You were added to a mass-message list because of your displayed interest in this case. The Arbitration Committee will periodically inform you of the status of this case so long as your username remains on this list.
You were recently listed as a party to and/or commented on a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Michael Hardy. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Michael Hardy/Evidence. Please add your evidence by August 25, 2016, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Michael Hardy/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Kharkiv07 (T) 17:23, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi.
I just re- submitted my article on Trenten Beram citing 5 references all substantiating the facts in my description. Please let me know if these revisions are sufficient.
Thanks.
Thenygman
Thenygman (talk) 17:16, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Trenten_beram
Hi.
I just re- submitted my article on Trenten Beram citing 5 references all substantiating the facts in my description. Please let me know if these revisions are sufficient.
Thanks.
Thenygman
Thenygman (talk) 17:16, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Trenten_beram
Hi. I took your advice and added links to context within the artlicle "Trenten Beram". I believe I created these links while being objective towards inclusion of relevant topics to the content area. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thenygman (talk • contribs) 01:12, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Thenygman: The problem with your article is that it lacks notability. Trenten Beram is only an American university student. There is nothing beyond that. He does not deserve his own article; he is not known worldwide. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 01:15, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Tremendous numbers of American University students are also Tremendous Athletes, yet the majority are NOT known worldwide. When someone in the United States gains the title of NCAA Division 1 Conference Champion, that in itself is noteworthy and recognized as a huge accomplishment. When that same person breaks an ALL TIME NATIONAL RECORD for a different country, that elevates his notoriety exponentially. A small summary now will no doubt lead to more comments and add-ons as this college athlete blossoms even more. I'm merely opening the door to an athlete that already made history while still years from his prime. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thenygman (talk • contribs) 01:43, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Thenygman: Okay, first, I don't appreciate the tone you are using. What you think matters doesn't mean it is with Wikipedia. Before you become defensive about how Trenten Beram is important when he is in fact not right now, I'd suggest you look at WP:NOTE and WP:ATHLETE. He is not notable enough to have his own article. If you don't agree, go ahead and contest. I don't care. He is not notable and the article is most likely to be deleted. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 01:56, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Wow. Thought I was being completely objective in making my point. Not disrespectful or out of line in any way. In all honesty, this article does not mean alot to me. The only thing I WILL contest with the editing staff of Wikipedia is the defensiveness YOU have taken just because I brought a different opinion to the table other than Yours. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thenygman (talk • contribs) 02:20, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Thenygman: You will you please stop creating a new section to reply to a message. Right next to the title of the message, you should see a link ([Edit]). Click on that and then respond. I don't care what you think of me. You don't agree with policy, that's your choice. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 02:32, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:10, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
The articles I finished have had reliable sources and I do know want they are. They were cited from NBC and news stations that had officially been given. So how can the source not be reliable. The same sources have been used for past seasons and several shows. But the picture was used for promotional content for the show, and no commercial use. So how can that violate if even last season of SVU was on a wiki page for the same reason? I just want understand if the format has followed past seasons and current wiki pages, how is it wrong now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Insight2016 (talk • contribs) 23:22, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Insight2016: You cited IMDB, which is unreliable (see WP:CITEIMDB) and your were copy-pasting summaries of the episodes (WP:COPYRIGHT). Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 23:26, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi! I wrote the sources in the article's talk, if it's better for you I can put them here as well. Let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.44.125.62 (talk) 21:33, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on Dancing with the Stars (U.S. season 23). What is going on with you, Mirela? Problems in your personal life? As far as I can remember, you've always been friendly to me. But, now your fighting me? See WP:DONTREVERT. Usually the only time to completely revert an edit is for vandalism (and that probably wouldn't happen with another experienced editor). Otherwise, unnecessary reversions like that are disruptive and causes contention between editors. (It also can be an indication of ownership.) Usually if I disagree with an edit by an editor with much more experience than me, I will discuss it with them on their talk page (instead of reverting). You mention BRD (which isn't an actual guideline), but maybe you missed reading: "Reversion should be a last choice in editing: the first choice in editing should always be to improve an article by refinement, not to revert changes by other editors." or "BRD is never a reason for reverting." or "Before reverting, first consider whether the original text could have been better improved in a different way or if part of the edit can be fixed to preserve some of the edit." (1) I changed Kenneth to Kenny because Kenny is the official name on the ABC site, and it helps make the column not so wide. (2) I removed actress from Jana Kramer because it's not in the source, and you agreed with me before that nothing should be added without a source. Musdan77 (talk) 02:39, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
