Peyronie's Disease and bring the Koro article into my office...while they have missed the only window to treat their probelm— Preceding unsigned comment added by Angelatomato (talk • contribs)

Mike - Thanks for your last comment...I was wondering - do you think it would make sense if I included information on differential diagnosis (and there are 100s of citations for how that works out there) - and then explained similar conditions (one of which is Peyronie's - with symptoms that are similar...hence the need for differential diagnosis) - and then posted it? Would that resolve the synth / original research problem? I am not sure if you read everything I posted (ohnoitsjamie's talk page has the full explanation). In a nutshell, Koro is a psychological problem, but Peyronie's is not... and there is a need to distinguish these two things or the wrong treatment / prognosis will be given. Doctors themselves screw this up since they are not often even aware of peyronies (it is rare - especially with young men). I explained why I am even bothering with this on my talk page (beyond the phd / patients with this issue - PD can be devastating & when misdiagnosed it leads to some bad outcomes that you can read about if you google peyronies and suicide) Angelatomato (talk) 17:33, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

The problem is whether this specific issue is addressed in the literature already. If it is not, then there's nothing you can do here to address that problem. On the up side, sounds like a great idea for an article in an appropriate journal, which would then give us a usable cite, AND address the ever-present pressure to publish or perish. (The only time my name ever appeared in a peer-reviewed journal in my field was when I mentioned a similar lacuna in the literature to a prof: she looked at it, decided I was right, then researched the issue; she's published a couple-three papers and is working on a book about the topic, and gave a shout-out to "Orange Mike" in the first paper.) --Orange Mike | Talk 17:46, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

hi there

i didn't think i put the address in the final version ... i am trying to learn here.

sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chopperbob67 (talk • contribs) 20:25, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Generally, a new artwork that is not itself notable has no place being grafted onto an article. Your multiple edits reeked of promotional intent, since there was no evidence presented that this art has gotten any attention from the press or art critics, and the artist is unknown. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:31, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

OK -- but WHAT LINK were you referring to? Chopperbob67 (talk) 14:49, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

This one, with the street address on it! --Orange Mike | Talk 17:05, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Benjamin Goss

Hi Mike-the Wisconsin Blue Book 1892, pg. 654 has a biographical sketch on Benjamin Goss when served in the Wisconsin Assembly. Thanks-RFD (talk) 22:48, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Correction-Wisconsin Blue Book 1893, pg.654. Thanks-RFD (talk) 12:49, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

I know; I just didn't have time to use it yet. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:06, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

I checked the Kansas State Legislators Past&Present Members database to see if Benjamin Goss was on it-and there nothing about Goss serving in the Kansas Legislature. Thanks-RFD (talk) 18:51, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Umm... no... he didn't. He did, however, raise a company of cavalry there. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:52, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Prime Minister of Croatia

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Prime Minister of Croatia. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 21:15, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Wisconsin Valley Improvement Company

I wrote an article on the WVIC and it was tagged (and deleted) by someone who I think culturally was misunderstanding its importance. I have a version on my user page here: [[5]]. I think they are jumping the gun thinking this is merely promoting a private concern. The company is responsible for maintaining the river flow "the usefulness of the rivers for all public purposes and to reduce flood damage." As such the public has an interest in knowing the background on the entities responsible for this. Any advice?

Laurentian Shield (talk) 01:57, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Fringe theories

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Fringe theories. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:15, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Tony Evers

I have an editor who is deleting cited materials from the Tony Evers article. He is the Wisconsin Superintendent of Public Instruction and is seeking reelection next spring. Any suggestions? Thanks-RFD (talk) 21:38, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Randy Stufflebeam

You'll see it anyway, but just to make sure: WP:REFUND#Randy Stufflebeam. JohnCD (talk) 18:03, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Graceland University webmaster

Thank you for blocking the Graceland University webmaster. The same person just tried editing while being logged out and has now taken a non-promotional name, User:Hockeysticker and continues to edit the GU article. However, it is still clearly the same person with the same COI. Any additional assistance would be appreciated. 72Dino (talk) 22:53, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

FIU.NET page removed

Dear Mike,

Thank you for your comments. It is correct that a part of the information is taken from the FIU.NET website. It however is our own information. We wrote it ourselves so it is not copyright. Would it then be oke to use this information? If not, do you have any suggestions on how to deliver FIU.NET text to wikipedia? As informing just you that this is ok will not prevent your colleagues from removing the page again, how do we ensure that it is clear that the information on the wikipedia is placed with our permission. Do we for example need to reformulate the wording and link to the source website in a citation? I seem to remember a large list of comments on the original article, however I can not retrieve as the page was deleted afterwards. Is it possible to retrieve the comments so that we may improve the article to wikipedia standards?

