User talk:MikeWazowski

BINDER (company)

Hello Mike! I've worked on the article BINDER (company) to improve it. It would be great if you could have a quick look at it again if there are still mutiple issues. Since I'm very new to Wikipedia and this is my first article I would also very much appreciate your advise in how is the usual procedure in getting a new article finally online resp. found on Wikipedia. Thanks a lot! Ket07 (talk) 12:28, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sock/Meatpuppet

Hi Mike. I believe I've been roped into a larger SPI investigation. I was on IRC and a user asked me to upload an article for him Happy_Family_(food_company). I told him I would Wikify it and upload it over the next week. I think the article is noteworthy. If I'm wrong, let me know.Chiliconwiki (talk) 00:11, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dark Signs?

Why Did you delete the Darksigns page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by George.Trimm (talk • contribs) 18:40, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I never did - but if it was anything like the current version, which only consists of the words "Dark Signs is a best discribed as a" and nothing else, then it deserved to be deleted. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:38, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was working on editing it as it was deleted. But thanks for explaining. :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by George.Trimm (talk • contribs) 16:48, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still working on the page don't delete it anymore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by George.Trimm (talk • contribs) 17:07, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how much clearer I can be - I'm not deleting anything. I'm simply tagging the article as a candidate for deletion, since at the time I tagged it, it was nothing more than an infobox, with no claims or signs of notability, and no references. If anything, this should be a watning flag to you to either accept that the subject doesn't pass muster to have an article and you need to stop recreating it, or that you need to wait until you have the references necessary before recreating. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:26, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Still multiple issues?

Hi Mike,

Does my page still have multiple issues? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roschier_Attorneys_Ltd.

If not, I was told the message must be removed manually.

--ChristineShaw (talk) 10:08, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see why you are asking here since it was MikeWazowski who twice tagged the article as having issues. I think you'll have better luck getting a response from him if we fix the weird technical glitch that got into your link. The article is at: Roschier_Attorneys_Ltd.. Mike, could you please check the article to see if you still think it is ad-like and promotional, and has sourcing issues? Cloveapple (talk) 19:07, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks Cloveapple! Not sure what happened to my signature, I have used the button in the template... But let's see what Mike says about the article. --ChristineShaw (talk) 09:06, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Mike

You have deleted part of my life — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.103.59.238 (talk) 18:27, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what you're referring to. MikeWazowski (talk) 18:50, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speed deletion request removal

Hi. I just thought I'd let you know out of courtesy that I removed your speedy deletion request from the article DirectFix. I don't think it is unambiguous advertising. The article has 4 independent references. I think the article fails WP:NOTE, but as the author points out in the talk there are similar article on Wikipedia about iFixit and iResQ. If these are acceptable then I don't think it would be consistent to nominate DirectFix for speedy deletion. This is just my opinion; please feel free to request speedy deletion again if you wish. NereusAJ (T | C) 00:15, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Considering that the user who created the article is named DirectFix, it seems unambiguously promotional to me. MikeWazowski (talk) 00:18, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, it is incriminating. It is definitely WP:COI. But still, this article is very similar to iFixit and iResQ. NereusAJ (T | C) 00:21, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Li Shengshun

why do you keep adding a redaction to the Li Shengshun article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kusaga (talk • contribs) 19:15, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because the article is completely unreferenced, and you have shown no significance or notability outside the series. I've reverted to the redirect again, but if you try to restore it, I will nominate it for deletion. MikeWazowski (talk) 21:09, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Flintstones (2013) deletion

On my article, The Flintstones (2013 TV series) it says it will be deleted - why? Can you remove the deletion or let me know ways to make the article not get deleted.— Preceding unsigned comment added by TBrandley (talk • contribs)

No, I will not remove the speedy notice. The article was originally deleted per the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Flintstones (Fox Television series). Since your version is not substantially different from prior versions that were deleted (including one you did back in December), the CSD G4 tag is appropriate. MikeWazowski (talk) 18:25, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cuttance

I can't find any mention of him at the site you linked... Peridon (talk) 19:47, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The third paragraph is a direct lift from the linked page. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:56, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Change to Babylon 5 article

