Please use the Reply button to reply to a message, or add topic (+) to start a new section.
If I have left a message on your talk page, please DO NOT post a reply here, instead, reply there.
Mention me using the "Mention a user" button in the Reply box or type out {{ping|Accotink2}}.
I will have your talk page on watch and will note when you have replied.
If you prefer to manually edit the page to post:
Use an accurate and appropriate heading.
Indent your comment by using an appropriate number of colons ':'.
Sign your post with four tildes (~~~~) at the end.
Archive. Select show to expand. ====>
Welcome
Welcome!
Hello, Accotink2, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
The Campus Ambassadors are crucial components of the Wikipedia Public Policy Initiative. Volunteers in this position will be in charge of training and supporting the participating professors and students on Wikipedia-related skills, such as how to create new articles, how to add images, how the talk pages work, etc. Campus Ambassadors will also help recruit other people on campus to contribute to Wikipedia articles, for example by setting up Wikipedia-related student groups and by organizing "Welcome to Wikipedia" social events. In general they will become known as Wikipedia experts on the university campus (in your case, on the Georgetown University or George Washington University campus). The estimated time commitment for this role is 3 to 5 hours a week, possibly slightly more at the very beginning and very end of the semester. The Wikimedia Foundation will hold a mandatory three-day training for all Campus Ambassadors in August, and will continue to stay in contact with and offer full support for the Campus Ambassadors throughout the academic semester.
If you are interested in being a Wikipedia Campus Ambassador at GWU or Georgetown University, I would like to send you the application form. What email address can I send this to? (Feel free to email me this info if you prefer: alin@wikimedia.org).
Please stop assessing articles, you've made too many mistakes that I'm being forced to revert en-mass your assessments to MILHIST articles. First, WP:MILHIST does not use either C-class nor importance assessments, as you've introduced here. It is customary that article assessment is only done by members of the associated wikiprojects, so please cease assessing for projects that you are not a member of and also please read how each individual project assesses before assessing articles in the future. -MBK00402:10, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Frankly, we won't get with the program. When C-class was introduced, all wikiprojects were given the choice of whether to adopt it or not, and MILHIST chose not to. Nowhere does it mention that any project is being forced to accept any assessment of another project, as each project has its own standards for articles, so please do not automatically carry-over assessments. For example, MILHIST does not use C but uses A (A is rarely used and not many projects recognize it at all). The members of MILHIST have specifically voted to not use C-class, and we do not use importance assessments either. I will note that you are still adding importance assessments to MILHIST articles in direct violation of what I have asked you to do ([1][2]) Please cease and desist immediately. -MBK00400:31, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, in most cases Projects don't mind if you do assessment for them, WPMILHIST is an exception, because they have so much manpower and organization. I would just suggest assessing obvious class related stuff such as stubs and starts for them. Sadads (talk) 01:59, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What is your problem. I've asked you nicely to cease adding importance assessments to MILHIST articles, and then this [3]. Your open disregard to common courtesy and the MILHIST assessment structure is disruptive editing, so the next time, you will be blocked for disruptive editing. -MBK00403:01, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I might as well add, that WP:SHIPS and WP:AVIATION also do not use importance assessments. Although many of their templates you may encounter will have them, they have not been removed yet since those projects decided to drop the use of that assessment in-line with MILHIST. Additionally, when assessing these articles, the projects use a B-class checklist that is tied into the display of C and B class, so even if you assess the article as such, without the checklist, your efforts are for nothing. -MBK00403:09, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for your input, it was such a pleasure interacting with you, now that the overlapping projects assessment are done, we need never interact again. projects opting out of policy, how charming, some projects are more equal than others, can i take a vote on SI project opting out of copyright vios? Accotink2 (talk) 03:22, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Policy = guideline, not rule. That is the beauty of Wikipedia. If you examined the system of the German wikipedia, you would see just how different they are, even though they have the same basic principles and policies. Don't get hung up on it, work with the project, per the interest of the project, and if someone gets offended, be flexible. There is no golden way to deal with every article and every WikiProject. Sadads (talk) 11:06, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop assessing articles that you've created only 15 minutes before, as you did here. Thanks, RJaguar3 | u | t20:08, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