FIUNetBureau (talk) 12:48, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

• Personally, I have never seen the point in a username policy the only effect of which is to encourage COI editors to hide their COI. I would much prefer an editor who is editing on behalf of FIU.NET to be called "FIUNET" or "FIUNetBureau" rather than "John Smith", so that we all know about the COI. However, a policy is a policy, whether I think it a good one or not, so I have blocked this account and directed the user's attention back to your block notice in the earlier account's talk page. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:35, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Hamas

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Hamas. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:15, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Nataliekelapire

Seriously Mike? It's been two months since she's made a truly non-kosher edit and since then she's been working through AfC and talk pages. No warring and even the "promotional edit" was hardly a big deal. Danger! ^{High voltage!} 19:20, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

She does not grasp WP:COI. Her every edit summary betrays a sense of entitlement, and an utter and abysmal failure to understand WP:OWN. Her edit summary when she tried to change Zomby, and the following query to the Help Desk, were the last straws. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:24, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

As far as I understand, a sense of entitlement isn't a blockable offense. (And WP:OWN has nothing to do with COI, might be worth a reread.) Danger! ^{High voltage!} 19:27, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

WP:OWN is highly relevant here: her edit summaries make it quite clear that she thinks the subject of the article, or his/her agent, or an employee of his/her agent, has some kind of right to control the article. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:42, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

I've unblocked. This was a really unacceptable block. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:29, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Obviously I disagree; but I won't get into a fight with you about it. I think we had already given her far too much WP:ROPE, as revealed by the tone of her query at the Help Desk; obviously you disagree. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:42, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

This seems to me to have been a perfectly good block. Evidently some others disagree, but it most certainly was not so clearly unreasonable as to justify a unilateral unblock without further consultation. Also, when reverting a good faith action by another administrator, more explanation is needed than just saying "This was a really unacceptable block." JamesBWatson (talk) 10:32, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I have replied to your note on my talk page; since the reply is aimed at you rather than OrangeMike, there's no sense clogging up his talk page. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:24, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

————————

Hello, Orangemike. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— Francheese (talk) 05:57, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Social media and EL

Hello Orange Mike, You commented on Yworo's talk page Golden Spike Company - social media channels.

(talk page stalker)Enquire, you are grossly misreading WP:EL. There is no ambiguity; the subject gets one, and only one, link to their own controlled website. Any other links should be to external sources of useful information. We do not give a INSERT VULGARISM OF YOUR CHOICE what their corporate "communication" strategy may be: this is an encyclopedia, not a webguide. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:02, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

The discussion was regarding the inclusion of links to social media websites that are directly controlled by the company. I do understand that fan sites are not allowed and that Wikipedia is not a link-farm or a social media directory service. I also understand that WP:FANSITE means sites (of which there can be many) are now allowed. However, it was my good faith understanding that such company websites are acceptable per WP:ELOFFICIAL. Now, I understand otherwise, since Yworo stated that WP:ELPEREN applies.
There had been a discussion on where it was agreed to keep the social channels of Golden Spike per WP:ELOFFICIAL. Nobody mentioned WP:ELPEREN in that discussion, and so the social media was left in. Now I know about WP:ELPEREN, although I didn't before. However, I did not see where there is a line saying the subject only gets one link. Perhaps you would be so kind as to show me where? Reading through, I must assume that it is Wikipedia:ELOFFICIAL#Minimize_the_number_of_links ... if so, may I be so bold as to suggest an edit to reference this from rules that seem to permit such links? Enquire (talk) 08:58, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)I don't give a monkey's how many "essays", guidelines subsections, etc etc you can quote acronyms for. Giving one link to a company's web site is one thing, giving links to all their various publicity pages on any site they use to publicise themselves is another. It is using Wikipedia for promotion, which is contrary not only to Wikipedia policy but also to the whole spirit of Wikipedia. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:41, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Another (talk page stalker). What JamesBWatson said. Their official site has links to both Facebook and Twitter for any reader who is remotely interested in them. They have zero encyclopedic value. We're not here to drive traffic to companies and their various publicity vehicles. As it is that article's sources, are overwhelmingly their own PR and press releases. Voceditenore (talk) 18:25, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Hezekiah's Tunnel