- @Musdan77: Frankly, I don't know what is up with me lately. I have noticed this "side" of me showing, which is normally not who I am. I got involved in a huge chaotic mess, which I was being falsely accused for things I didn't do, so maybe that is a factor? Or maybe the constant fighting of whatever content is getting to me? I don't know. I recently started college, so it could be that. I have no clue. Perhaps I need a break and recollect my thoughts. I don't know. I apologize for my edit warring, it truly was not my intention. BRD is misrepresented, if you ask me. Editing on DWTS for maybe 3 years made me become accustomed to certain things. Stating Rick's years of office redundant and unnotable on the article, if policy says otherwise then I'll have to suck it up. I also have the huge tendency to revert an edit without looking at the changes properly. I always have and I don't know if it will change. I apologize for the Jana part, I didn't see at all. Again, I apologize for everything. I am glad you brought this to my attention. I knew there was something wrong with me, but another editor telling me confirms my suspicions. If I caused you any emotional stress (mostly anger and frustration, if you will), I sincerely apologize. I need to be more cautious. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 02:58, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for your (unexpected) reply. I'll pray for you (if that's OK). Hope things are better soon. —Musdan77 (talk) 16:56, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
I don't know what your problem with my source was. It was the official press release. Edggjhh (talk) 06:30, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- @Edggjhh: It was unreliable. I could not find the legitimacy of it. Please see WP:V, WP:SOURCE and WP:Reliable sources when you add a source and if someone reverts you. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 15:25, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- How do you feel about this; bigot? Yes, I am perfectly happy with a boomerang to Giano for two PA's (one against Kelly calling them stupid, and one against Callmemirela and Canadians in general calling them "precious" in the most facetious way possible). I could be misinterpreting their comment to you about being "precious" but I feel it's directed to you because a) you're canadian and b) your sexual and gender identification. Mr rnddude (talk) 18:07, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- @Mr rnddude: Frankly, I don't even know what that is supposed to mean. I'd be more inclined to request action if a) I knew what that meant and b) it got worse. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 18:10, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- Aight, I'll put it on the back-burner. If they carry on I'll bring it up, if not, I'll let it go. Carry on, Mr rnddude (talk) 18:14, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- Deal. Thank you! Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 18:18, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Callmemirela, in the open Michael Hardy arbitration case, a remedy or finding of fact has been proposed which relates to you. Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Amortias (T)(C) 19:44, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi Callmemirela -- I didn't quite understand what you meant by this comment. Could you please explain? Regards, —MelbourneStar☆talk 12:38, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- @MelbourneStar: I am fighting a cold, so I apologize if any of my comments seem strange in grammar or the comment itself makes no sense. What I meant to say was that I was replying to the user when they said that you were "threatening" them. I'll redit comment. I apologize for any confusion. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 12:45, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- I've struck out my comment instead. Again, my apologies. I've been at odds these past days due to the cold. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 12:48, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- I thought that may have been the case; your comment being in response to theirs – an implication whereby I threatened a user, which is why they threatened legal action. Of course, you may have been just diagnosing the problem. But that problem, was apparently my work as that ANI discussion explained, which makes so much sense now. Thanks very much for your input! soup and tea work wonders, so I hope you get better soon. —MelbourneStar☆talk 12:55, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
We'd like to invite you to participate in a user study closely related to SuggestBot. User:Another Article is seeking to understand more about the workflow and time commitment of contributors to the English Wikipedia. As part of this study you will occasionally be prompted to answer questions about your editing activity, and these questions should never take more than a minute or two to complete. The intended length of the study is two weeks, but your actual time commitment is totally up to you. If you would like to see more details you can read the project proposal at Research:Measuring editor time commitment and workflow (on meta), but if you are feeling bold and would like just like to sign up right now you can add the line importScript("User:Another_Article/workflowstudyclient.js"); to your common.js. Contact User:Another Article if you have any questions about this study!