I noticed you prefer a season 4 poster of Babylon 5 being used instead of a screenshot of it’s intertitle logo. As the use of a screenshot of an easily identifiable element of the television show (taken from the opening credits) appears to be more appropriate in the infobox television template, and is what is used in all the wiki articles I’ve found on similar television shows, can you provide some rational for removing the B5 logo and replacing it with the poster. I’ve undid your change for the moment, as a poster could possibly be better placed in something like the article on the Babylon franchise!? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minsk59 (talk • contribs) 10:04, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just feel it better represents the series - it shows not only the logo, but the entire major cast. Kills two birds with one stone. Not only that, but as an image created by WB specifically for promotional purposes, I feel its better suited for a non-free use rationale than a screenshot, which was never licensed for such use. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:38, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Question about Star Wars

When I redid my edit, I did not change the quote. But why are you calling the other edits as "inaccurate"? PRProgRock (talk) 16:24, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your changes made such inaccuracies as saying that Anakin's name was Darth Vader as a young slave - this is wrong. You claim that "Darth Sidious" corrupted him - however, as this is discussing plot points added in 1980, this is inaccurate, as the name was not invented until the late 1990s. The first prequel was originally called Episode I: The Beginning - your change of that to The Phantom Menace in that instance is also incorrect, as are your further name changes - they are all contextually incorrect in the forms you have changed. Do not make these changes again. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:32, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I understand what you are saying, but for one thing, Darth Sidious and Emperor Palpatine are supposed to be the same character. Darth Tyranus and Count Dooku are also supposed to be the same character. And last, but not least, Darth Vader and Anakin Skywalker are also supposed to be the same character. PRProgRock (talk) 17:10, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But you have to understand context - if the article is discussing these characters in historical context, your introduction of names introduced 15-20 years later is incorrect - and will be reverted. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:14, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Ortiz

Please delete the article of Daniel Ortiz, people still editing and know is consider to delete and I know that people still disturbing so please eliminate, I'm giving you the permission to do it, because I really don't know if you need the permission to do it, Daniel Ortiz (paintball player) this is the article, I placed the tag for deletion... This guy is relevant but eliminate this article and in the future I will make a better article with more relative sources... Paintballxtreme (talk) 19:48, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot delete articles. However, had you left the article alone, it would have been speedy deleted under the G7 criteria - but since you then went back in and recreated all the content in the article, I think you need to just let the AfD process run its course, as you've presented too many mixed messages about your intentions today. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:50, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

MERKLE ARTICLE

Sorry, I thought I kept deleting the article myself since my computer has been freezing up. I didn't realize it was you. I'm trying to add a section similar to Ernst & Young's Global Structure: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_%26_Young. Can you tell me why I can't add the offices that Merkle has similar to Ernst & Young? Zavila (talk) 20:23, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ernst & Young is in a far different league than Merkle. However, even that article doesn't have a section that lists every single regional office. If you're referring to the gallery at that article, I've removed it for similar reasons. MikeWazowski (talk) 20:26, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem I understand, thanks for your help - I really appreciate your guidance. Is it ok if I add external links? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zavila (talk • Zavila (talk) 21:28, 17 January 2012 (UTC)contribs) 20:46, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Football Ramble - Dean Windass Hall of Fame

What is the reason for continuing to delete the hall of fame section? It is referenced and is entirely related and notable when having a discussion on the podcast ---User:Murrayszymanski —Preceding undated comment added 12:51, 19 January 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Wikipedia does not exist to be a repository or backup for the podcast's activities. There is no sign of notability for this "hall of fame" outside the podcast, and it is only referenced to the podcast website itself, which is hardly independent sourcing. There is a section about the hall of fame in the article, and that has never been deleted. However, there is no place for the entire list on Wikipedia - that is what the podcast's website is for. MikeWazowski (talk) 15:02, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Excuse me