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Hezekiah's Tunnel. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 14:15, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

User question

I see that you blocked the user User:Diff-text for spam. The user has reappeared as User:Marisa rain. They created their "favorite" articles in the main space. Diff-Text and DiffEngineX. I communicated with the blocked user during an AfC (see User Talk:Paulthomas2). The author has a clear WP:COI, but they are also clearly passionate about this article. I try to assume good faith on Wikipedia and could use a second opinion. Thoughts? Mind weighing in? Thanks, Paulthomas2 (talk) 22:02, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Augustus Barrows

1=HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:15, 16 December 2012 (UTC) 16:56, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Bank De Binary

hi, i would like to knew why did you deleted my article. the reason banc de binary should have a wikipedia entry was mentioned under "Reputation" section: "Banc De Binary received a 50/50 score and was voted as the Best Binary Option Brokerage 2012 by Binary Options Daily. Accredited as a World Finance 100 Company, Banc De Binary has also appeared in over 500 financial publications in 2012." Reuvengrish (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:18, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Unless you sell binary options for a living, the first is not an assertion of notability for a global project. The second consists of a meaningless clause, followed by an almost equally meaningless vague and unsupported assertion. None of this adds up to the requisite credible assertion of notability. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:07, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Syria for All copyvio

Hi OM.

Just a heads up, right after you cleaned up the copyvio, an IP came back and reposted the copyvio. I went ahead and tagged the page as a copyvio & blanked the page. I have no problem if you have another way to handle it. Regards. GregJackP Boomer! 00:58, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Kukri

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Kukri. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Indigenous peoples

You are being contacted because you participated in this RfC in February about the scope of the article on Indigenous peoples. The discussion has now been revived at Talk:Indigenous_peoples#Scope_of_article.2C_Definitions.2C_etc and your input would be appreciated. ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 12:39, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

User:Legal Marketing?

Yo, Orangemike, I was wondering about this guy. You posted a (correct, obviously) block message on his talk page, and he's gone through several declined unblock requests, but he doesn't appear to have ever been actually blocked; his block log shows up empty, and he's made some edits to his user page and sandbox after you posted your block notice. Did something go weirdly wrong with his block, or what? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:22, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, a tired admin forgot to administer the actual block. Luckily, Danger (one of those darned children of the Phoenix) did it for me. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:33, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Heh, okay. That was my first thought, but I thought it was weird that the user himself and four other admins didn't notice, so I wanted to ask, just in case there was some sort of weird bug or something. Cheers! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:51, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Problem fiction: merging

Re your comment in November (TP Problem fiction) re the possibility of merging the Problem fiction and Problem novel articles, I posted a merge banner on the Problem fiction article several weeks ago and moved a few details from that page to the Problem novel page. There was no response to the banner, so I suggest that they should now be merged, leaving just the Problem novel article. Can you facilitate this? I also started a new section on the young adult problem novel in the Young adult fiction article.

• Subsequently the Problem novel article might be merged with the Social novel. Rwood128 (talk) 14:55, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Daniel Catullo

Far from a personal attack, when people take the time to delete data that is supported, using incorrect information that person should remove hi/her self from editing that story. What on EARTH does the summary removal of all the data on this page serve? Clearly this person is biased as he has already metioned law suits and maintains that Daniel Catullo is only know for litigation. That is a rather telling claim and frankly speaking it is not fair reason to simply remove the data.