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
| Views/Day
|
Quality
|
Title
|
Content
|
Headings
|
Images
|
Links
|
Sources
|
Tagged with…
|
| 5,476
|
|
The Voice (U.S. TV series) (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add sources
|
| 216
|
|
Dancing with the Stars (U.S. season 4) (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add sources
|
| 271
|
|
Dancing with the Stars (U.S. season 10) (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add sources
|
| 243
|
|
Mahidevran Gülbahar (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add sources
|
| 18
|
|
Sriwijaya University (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add sources
|
| 242
|
|
Dancing with the Stars (U.S. season 3) (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add sources
|
| 203
|
|
Roman Catholic sex abuse cases by country (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cleanup
|
| 223
|
|
Argentine tango (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cleanup
|
| 4,428
|
|
Last Man Standing (U.S. TV series) (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cleanup
|
| 6,779
|
|
Money Monster (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expand
|
| 1,452
|
|
Superman in film (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expand
|
| 2,612
|
|
NBC (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expand
|
| 1,154
|
|
Catholic Church sexual abuse cases (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unencyclopaedic
|
| 3,299
|
|
Bob's Burgers (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unencyclopaedic
|
| 52
|
|
George & A.J. (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unencyclopaedic
|
| 4,303
|
|
Rape (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Merge
|
| 1,465
|
|
Karna (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Merge
|
| 777
|
|
HP Inc. (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Merge
|
| 260
|
|
American Idol (season 10) (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wikify
|
| 67
|
|
Gordon Ramsay's Home Cooking (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wikify
|
| 1,125
|
|
A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010 film) (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wikify
|
| 7
|
|
2015 drought in Korea (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orphan
|
| 3
|
|
Aquabike World Championship (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orphan
|
| 3
|
|
Aidong Men (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orphan
|
| 50
|
|
Silumin (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stub
|
| 363
|
|
Remix OS (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stub
|
| 18
|
|
Beach Chair (film test) (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stub
|
| 34
|
|
Gregg Jakobson (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stub
|
| 18
|
|
Dancing with the Stars: We Dance! (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stub
|
| 17
|
|
Run Fast (talk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stub
|
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:23, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:
- Michael Hardy is reminded that:
- Administrators are expected to set an example with their behavior, including refraining from incivility and responding patiently to good-faith concerns about their conduct, even when those concerns are expressed suboptimally.
- All administrators are expected to keep their knowledge of core policies reasonably up to date.
- Further misconduct using the administrative tools will result in sanctions.
- MjolnirPants is reminded to use tactics that are consistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines, and the 4th Pillar when dealing with other users they are in dispute with.
- The Arbitration Committee is reminded to carefully consider the appropriate scope of future case requests. The committee should limit "scope creep" and focus on specific items that are within the scope of the duties and responsibilities outlined in Arbitration Policy.
For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:56, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
- Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Michael Hardy closed
Hello C. I haven't stopped by in the longest time so I just wanted to say hello and I hope that your autumn has been pleasant - well except for your cold. Get to feeling better soon and have a nice weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 22:30, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for all the thanked comments on that page. It would be nice if you returned to the discussion. :) Depauldem (talk) 22:48, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Depauldem: I would if GF wouldn't act so WP:OWN-y, refusing every reliable source available when WP:RS clearly applies. I'll see the responses, and I'll comment then. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 00:33, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
I have cited the originator of the source. It is the official registered database of all shows etc.
So that is why I reverted it back.
Pipera (talk) 01:31, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
- Please forgive the intrusion Callmemirela. I have added a section header so this wont get lost in the thread above. Pipera please see WP:RS/IMDB where you will read why that website cannot be used as a reference. Also see WP:USERGENERATED for further reasons about sites like IMDB. MarnetteD|Talk 01:37, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Read it for yourself[1]. The New Left is dying off and people like you are not gonna stop people like me from including the facts.JoetheMoe25 (talk) 02:34, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
- @JoetheMoe25: Uhm... okay? I am here just abiding by Wikipedia policies and guidelines, which you are not as it seems. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 02:45, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Now read this and quit libeling false allegations: "a series of decisions the Supreme Court ruled that the Proclamation of Independence does not have the validity of a constitutional law, and that it is not a supreme law, in light of which laws and regulations that contradict it are nullified. Nevertheless, article 1 of the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty and of the Basic Law: Freedom of Occupation relates to the principles mentioned in the Proclamation of Independence as a normative source"[2] The New Left cannot be saved. Sorry.JoetheMoe25 (talk) 02:56, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
- @JoetheMoe25: If you're here to repeat the same thing and say a bunch of bullshit, do not post on my talk page again. I do not care for the topic. I am here to stop you from reverting everybody to your version. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} ♑ 03:01, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