Was there any legitimate reason why you felt that the Tom and Jerry poster images didn't belong on their respectable articles? I feel that they help illustrate their individual subjects without the need for a gross over abundance of non-free material, as many Tom and Jerry shorts articles are currently doing. Sarujo (talk) 03:29, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because the style guides set forth in the Animaion Wikiproject (and as seen in most animated cartoon articles) is to show the film's title card in the infobox. I just restored the articles back to the preferred format. MikeWazowski (talk) 06:31, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mike, I'm not taking advice about edits from a man who thinks he's starred in Disney Pixar's Monsters Inc.!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lv123jv456 (talk • contribs) 11:19, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Then I'm afraid you're stuck. The Shadow-Fighter (talk) 17:00, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

on Robert Eisner

how could I enjoy editing here. Mr. Robert Eisner was to became my first contribution; I was kind of proud of that, and I was gathering some more related info on Him. You requested the new entry to be speedily deleted – for clear copyright infringement - how could it be. Please explain it to me. Alberto Veronese (talk) 15:08, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because you cut-and-pasted text directly from the Chicago Tribune obituary. That's a clear copyright infringement, and not allowed on Wikipedia - I don't know how much clearer I can make it. However, someone has recreated the article, and in a much more acceptable version. MikeWazowski (talk) 15:14, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is false Wazowski. Yes, Cindamuse made then the article; a great page. But it was from a small (first) - bona fide - contribution I started. What I think and saw, was an inappropriate conduct from your side. Alberto Veronese (talk) 17:10, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, right. Please, try to make that an official complaint. The fact that another admin deleted it after I tagged it (remember, I can't delete articles - only an admin can do that) shows that there was merit to the tag. You don't like being called on the carpet for adding a copyvio? There's a a simple solution - in the future, DON'T ADD COPYVIOS. End of discussion. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:31, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Film festivals

You're trying to delete pages for film festivals that have been around for years but are run by people who aren't up to date with technology. We spent all night trying to increase knowledge of these events and rather than take the time to add information to them you nominate them for speedy deletion? They have every right to be in an encyclopedia that Cannes and Sundance do but don't have studio dollars backing them and when filmmakers try to help them out, someone comes along to take it all away for no reasonn. Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.54.4.239 (talk) 18:03, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Every page you created not only appear to have all the text lifted directly from the respective websites, but all also just so happen to have ties to the movie Strings. Copyright violations and self-promotion have no place here. MikeWazowski (talk) 18:07, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kim Man Lui Student

I am inviting the Wikipedia Ambassadors to review the page of Kim Man　Ｌｕｉ. Please do not remove the references. The page has been ruined. I am the student of Kim Man Lui and I spent lots of time to get those references. If references in Chinese are not allowed, please let me know rather deletion　（ａｓ　Ｉ　ｄｉｄ　ｎｏｔ　ｈａｖｅ　ｔｈｅ　ｃｏｐｙ） and I try my best to look for English reference of my teacher. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nofriends9999 (talk • contribs) 06:18, 25 January 2012 (UTC) Could you please restore the page as before. You of course add notability warning at the head. --Nofriends9999 (talk) 06:20, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, I made the edits I did for a reason. Furthermore, I'd suggest you read up on the conflict of interest guidelines, now that you've admitted your own COI in the subject. MikeWazowski (talk) 06:24, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, I called in Cindamuse for help. Many references are in Chinese. Thanks, Kim Man Lui has thousands of students. Thanks. So we cannot write for him? FYI http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Cindamuse#Kim_Man_Lui_Page--Nofriends9999 (talk) 06:31, 25 January 2012 (UTC) I am not going to write or edit anything until Cindamuse says I can write it. Thanks, --Nofriends9999 (talk) 06:34, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]


explanation politely requested

Hi Mike,

Can you please provide justification of this edit? [1]

It would have been possible to have done this, either in the edit summary or on the talk page. I think it's a fairly common courtesy to me, as a fellow editor, that you do this. In particular, can you explain, why somebody would be listed by the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Who's Who. Did you do any research yourself? Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:31, 26 January 2012 (UTC)‎[reply]

