en User talk:Dudel250

Redirect to:

User talk:Lor

From a page move: This is a redirect from a page that has been moved (renamed). This page was kept as a redirect to avoid breaking links, both internal and external, that may have been made to the old page name.

STOP!. This is the old talk page for Lor So please do not leave comments here and leave them on Lor's Talk page. Thank you

— Preceding undated comment added 23:06, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion tag

Hi, You wrote to me regarding the speedy deletion of an article. However, there are no speedy deletion tags on the page in question. I wish to contest this as the article is of a high profile and much sought after public speaker. Please direct me to where you have placed the tags. Thank you. – SMasters (talk) 09:41, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Thanks for reviewing and approving my article on Charles Rodrigues. It's the first one I wrote and I'm pleased it made it onto Wikipedia. I noticed the note about adding more categories, so I found and added three relevant ones. I hope that's enough; it's all I could think of. Mgushulak (talk) 05:49, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edit on Traore at Stoke City

Hi

Source? Mad Stoke fan and haven't seen anything about his move — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.167.121.86 (talk) 12:32, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Empire of Luxembourg

Hello, first off, thank you for your contributions to the Wikipedia community. Secondly, regarding your edit of the page Empire of Luxembourg, I have taken a look at the hotel chain you mentioned, and while it is odd that there happens to be a series of hotels bearing a similar name, I do not see any link between them and this page. Furthermore, this page does not seem to me a hoax, although you can check the sources yourself if you like. I would just hate to see a valuable source of history taken down because here is a hotel chain with a similar name, so I have taken th liberty of removing the tags which you added. Thank you for your time, and happy editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EditShark53 (talk • contribs) 16:09, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Shomshuklla Article

Hi Lor,

Thanks for reaching out. Am still working on the article and will complete the references and links etc. in a day. I published it by error. Apologies for that!

Hope I can be given the time to complete the article.

Let me know.

Thanks a ton! Purab.

Please help

I have made all the necessary edits on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheikh_Showkat_Hussain but it is not being reviewed. The message it shows on top is very discouraging. Please review this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aroojdar (talk • contribs) 14:37, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffrey Epstein article

Hi Lor,

You wrote: "Hello, I'm Lor. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Jeffrey Epstein, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page."

No new source is required, since this information was already contained in the article. The statements that he is a financier and that he is a philanthropist are not referenced in the introductory sentence, so nor I think should this.

I stated in the comments for the page:

'Changed to: "Jeffrey Edward Epstein (born January 20, 1953) is an American financier, science and education philanthropist, and a self-confessed paedophile." He is at least as widely known for pleading guilty to soliciting sex from a minor as for his philanthropic endeavours, so this introductory sentence seems to me to strike the best balance.'

By my understanding, this is not a question of validity or verifiability, but simply one of emphasis. As the article clearly states, Epstein is a high-profile convicted sex offender. This is easily as significant a part of his renown as his philanthropic activities and thus deserves equal mention in the introductory sentence.

The purpose of wikipedia is neither to lionize nor demonize people. Epstein is well known for business, philanthropy and sex crime, and NPOV is to give them equal mention from the offset.

Edit: I'm reverting sentence on the grounds that the reference issue does not apply, for reasons stated above.