i always assess an article after i create it, if anybody disagrees they can change it. i find it important to have an initial assessment since so many are unassessed. with anything less than a B it is trivial, what do you do with the articles you create if any? Accotink2 (talk) 20:45, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you want an article that you wrote assessed you should get an impartial reviewer to asses it. I would be happy to review all of the articles you have written. The assessment scheme is to help get another pair of eyes on an article. And yes we have a huge backlog, all the more reason to draw people's attention to what you feel is important. Sadads (talk) 20:50, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
i note there are 1,381,855 with no importance; 390,984 with no quality Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment, the previous version where it was "bad form" to self assess is superceded, no mention now. thanks for the offer, it may become a challenge for you, but only 13 thusfar [4] i don't know about "huge", but it makes the BLP backlog of 40,000 looks like the trivial nonsense it is. Accotink2 (talk) 20:54, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Accotink2! We are looking for editors to join the Smithsonian Institution collaboration, an outreach effort which aims to support collaboration such as Wiki-Academies, article writing, and other activities to engage the Smithsonian Institution in Wikipedia. We thought you might be interested, and hope that you will join us. Thanks!!!
You recently wrote one of the articles that we had identified as in need of creation as part of the Smithsonian Institution collaboration. We hope that you will continue helping us develop that material. Sadads (talk) 13:23, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you go to Wikipedia:GLAM/SI/Members you will find a place to sign up for keeping informed about what is going on and other articles we have identified as needing creation are at Wikipedia:GLAM/SI/Articles_for_creation. Currently, we are in the process of trying to get a time slot for an instructional session at the Smithsonian for some of their staff. For right now we encourage you to keep up the tagging and working on articles related to the project. If you need any help working on this material, please raise questions or comments on the Project talk page. Sadads (talk) 13:45, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Accotink2. You have new messages at Sadads's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Please do not cut and paste information from the deletion logs into articles and article talk
I see that you added a cut and paste of the deletion log of a previous version of Grace Lin at the end of both the article and talkpage. I have deleted both of those since that has no bearing on the subject of the article. If you are trying to make some kind of statement about Tnxman307, you should be aware that the previous version of the article that he deleted consisted of "Still gathering reasherch for article. estimated time 3 days". Cheers! Syrthiss (talk) 14:48, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
i tend to want to keep a record of deletions, for future reference. while this one is ok, others show inappropriate speedy deletion of notable articles. mere users want to know, not just admins Accotink2 (talk) 14:49, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
^^ This. If you feel that there are inappropriate speedy deletions being done about notable subjects (where the article wasn't something like 'Bobby Joe is an author') then you should ask those administrators on their talkpage and see if they can justify the deletion. Syrthiss (talk) 14:53, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
done User:accotink2/Deletion Logs i have encountered, well i dunno, do i really want to antagonize admins questioning their "delete first and ask questions later"? this problem will require a culture change that i will be unable to effect one by one, but i can compile some evidence whenever there might be a consensus. Accotink2 (talk) 14:58, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to link to those as well, that way you can go back to them. The cool thing about Wikipedia, is that the records accumulated rarely ever get deleted. Sadads (talk) 15:00, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Ok, thanks. I still think that your first target for your Righting Great Wrongs should probably not be for a completely valid speedy, at the risk of invalidating your point...but thats just me. Unwatching your page now. Happy editing. :) Syrthiss (talk) 15:04, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
just to clarify what i was saying, i'm not interested in righting anything, i just want to know what the facts are. my concern is based on the two incidents:
therefore, i will keep a running total of deletion logs as i encounter them. i'm sure it will be a small number, and most will be ok, however the "wrongfully deleted" will be greater than zero. it's important to include all to gauge the ratio of proper versus improper. Accotink2talk12:24, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
References
I noticed in a lot of your edits, you cite webpages without additional information such as access date, for someone to retrieve it if it moves on Internet Archive or similar programs. I would suggest trying to fill out Template:Cite web when you make these references that way people can find the information easier in the future. Sadads (talk) 15:03, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
i will try to format refs better in the future. in the quick writing of articles, the cite web tools are kinda klunky, trying to figure them out is frustrating. pure laziness. Accotink2 (talk) 22:01, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I understand, I sometimes avoid templates, such as the Harvard citations and some of the other more odd formats. However, the problem is that you leave that to editors like myself, who is cleaning up the references to the United States Army Center of Military History, many of which have broken links, so unless you had the specialist knowledge I have, you would have a really hard time finding the content on the website still.Sadads (talk) 11:09, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
i agree kicking the can down the road is not a solution, we need some citation tools that will make it easy to drop in the info, and allowing you to "change ref style". some refs are more stable than others, but another good example is Ploughshares who at the beginning of the year broke all their links. for example: [5] i found the reflinks tool, but it needs human supervision. Accotink2 (talk) 19:40, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Yotam Haber, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.yotamhaber.com/page1.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 18:47, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Normally it's a matter of whether or not people are interested in the topic. I recently wrote an article on Nancy Wexler, this woman who did nothing particularly important with her life. Oh, except discover the genetic roots of Huntington's Chorea. And she didn't even have a stub. Let me know if you need someone to search for sources, or any of your articles somehow have a legal aspect or overlap; that's my area of expertise. Ironholds (talk) 20:28, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 18:33, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Edmund T. Allen, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/archive/2004/april/i_history.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 01:47, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Bunny Harvey, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.bunnyharvey.com/resume/solo. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 19:32, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Again with the articles!
The Original Barnstar
You're writing articles at a rate that puts me to shame :). As such, I hope you accept this barnstar as a reward for your work. In addition, I've asked an administrator to give you the autopatrolled right, confirming that your articles are excellent enough to not require checking upon creation :). Happy editing! Ironholds (talk) 14:40, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
not at all, simple trans from the french, better to tag frenchtrans than blpunref. you see the wiki english bias here, since there are no english references, but an equivalent person like say Dolly Parton has plenty of french ones. Accotink2talk14:09, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Smithsonian Institution workshop on Thursday
This is a reminder that you're signed up to help with the workshop, per Wikipedia:GLAM/SI/Events. If something has come up, and you can't make it, please take your name off the list. Otherwise, we'll look forward to seeing you.
However, I'm making this request: please don't volunteer to assist the workshop participants from the Smithsonian Institute. Rather, I suggest that you just watch and learn; I expect that there will be plenty of space for everyone in the room.
I request this because, looking at the comments on your user talk page, you've got a lot to learn - not surprising, since you've been editing for less than two months. For example, experienced editors archive older postings on their user talk page, rather than deleting them. You might take a look at WP:TMM to get a sense of how much there is to learn about Wikipedia editing. (Much of that is dated, particularly the screen shots and description of the user interface, but the concepts are all still quite valid.) -- John Broughton(♫♫)
Thanks. I think it is important they are started however short so others can expand. Thankyou for your expansions to Runcorn Priory. I will try to get all the red links started. You and others can expand over a year or so. Am working through, Cornwall and Cumbria now.Starzynka (talk) 16:36, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, one of our SI employees has developed the article Ernest Spybuck, would you mind taking a look at it and helping us solidify the article?Sadads (talk) 19:16, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.