I've generally found most Who's Who to be questionable sources, as they generally require some form of payment to be listed. I cannot speak to the Oxford volume, nor can I read it at present, but based on one line (she was a British psychologist), that's hardly enough to demonstrate notability - hence the tag. MikeWazowski (talk) 22:36, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Mike, Thanks for your reply. Who's Who does not require payment to be included but is compiled professionally. Oxford DNB is a biographical encyclopedia also compiled professionally (as per the articles on both). They both select their members based on merit alone. She's also the subject of a book by an academic (the same has written some papers on her too). I agree the article is short, and I have not read the book but if I put down some facts like she was the first woman to be awarded a PhD in psychology in Britain, the first female professor of psychology in Britain, is that not good enough? Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:46, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oo-lone

Hi, if you're still not happy with the news sources quoted could you please delete the page in its entirety, rather than keeping a page saying it has been deleted? Thanks Jonquilljones (talk) 09:41, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First off, I didn't delete anything, but the page has been deleted. Unfortunately, I can't do anything about the notice that something had been deleted - that's just part of the way Wikipedia works. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:27, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for your reply. Could you delete this talk section so that the title doesn't get picked up by search engines? Thanks Jonquilljones (talk) 16:36, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Popcorn?

Have a bowl of popcorn!
Would you care for some? I've been enjoying a bowl as I watch this circus unfold before me. This suspense is terrible. I hope it will last. Erikeltic (Talk) 19:02, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I found this to be both hypocritical and hysterical - apparently being shown the truth was "unconstructive". Whatever. That block was long overdue. MikeWazowski (talk) 20:57, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

editing bernhard thalheim wiki

Why are you editing this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamdhal (talk • contribs) 19:37, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I wasn't aware I needed anyone's permission. Considering that I removed text that was a copyright violation, I was entirely justified in my editing. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:55, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Djathinkimacowboy

Please note that per WP:BLANKING, editors are allowed to remove comments from their own talk pages and these should not be restored. And also note that users who repeatedly restore the same comment to another user's talk page may be blocked for violating the three-revert rule or harassing another user, cf. Wikipedia:Don't restore removed comments. Salvio Let's talk about it! 21:26, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

However, don't you think it's a bit hypocritical of him to accuse me of posting inaccurate content on his page (which did not happen), and for him to then continually remove a simple request to prove that, while his original allegation remains uncontested? MikeWazowski (talk) 21:30, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
He's been having bad days lately. Don't bother him. It'll only make him do worse things. Jasper Deng (talk) 00:46, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What Jasper said. Dja was blocked and is now feeling upset and ganged up on; your posts on his talk page can only aggravate him further, even if that's never been your intention... Salvio Let's talk about it! 10:07, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Listen to Jasper. I had to learn the hard way. The Shadow-Fighter (talk) 17:03, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

why?

I went back in and posted links to his Endorsement page with Pearl Drums and validated everything I wrote about the guy with links.. What is the problem here?? He is in 2 national bands both are signed to record labels and he has national and international releases? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chaoticcreations (talk • contribs) 00:37, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, you just posted a bunch of links to various primary sources, not all of which even mention the guy. Nothing you added is from independent reliable sources that demonstrate notability, which is why I restored the redirect. MikeWazowski (talk) 00:39, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here is actual actual artist link on Pearl Drums - http://www.pearldrum.com/Artists/Drumset-Artists.aspx?id=683 Validated!! Here is the press release on his envolement with Inzane Records - http://keithentertainmentgroup.com/inzanerecords.cfm , if you take the time to read the 1st paragraph it says he is director of A&R.. Bonz - http://keithentertainmentgroup.com/bonz.cfm if you again take the time to scroll down the page to the pictures, thet include band members and postions..

And then there is The Chaos Agent, witch are signed to Inzane Records in the US and Bellaphon Records in Germany - Once again if you just look, it is validated.. - http://www.facebook.com/thechaosagent

The guy is real and the links validate it.. If you look at Allele's facebook pages you can validate that KEG Management is who reps them..http://www.facebook.com/official.allele1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chaoticcreations (talk • contribs) 00:53, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You've posted a lot of primary sources, and Facebook is not a reliable source - please read the appropriate guidelines for verifiability and reliable sources. MikeWazowski (talk) 00:59, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for putting in an effort to find sources. Unfortunately Mike is right that Wikipedia can't use an endorsement page or a Facebook page as a source of information. What is needed for a Wikipedia article is sources such as magazine articles, newspaper articles, or books. If you have some sources like that I'd be glad to help you learn how to use them to back up a Wikipedia article. Cloveapple (talk) 01:03, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Carrie's Life With Magic