Most people on Wikipedia use the talk pages, and the user that was removing the data even suggested that the talk page was the right place to review this, and I am more then willing to secure the page with further refs, rather then simply remove it. Daniel Catullo has "5 grammys" that and that in itself makes him more then notable. I will spend time editing the story today, and correct anything that is pointed out on the talk pages. Have a nice day!--WPPilot 15:50, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

NYC panel

Hello, Orangemike. You have new messages at WWB Too's talk page.
Message added 15:56, 19 December 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Daniel Hernández (fashion designer)

Hello OrangeMike, I would like to intro my self to you my name is Daniel Hernandez, I hope you are well, it has come to my attention that the page some one had created about my work has been recommended for deletion and after reading your comments, I wanted to reach out to you and ask for help, first of all I want to let you know that I believe in WIKIPEDIA and not as a source of marketing but as a source of information, when some one decided to create an article about my work I was above all proud of being on this incredible project. I want you to know that I respect the fact that you guys want to keep this project clean and also the fact that there are lots of people trying to abuse this project, I am not one of them, and I have also contributed to WIKI for a while with donations. I am not saying you need to help me because of that, but I am proving to you I believe in this work taking place here (WIKI), with that said I would like you to please review all my information and make an educated choice before you recommend me for deletion. If after you review the data and the honest and hard work accomplishments that have taken place you feel the article does not belong here I will respect your decition, Aside from some of the dates not matching almost all the information is correct, I did win a competition among 72 countries, with over 6000 votes, got awarded Young Entrepreneur of the year by the United States Business administration, got awards from Banana Republic, and I personally participated on founding fashion week Boston. I have been on a total of 7 magazine cover local and national, I have presented my work in Bosotn, New York and South Beach. have worked internationally after the competition, I know you may not understand fashion, but I know you understand hard work, I do not ask you to consider supporting the article because I need the publicity but because I feel proud of it, and all I ask is that if you are going to have it removed do it after you have really evaluated all the truth not what appears to be another garage band article as you mentioned. Above all I thank you for what you are doing and will respect what you decide. How ever if you decide to help I can provide you with all info necesary to create an article worthy of WIKI that is non self promoting nor influential in a negative way when people read it. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanielHernandez1974 (talk • contribs) 09:18, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Fortunately, I am not the only editor looking at this article and discussing what should be done about it. Many of our editors who are more knowledgeable in the fashion realm than I are discussing what should be done. Fortunately, the fact that a public relations firm was meddling in the article about you should not poison the well. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:27, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the respond, I am glad several editors are looking at the article and think that is healthy. I took a look at some of your work and what you do and I am very impressed. It would really mean a lot if you can help on this matter, you seem to work well with people and your passion for WIKI is remarkable. I did read some of the latest additions one other editor made, it seems he was not able to find information about the international recognition for my work but he found information on the SBA Award and a couple other citations. there are also a couple of national magazine covers and stories that I am not sure if it would help the article, I have decided to let WIKI take its course, how ever if they can not find the information, the article should not be deleted as the information does exist, I also as you know should not be editing this article but I will however make sure all actions are based on facts and not inaccurate information. Once again thank you for your response and please let me know if there is anything you think I should do to clear this issue. (DH 09:26, 20 December 2012 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanielHernandez1974 (talk • contribs) BTW I apologize for my horrible writing, as you can see english is not my forte nor my first language, so in a way I am glad editing nor working on this article is my job.

Min kredu, amiko: your English is better than my Spanish! The question has never been whether you exist and work in this field, but rather as to whether you pass our threshold of sufficient notability to justify an encyclopedia entry about you. That is under discussion now. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:39, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Hedge Funds

Once again sir you are out of line. How on EARTH can you assert that I am PROMOTING a fund that is under SCE indightment for fraud?? If you were to take a moment to review the story that you just removed my edit from you would see that the fund I added to the list was, only 2 months ago accused of creating a fraudlent Scheme. The SEC asserted that this FUND had miss valued assets, and lied to investors for years regarding the value of its assets to raise money. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedge_fund#US_investigations

Again I suggest that you stop with your threats and stalking of my edits. You sir have been around Wiki for a long time and one would think that a person with your tennure would be more intrested in resolving things rather then harrassing editors that you do not agree with. --WPPilot 18:10, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Many non-notable entities are accused of various crimes. This particular fund is not notable, so your post looked like a spamlink. Withdrawing my notice right now. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:12, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 01:04, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of indigenous peoples

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of indigenous peoples. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 07:16, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Orangemike. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Help desk.
Message added 21:22, 20 December 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

TheOriginalSoni (talk) 21:22, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Atlantic Pictures