If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 21:08, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Accotink2. You have new messages at Sadads's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
WP Smithsonian in the Signpost
"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Smithsonian Institution for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Also, if you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 23:54, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for retrieving the Max Conrad article. I found the New Yorks Times obituary about his death but could not doing anything until the article was moved.-RFD (talk) 18:31, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
why did you delete anthologies? don't they tend to go to WP:Author 3. "The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." Accotink2talk13:47, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your message. I deleted the anthology entries for Major Jackson because he did not edit them. He was a contributor along with many other writers. We cannot list anthologies that writers have been in as they often contribute poems to hundreds of collections and hundred of writers are included in each one. I did research the books listed and it seems he had no further significant role in the books' compilations. I hope that makes my edit choices clearer. Best wishes Span (talk) 13:55, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
From what I can see, they are not articles, they are single poems. No doubt Major Jackson is notable, my edit was not surrounding that. If you have 150 poets contributing one or two poems to an anthology you cannot list every author. You can see here and here, on Jackson's own website, that he lists his publications as the books he has written. As an example, the Billy Collins article gives a sense of how works are commonly listed. Best wishes Span (talk) 14:25, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
i agree for the snowball notable it appears to be citation clutter, however, for the marginal notable with fewer works, anthologies might well tip the balance. maybe we should elevate the issue to Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (lists of works)? i note that the "cite books" template has a "chapter" input so book chapters stories are implied? Accotink2talk14:41, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have re-added the anthology listing under the career section. I would be surprised if anyone would suggest Major is not notable. WP:ANYBIO lists repeated nomination for a significant award as a criteria. Of the criteria Wikipedia:Notability (academics) gives, he clearly meets several including
The person is or has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g. a National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society) or a Fellow of a major scholarly society for which that is a highly selective honor (e.g. the IEEE)
The person is or has been an editor-in-chief of a major well-established journal in their subject area.
The person is in a field of literature (e.g writer or poet) or the fine arts (e.g. musician, composer, artist), and meets the standards for notability in that art, such as WP:CREATIVE or WP:MUSIC.
thanks for putting back. i would agree that anthologies for someone like E. E. Cummings would be overkill, however for Jackson or say Larissa Szporluk, or Nicholas Christopher, Shu Ting, the only example of the poets work may be the anthology in the local library (or google books online). i understand i tend toward the bullet point (powerpoint style ugh) which to me is more accessible of list of works.Accotink2talk16:37, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You're doing good work. these changes to anthologies are small points, compared to all the great changes you are making across the board. Larissa Szporluk, Nicholas Christopher, and Shu Ting do have their own collections. I would suggest that the anthologies listing could go in their careers section, as with Major Jackson, else it looks as those these poets edited or complied the anthologies. How would that be? Best wishes Span (talk) 10:28, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
i prefer to edit article space. sorry to quibble with you. as a threshold, i would like to see the anthologies stay as examples of authors work, especially for articles less than 32 kb. but as to format, i prefer the bullet list format in that it's easier for me to see and click through to online examples of work. i have done the paragraph list for magazine articles behind a pay wall, i.e. New Yorker, Nation, but it's harder to get to the reference in a paragraph. i tend to conflate poem, story, essay, (insert work) in that they are all less than book length in a book or periodical. my impression is that this is a personal style matter with no consensus. (i would follow consensus) my impression is that "anthologies" is their work in, and "edited" is their editing. i don't feel strongly enough to get in an edit war. there are hundreds like this. Accotink2talk14:45, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for "The Art of Fiction"
Thanks so much for linking "The Art of Fiction" to Ernest Hemingway. For some reason I've never been successful in pulling up the Paris Review version online- it's great to read it; I intend to use it in a number of EH articles and probably the Ezra Pound article as well. Just wanted you to know. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:55, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
yes, the Paris Review interviews complete is newly online, up to the M's -- the online content of magazine is hit or miss, compensates for Ploughshares pulling down all their online content. Accotink2talk01:36, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is hit or miss. I've wanted to read that interview for a long time, but have only read the reworked version that he published as "The Art of the Short Story". It's a very good interview during an interesting time in his life. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 20:42, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
enjoy it while it lasts, the nice thing about the web is unlocking all these orphan works, but the copyright mindset intrudes, so the internal debates about opening archives and pay walls continue. Accotink2talk20:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I saw the administrative clarification the bullies are pushing for with the badlydrawnjeff case. I had nothing to contribute but personal attacks against these abhorrent people, so I didn't write anything. Okip 04:45, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
yes, as you saw inconvenient facts add nothing to the discussion, when their train has left the station. funny the way blp tags are added just enough to "prove" that "progress has stalled": maybe we should start tag removal at the same rate as those added. then the real progress would be back on schedule. Accotink2talk14:22, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
thanks a lot, i confess i have a short trigger, when people delete lists. he's good enough to ask questions, but doesn't like the fuzzy consensus answers. moving along. Accotink2talk03:30, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings! Please excuse this intrusion on your talk page, and allow me to invite you to participate in the newly-formed Wikipedia Contribution Team (WP:CONTRIB for short)! The goal of the team is to attract more and better contributions to the English Wikipedia, as well as to help support the fundraising team in our financial and editing contribution goals. We have lots of stuff to work on, from minor and major page building, to WikiProject outreach, article improvement, donor relations, and more—in fact, part of our mission is to empower team members to make their own projects to support our mission. Some of our projects only take a few minutes to work on, while others can be large, multi-person tasks—whatever your interest level, we're glad to have you.