Please do not bite the newcomers, like you did here. I have reverted your edit and instead welcomed them. Acps110 (talk • contribs) 16:11, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but the entire "article" is a fraud - there is no program called Carrie's Life With Magic - this is also likely not a new user, but a repeat offender, as there have been a rash of these accounts that try to create fake television program histories over the past few months. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:16, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ever heard of WP:AGF? Don't judge a book by it's cover. Tag it as a draft first, which will put it in this category, which can be purged later. Acps110 (talk • contribs) 16:21, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just to point out that AGF is not a suicide pact. I often close MfDs and I recognise a pattern, here, though I honestly can't remember who the main account is. This is most definitely not a newbie... Salvio Let's talk about it! 16:25, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I did a Google search on "Carrie's Life With Magic", and found zero results. AGF is all fine and dandy, but in this case, I don't think it applies - the content (not in article space, mind you, but on a talk page, where it wouldn't belong anyway) was a complete hoax. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:29, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Userspace is an even less pressing issue than article space, because remember, user's are given wide latitude to do what they please with their user space. It's one thing to react the way you did in article space, but you are being extremely bite-y by doing it in a new user's space. Acps110 (talk • contribs) 16:41, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that user's gone and removed all your welcomes and messages, so I've gone ahead and flagged it as a hoax speedy deletion. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:59, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not a surprise considering the way you treated them. Also, CSD G3 doesn't apply to user pages. Acps110 (talk • contribs) 18:07, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Horse hockey. This is not a new user, the content is fraudulent, and per the FAKEARTICLE guidelines, I was perfectly within my rights to remove it. MikeWazowski (talk) 18:10, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

University of Washington - United Greek Council

Hi I am new to Wikipedia and I would like to understand why my article is marked for a speedy deletion. I got the following response from someone who is trying to delete my article.

"This article may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion as an article about a company, corporation, organization, or group that does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject. Note that schools are not eligible under this criterion"

How can I justify that the organization I am try to write about is an important subject? I provided a brief description of the organization and I was hoping to interview some of the members of the organization for a history section later on. You can find my article at "University of Washington - United Greek Council"

Thank you Wilsonlu (talk) 18:22, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think you have a misunderstanding about what kinds of articles Wikipedia has. We can't host the sort of original research you are planning to do. If you want to do a series of original interviews it would be best to find a different sort of website to host them, maybe start a blog for your school's Greek history?
If you still want to write a Wikipedia article on the topic, what you need to get started is sources that Wikipedia will accept. (And finding such sources would show that others have considered the topic important enough to write about.) So to write an article here you'd need to find newspaper articles, magazine articles, or books that discuss U of W's Greek organizations. If you have sources like that I'd be glad to help you learn the basics of writing an article here. If you don't have that sort of source, then Wikipedia is not a good place for your information. Cloveapple (talk) 20:25, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are only two sources that are credible regarding the subject I am talking about. One is from the University's newspaper and the second one is the organization's website. There are no other sources that (I know of) that has reported on this organization. Both of the sources I named are listed and referenced in my article. I was hoping to conduct interviews on the founders of the organization to add additional information in the future. Currently, only information provided by the sources are presented on the article. Wilsonlu (talk) 23:39, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If I put the United Greek Council on the University of Washington page, will that be more appropriate for my work? Wilsonlu (talk) 21:29, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Adding a sentence or two to the school article would be better than trying to write a complete article on the subject. However if all you have is a student newspaper as a source, I'd still say it's a little iffy. (The organization's own website wouldn't be a very good source for Wikipedia.) If you really really want the information in Wikipedia I'd suggest asking a school librarian for help in finding sources such as non-student newspapers, books, or magazine articles. It's sometimes surprising what you find with the help of somebody who knows how to research.
However it still might turn out that the best use of your time is to find a different web space for your information. Cloveapple (talk) 18:26, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PRProgRock

I made one of my rare decisions to impose a block of less than 24 hours on them, as it is entirely possible their position could be right ... they're not, as you admitted, adding false information per se, just using a name for a character not used at that point in the narrative. Since that might be defensible under current policy, I don't consider it vandalism.