Hello Mike,

You recently deleted the wikipedia page Atlantic Pictures on the basis that is it not important or relevant enough (A7). This is not the case. Atlantic Pictures, although small has helped to create large features, not listed in the article, such as Lord of War and Kick Ass. They were mentioned in an article as one of the production companies, The Art of Getting By. There is also an article in the Chicago Tribune regarding Atlantic Pictures and its significance in the film industry. Magnolia Pictures acquires 'Brass Teapot'. If there is more information that you think should be included in the company's page, then please say so.— Preceding unsigned comment added by DanGoldwyn (talk • contribs)

Read our rules as to notability of companies. Not everybody that provides craft services or completion bonds to a notable film, becomes notable thereby, since notability is not contagious, and cannot be acquired by contact or commerce with a notable subject. That piece in the Tribune mentioned one person who apparently does something at Atlantic, once, in passing, and the company not at all, far less its significance in the film industry"! We need substantial coverage of a company, in order to make a case for notability; and this wasn't it. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:45, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Article Deletion - Integrated Nano-Science Commodity Exchange

Hi Mike. This article was deleted by your good self on 20th December 2010 for reasons a7 (no indication of importance) and g11 (unambiguous advertising or promotion).

By being deleted is the article now lost to the world or can it be recovered for the purpose of editing into an acceptable format ?

Giantswood (talk) 16:07, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Frankly, the tone of the "article" (written by an account which was named after the exchange, and presumably was run by one or more people at the exchange) was so promotional and so self-praising that you wouldn't want to start there. It appears to have been cut-and-pasted from the language of the exchange's various websites and those of its affiliates. You would be much better off starting from scratch, basing your draft on information from substantial impartial press coverage (and if there are no impartial financial or technological press reports, then right there you've got evidence that this entity is not notable enough to call for an encyclopedia article about it, at least not yet). --Orange Mike | Talk 17:57, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Thankyou Mike for your swift response. I shall follow your advice and base my entry on available press coverage and its uniqueness in the commodities trading arena. Giantswood (talk) 18:20, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)You should consider using the articles for creation process so that your draft can be reviewed before it is moved to the main encyclopedia.--ukexpat (talk) 18:24, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Remember, also, that "unique"≠"notable", else every snowflake would merit an article. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:33, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Socialism

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Socialism. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 05:15, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Wishing you and your loved ones very happy holidays! Mugginsx (talk) 15:17, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Tom Stienstra

Hey can you look over this article and vet it? I want to make sure it isn't violating WP:UNDUE and can not be considered libelous or defamatory. I'm pretty confident it's not but I've been contacted via email from this person publisher and they naturally don't like bad publicity. Either way I just want to make sure our bases are covered. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 23:04, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

With respect he is a very notable author. He's won several national awards, is in the California outdoor hall of fame. The pot bust led me to write the article and if it's undue we can certainly trim it down to size. My main concern is the publisher saying we were printing libelous material. It's a borderline legal threat however, the person is working with me and discussing in a manner not disruptive so i will not be divulging that account for blocking as I think they are trying to work within the constraints of the wiki editing system and not disrupting the site. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 23:40, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

The notability needs to be solidly sourced within the article. At this point, these supposed awards aren't in the article, but lots of pot-bust stuff was. The use of the word "libelous" is a borderline legal threat, and totally bogus: the term libel has a very specific meaning; but if they're backing off that nonsense then sure, continue to deal with them. Please add your input at the AfD, too. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:15, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Pangaltı

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Pangaltı. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 02:17, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

..

Seasons greetings to you and yours
Dougweller (talk) 14:11, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Maybe need an Admin. decision? Help?

The article for Namullim doesn't appear, IMHO to meet notability guidelines. Would you please have a look? Please leave any responses on my talk page please. By the way, I'm glad you are still here on the web, and hope you enjoy the holidays! --Leahtwosaints (talk) 23:20, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Greenwashing

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Greenwashing. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 00:15, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello Orangemike

Hello, can you help me please by James belushi. James Belushi's mother is an Albanian immigrant and the user Nymf delete that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthony.al (talk • contribs) 13:47, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

You will need a source for that. You have provided none. Nymf _hideliho! 14:01, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