If this sounds interesting, please visit WP:CONTRIB and sign onto the team. Even if there does not appear to be anything that really speaks out as being work you'd like to do, I'd encourage you to join and follow the project anyway, as the type of work we'll be doing will certainly evolve and change over time. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me, or ask on the team talk page. Regards, ⇒DanRosenthalWikipedia Contribution Team22:20, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, this is a human edit (not a bot). I'm specifically contacting you as you expressed interest in the Campus Ambassador position, and the Wikipedia Contributions Team has a lot of commonality in working along with the Campus Ambassadors. You can reach me on my talk page, or by email at drosenthal@wikimedia.org with questions; I can't guarantee that I'll be checking back on your talk page often enough to hold a sustained conversation there. Regards, ⇒DanRosenthalWikipedia Contribution Team22:20, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.
If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 15:07, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
list of winners not copyright vio. this list is the last one of the series not written. false positives tend to undermine the credibility of corenbot. Accotink2talk16:22, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
P G Wodehouse
Hi, Accotink2. I just wanted to explain that I've reverted your addition of the Paris Review interview to the list of external references, not because there's anything wrong with it, simply because it's already there, a few lines lower down. regards Jimmy Pitttalk18:47, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
22:35, 24 December 2007 Jj137 (talk | contribs) deleted "Blue Heart Diamond" (It is a page created primarily to disparage its subject or a biography of a living person that is controversial in tone and unsourced, where there is no neutral version in the his)
20:37, 21 May 2008 Garion96 (talk | contribs) deleted "Larry Thomas Bell" (G12: Blatant copyright infringement)
19:32, 12 November 2007 Davewild (talk | contribs) deleted "Richard Beeman" (per CSD:G2 test page)
05:32, 22 May 2010 Anetode (talk | contribs) deleted "Shirley Tse" (Speedy deleted per CSD G11, was blatant advertising, used only to promote someone or something. using TW)
14:23, 6 July 2007 Rebecca (talk | contribs) deleted "Vaughn Shoemaker" (author admits in edit summary was complete/partial hoax)
17:22, 1 March 2010 Accounting4Taste (talk | contribs) deleted "Robert Harms" (A7: No explanation of subject's significance (individual real person/animal, organization, WWW content): Article about a real person, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject (CSD A7))
02:12, 26 November 2007 Philippe (talk | contribs) deleted "David Eltis" (Speedy deleted per (CSD A7), was an article about a real person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content that didn't assert the importance or significance of its subject. using TW)
10:44, 23 February 2007 Mailer diablo (talk | contribs) restored "David Eltis" (39 revisions restored: restore in good faith)
20:10, 16 February 2006 Retired username (talk | contribs) deleted "David Eltis" (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Eltis)
21:00, 1 October 2010 PeterSymonds (talk | contribs) deleted "Tom Joyce" (Courtesy deletion of a marginally notable biography of a living person per OTRS #2010100110005982)
06:16, 27 September 2007 Jreferee (talk | contribs) deleted "Daniel Heyman" (CSD A7 No reasonable assertion of importance/significance.)