While the Albania roots of the Belushi family are well-known, we do require a source. Also: we don't put people's ethnic background in the lede paragraph about them, unless they are most famous for their activities in the realm of ethnic activism: something certainly not true of either notable Belushi. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:10, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Indeed. I was referring to the part about Belushi's mother. The fact that he has Albanian roots is well-sourced, but as you pointed out, ethnicity, unless relevant to the person's notability, should not be in the lede. Nymf _hideliho! 14:19, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

yes but before in this article have write that Agnes Belushi is daughter of albanian immigrants why not now ? that is the true story. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthony.al (talk • contribs) 21:11, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Because we're always trying to improve articles in all ways, including proper citations for information that "everybody knows". --Orange Mike | Talk 21:14, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Okay, no problem there are reliable sources: http://www.biography.com/people/james-belushi-20851499 http://www.jimbelushi.ws/biography.htm http://www.moviesection.de/schauspieler/426-James_Belushi</ref>

so when you need more no problem. I can find 10000 sources reliable article about that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anthony.al (talk • contribs) 21:04, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

You don't need to add them to my talk page, you need to add them to the article (or at least its talk page). --Orange Mike | Talk 21:14, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Nayirah (testimony)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Nayirah (testimony). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 21:17, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Joyce Meyer Page

Hi there Orangemike! Sorry I didn't mean to be rude, but that section is unecessary. Calling Jesus scruffy is just silly. Also Wikipedia is about being subjective and it doesn't matter how someone sees her book. All that matters is that she wrote it. Anyways I hope you were not upset!

BTW I am new at this whole thing. But I am learning as I go! :) Alliereborn (talk) 00:05, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

One of the ways we extend courtesy to each other here is that we do not edit the remarks of other editors on talk pages, regardless of how we feel about what they say. (And personally I'm sure the Romans and Pharisees and collaborators thought that He was scruffy and shabby: after all, look at the kind of people He hung around with!) --Orange Mike | Talk 13:34, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Hope you and yours are doing well! --BenBurch (talk)

Still on the right side of the dirt! Daughter graduates from high school this year, to my astonishment: who overclocked the calendars? --Orange Mike | Talk 14:43, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Mayor of Leicester

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Mayor of Leicester. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:15, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Frankopan

I suggest a visit to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Official Lists. Uncle G (talk) 00:42, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of districts and neighborhoods of Los Angeles

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of districts and neighborhoods of Los Angeles. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:16, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:International Crimes Tribunal (Bangladesh)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:International Crimes Tribunal (Bangladesh). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 14:15, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Mig

Thank you for your note. Because of many family and personal responsibilities, I do not remember the exact protocol. Please, understand that I was told the page in question would be researched and posted accordingly so that its content does not appear so one-sided, but apparently the person was too busy at the time. I have no intention of editing that page. And whenever I do something, I sign or contact someone and flag it so that it's seen -- this is not done in secret. Please, note that I have been busy for the last four long years getting my UCLA MFA and that included writing 5 screenplays, one comedy pilot, creating 2 video games, three actual games, four films plus my other scholastic responsibilities and the far commute. I had no life or time for anything and made no money during all that time -- thank you for understanding. Happy New Year. Mig (talk) 19:54, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:GLAM/smarthistory

I reverted your smARThistory to Smarthistory. They likely used "smARThistory" before, and I liked it because it explains what the website is all about, but they use "Smarthistory" now.

BTW, I'm actively working on WP:GLAM/smarthistory. Would you considered joining the project? I think it will become a very good example of how Wikipedia and an outside educational non-profit can work together to improve both websites. You may know me from the fight against paid editing and WP:COI in general, so you should know that I want to be extremely careful on how this is done. Perhaps this can also become an example of how an interested editor can accomplish things that a paid or otherwise conflicted editor can not. Anything you'd like to contribute to the Wikiproject would be appreciated!

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 21:53, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Alas, my ignorance of art history is both broad and deep. I would not be a good match. (Anybody who's seen most pictures of how I dress knows that I am not of an artistic bent.) --Orange Mike | Talk 22:20, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of Puerto Ricans

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of Puerto Ricans. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:17, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Notability question

I have an idea for an article but not sure on the notability aspect. [[6]] I found this interesting and it's probably recieved quite a bit of coverage but it may fail WP:ONEEVENT what do you think? Is it worthwhile to pursue? Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:18, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

I'd say it fails on the one-event measure: it's a tragedy, but unless it makes new case law at some point, it's really not encyclopedic content. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:09, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) If there is enough source coverage, why not? Not for a bio, but for an article on the event. --Cyclopia^talk 15:19, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Remember, we are an encyclopedia; this may fall under WP:NOTNEWSPAPER. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:23, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't look like routine news to me, but YMMV. --Cyclopia^talk 15:49, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:California State University, Northridge

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:California State University, Northridge. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 08:18, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Can you delete this subpage in my user space?

Hi Mike,

Sorry for the trouble, but I'm afraid that in an attempt to build a watchlist of all the high schools in the US I accidentally created a really, really big page in my userspace. Unfortunately it's so big I can't even blank it because it crashes whatever browser I use when I click on the edit button (the page can be viewed though). Would you mind deleting it for me? The page is at User:A13ean/All US Schools. I'm still trying to make this watchlist at some point, but will try to do it with a much smaller page. Thanks, a13ean (talk) 16:45, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

 Done --Orange Mike | Talk 16:48, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

William L. Utley

Hi-I came across this link:[7] Very interesting reading. Thank you-RFD (talk) 17:34, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

He seems to have been a fascinating figure: came into Wisconsin as an itinerant portrait painter and musician, ended up a legislator-politician (Democrat/Free Soil/Republican/Greenback), Adjutant-General, newspaper owner (at least three that I can name), horse-breeder and commanding officer. Alas, the latter seems to have been his least successful trade, when it came down to combat. He is on the honorable roster of those known to have operated Underground Railroad stops, as well. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:13, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Greg Sestero page

Hey, about a year-and-a-half ago we chatted on Greg Sestero's page about some edits I was doing, and there was question about COI and primary sources. Greg is hoping to get the page cleaned up and remove those tags; if I take out the claim of him being French American, would you be comfortable with me taking off the tags? I think those were the only claims in question. I don't want to step on your toes with any concerns you have about the page, so I thought I'd ask first. tx.Bobbyandbeans (talk) 21:57, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Dar es Salaam

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Dar es Salaam. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 07:44, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Stalking/Harassment

Ha! watch page stalkers! Thank You for your edit. Just drop it in the right section for me, next time. I might not be able to hang around. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by PersecutedChristian (talk • contribs) 18:32, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

From John Colby Re: Walter Cunningham

I am sorry if you consider adding an important fact to be "disruptive editing" but it isn't fair to keep Macmillan as the publisher of this book when it is in fact someone else. If you prefer keeping and defending erroneous content, then I suppose that's your business. Best, John Colby, Publisher. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.143.61 (talk) 20:27, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Review of Cavatak entry

Hello Orangemike, Just wanted to see if this was more acceptable for now. Was hoping to submit the following page User:Goughau/Cavatak‎. Thanks! Goughau (talk) 12:21, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Looks fairly solid to me; I'd say it's time to click the link that says, "Submit this page"! Please, though, post full disclosure of your conflict of interest on the talk page of the article. I'd also like to ask that you consider creating a new article, Human enterovirus C. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:32, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Rod Serling edit

Hi, Today was my first (and probably last) attempt to contribute to Wikipedia. I read the Rod Serling page and was interested to find out the ratings for this year's New Year's Eve marathon because it's a testament to his continued impact on society. You deleted my edit, though. Can you give me a general reason why? I wasn't trying to advertise--I thought it was relevant.

Thanks! MK — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.250.108.239 (talk) 21:55, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Because it was a direct advertisement from the SyFy Channel's own press release, and the tone was shamelessly and irredeemably promotional, serving to advertise that network's ratings (yeah, I watched some episodes that day myself). It was not from a reliable source, it was not about Serling, and it contributed nothing to our understanding of him.

That said: please, MK, feel free to continue to edit here. We all stumble in our first efforts to improve this project. (Rule of thumb: corporate press releases are seldom reliable, and never, ever display the requisite neutral point of view Wikipedia strives for.) --Orange Mike | Talk 22:01, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:History of Bosnia and Herzegovina (1878–1918)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:History of Bosnia and Herzegovina (1878–1918). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 05:15, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Unblock request

Hi Mike. We've got a pretty decent-looking unblock request from Third Man Records, and I'm inclined to hand him some rope and see what he does with it. However, I'd appreciate your take on the situation before lifting the block; let me know what you think. Yunshui 雲‍水 11:46, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Cheers. Unblocked him accordingly. Yunshui 雲‍水 15:06, 10 January 2013 (UTC)