14:57, 29 October 2010 JohnCD (talk | contribs) deleted "Andrew Lopez" (A7: Article about a real person, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject)
00:38, 11 November 2010 Explicit (talk | contribs) deleted "Daniel Heyman" (Expired PROD, concern was: No real claim of notability. Doesn't seem to meet WP:BIO)
06:16, 27 September 2007 Jreferee (talk | contribs) deleted "Daniel Heyman" (CSD A7 No reasonable assertion of importance/significance.)
21:30, 24 November 2010 TexasAndroid (talk | contribs) deleted "Jacques Darras" (Speedy deleted per CSD A7, was an article about a real person that didn't assert the importance or significance of its subject. using TW)
12:46, 2 December 2010 Nyttend (talk | contribs) deleted "Ramey Ko" (A7: Article about a real person, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject)
17:18, 6 December 2006 Mindmatrix (talk | contribs) deleted "Hocine" (CSD - A7; also, is in French)
14:17, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Rudi Beichel" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
14:17, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Otto Hirschler" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
14:18, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Gerhard Reisig" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
14:17, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Georg Rickhey" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
14:17, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) restored "Georg Rickhey" (23 revisions restored: wrong rationale; restoring to clarify)
14:16, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Georg Rickhey" (G4: Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
14:18, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Werner Rosinski" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
13:47, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Jessie Little Doe Baird" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
13:44, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Kelly Benoit-Bird" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
13:44, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Drew Berry (biomedical animator)" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
13:44, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Carlos D. Bustamante" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
13:44, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "John Dabiri" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
13:47, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Shannon Lee Dawdy" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
13:44, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Nergis Mavalvala" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
13:44, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Jorge Pardo (installation artist)" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
13:40, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Sebastian Ruth" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
13:40, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Dawn Song" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
13:40, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Marla Spivak" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
15:09, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Paul Rudy" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
15:09, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Yotam Haber" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
15:09, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Andrew Norman (composer)" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
15:05, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Susan Botti" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
15:06, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Charles Norman Mason" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
15:06, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Steven M. Burke" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
15:06, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Pierre David Jalbert" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
15:02, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Shih-Hui Chen" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
15:02, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Carolyn Yarnell" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
15:03, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Mark Wingate" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
15:03, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Andrew Rindfleisch" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
14:59, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "David Rakowski" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
14:59, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Edmund Campion (composer)" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
15:00, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "James C. Mobberley" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
15:00, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Walter K. Winslow" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
15:00, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Kathryn Alexander" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
15:00, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Steve Rouse" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
14:06, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Tamar Diesendruck" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
14:06, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Jay Anthony Gach" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
14:07, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Larry Thomas Bell" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
20:37, 21 May 2008 Garion96 (talk | contribs) deleted "Larry Thomas Bell" (G12: Blatant copyright infringement)
15:09, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "William Neil (composer)" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
14:07, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Arthur V. Kreiger" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
14:07, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Gerald H. Plain" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
15:09, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "George Edwards (composer)" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
15:09, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Eugene O'Brien (composer)" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
15:01, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Sarah Oppenheimer" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
14:56, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Karen Yasinsky" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
14:56, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "William Bailey (artist)" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
14:56, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Robert G. Dodge" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
14:49, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Bunny Harvey" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
14:40, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Steven A. Linn" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
14:40, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Dimitri Hadzi" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
14:40, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "David S. Shapiro" (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: See also Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Pohick2)
02:16, 17 October 2007 Kimchi.sg (talk | contribs) deleted "David S. Shapiro" (Expired PROD, concern was: MD with a few papers--still in training)
13:04, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Preston Gannaway" (Mass removal of pages added by Accotink2; G5; serial copyright infringer)
13:04, 9 December 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Renée C. Byer" (Mass removal of pages added by Accotink2; G5; serial copyright infringer)
18:35, 10 May 2007 Fran Rogers (talk | contribs) deleted "Stephanie Welsh" (CSD A7)
I would like to apologize to Spanglej, Sadads, Binksternet, TJRC, Kumioko. my intent was not to create work but provide a demonstration to MRG, VW. These three concepts, while reasonable alone are together asinine:
"substantial edits by others", good point. let's bury the hatchet, let me scrub the backlog with your approval, the lists are clearly PD facts. VW argues that an abridged list is "creative", but this can't be so: the telephone book excludes unlisted numbers; rather it must be the "uncreative" facts in the list. Accotink2talk17:35, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've never wanted to have a hatchet. It was always my goal to keep you as a productive contributor without the violations of our copyright policies. You have just repeatedly indicated that you find the standard of not copying content impossible to uphold. I would, frankly, love to have your help cleaning up any content concerns that may remain, but you have repeatedly minimized the problem and persisted in spite of multiple conversations about it. I have not had time to review any of your more recent edits, but from what you say it seems that you have continued copying content even under this sock account. If you want to negotiate an unblock, you should make an unblock request at your primary user talk page. You should disclose and explain the block evasion, since that is a separate issue, but also should offer some plausible assurance that you do indeed get it and that you can and will meet the policies that prohibit pasting from other sources. Another administrator should review that request. I would not personally be comfortable unblocking you, given especially your sock puppetry.
An abridged list can indeed be creative; it depends on the selection criteria for the abridgment. But I have no interest in engaging you in the kinds of circular conversations we ran into in the past. As you're very well aware, we have a lot of work to do. --Moonriddengirl(talk)17:53, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Feist v. Rural: " If Feist were to take the directory and rearrange them it would destroy the copyright owned in the data."...."but, if you rewrote every recipe from a particular cookbook, you might still be found to have infringed the author's copyright in the choice of recipes and their "coordination" and "presentation", even if you used different words; however, the West decisions below suggest that this is unlikely unless there is some significant creativity carried over from the original presentation." as was changed here [15]
I have no interest in engaging you in the kinds of circular conversations we ran into in the past. After having explained to you, for instance, that we do not accept content on the basis that our site is noncommercial and why we don't, I see that you still asserted that as a defense in your last comment to User:Dcoetzee. For that reason, I'm afraid it feels like a waste of my time to try to engage you in conversation. So far as I can see, the issue is not that you don't understand our policies, but that you disagree with them and hence choose to ignore them. Let me know if you want to talk about the procedure for requesting unblock. --Moonriddengirl(talk)19:08, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
no, i don't disagree with policy, but your method of enforcing it: copyright is a serious problem, and you are making it worse. by "impossible": i mean that Zero Defects is an impossible standard: it is a slogan and fad, even sham and delusion. your backlog increases because of your inability to compromise. (what comment at Dcoetzee?) why should i submit to running the gauntlet when i have pin the tail on the donkey? Accotink2talk19:20, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So, then, your attitude is unchanged, and an unblock would be inappropriate. Many contributors seem to manage to contribute content to Wikipedia without pasting anything. Your last comment to Dcoetzee remains quite visible on your primary user talk page. --Moonriddengirl(talk)19:58, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
the comment to Dcoetzee was an explanation that policy is more stringent than the law, making it harder to comply. non-compliance is not "lack of understanding", nor "disagreement with policy". your projection of motives is bad faith. the issue is profoundly gray, and not amenable to Binary opposition analysis. Dialectical behavior therapy may be appropriate.
Description: There will be a behind-the-scenes tour of the National Archives and you will learn more about what NARA does. We will also have a mini-film screening featuring FedFlix videos along with a special message from Jimmy Wales. In the afternoon, there will be lightning talks by Wikimedians (signup to speak), wiki-trivia, and cupcakes to celebrate!
Details & RSVP: Details about the event are on our Washington, DC tenwiki page.
Please RSVP soon as possible, as there likely will be a cap on number of attendees that NARA can accommodate.