However, refusing to discuss and continuing to edit this way either against, or in the absence of, clear consensus is undeniably disruptive, so the editing's blockable. In the future, should they continue, report them for that rather than vandalism. Daniel Case (talk) 19:36, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - the best I ever got out of him was this section above, where I tried to explain it to him - he apparently does not understand (or refuses to acknowledge) context. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:43, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Pride Toronto Information

Mike, I would like to know why the leadership information is not required or the WorldPride 2014 information. Its valuable info regarding the date! thanks SMCKINNON (talk) 03:19, 30 January 2012 (UTC)Steven[reply]

The leadership information would be fine for the group's own website, but it doesn't belong in a Wikipedia article - this site does not exist to be a mirror of your group's website. MikeWazowski (talk) 04:01, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dennis Hollinger

Why did you remove the quote from Dennis Hollinger and what purpoes do the maintainece plates serve, neither of them appear to apply to the article (which was not self-published... I am not Dennis Hollinger)ReformedArsenal (talk) 14:12, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The quote is inappropriately placed - that type of promotional opening is fine for a personal website, but completely out of place in an encyclopedic article. The tags were added because you have references to self-published items - his books. The do nothing to indicate notability, just existence. The primary sources tag refers to the school websites - again, these do little to indicate notability, just confirm existence from connected sources. Until you can supply better references, these tags need to remain. MikeWazowski (talk) 15:04, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

MTV Czech, Nickelodeon Central & Eastern Europe

Hello, I would like to ask why you have removed "Coming Soon" aka future programming sections from MTV Czech and Nickelodeon Central and Eastern Europe? These two articles are edited and updated regularely by myself and I have all the information for them first hand, not only becuase I live in this area and watch the feeds at a regular basis. All of the mentioned future programming is accurate and even has been cited by the channels themselves - though there is no available link to prove it. However, the upcoming programming on Nickelodeon UK has been preserved, yet on the CEE feed it has been removed. Jack 6428 (talk) 13:16, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever I removed was done because it was completely unreferenced speculation, which (as WP:CRYSTAL states) has no place here. Without proper references from reliable sources, I would feel no hesitation in removing it again. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:28, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Spotware Systems Ltd

Hello MikeWazowski. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Spotware Systems Ltd to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. Bmusician 14:09, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While no notability is asserted in the article, I don't think it is advertising. Thoughts? --Bmusician 14:10, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This one set off every red flag in my book as far as advertising was concerned - new user account (and possibly connected to the company. as they claimed copyright ownership on all the images used, including the logo), first edit was an incredibly detailed article about a company and its products, complete with a raft of images better suited to an internal article on their website than an encyclopedic article on the company - it's more focused on promoting their products, IMHO. MikeWazowski (talk) 14:20, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Roma (Character)

plz stop removing info on roma character coz people r cleanin the article up now so u dont need 2 delete so plz stop doin that — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.27.169.211 (talk) 14:07, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As the AfD was closed with the recommendation to redirect the article, I will continue to restore the redirect. You are out of line in restoring the article. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:00, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
but the article looks better than b4 plz leave it like that plz :)
I don't care. You have not given any valid reasons for restoring it, so I have reverted you. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:58, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

M Class planet

I just watched the episode of Star Trek: Enterprise where they said that. Here's a link to a Star Trek page that confirms it http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Class_M--94.15.42.24 (talk) 18:03, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Memory Alpha is non a reliable source, as it is both a fan site and user-editable. However, while the term Minshara is used in the series, nowhere is it specifically stated from a reliable source that Minshara and M-class are the same - not even on the official page at startrek.com. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:47, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ink Global

Looking at the source and target it looks like a copy and paste. However, assuming that load of awards, which I think is undue weight anyway, is to be left in, since it's a list, how can one avoid it? Thoughts for the article creator would be appreciated, too, please. I think they are very new to WP. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 15:22, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say go ahead and remove it - I'm finding a lot of copyvios or copy/pastes from the primary source already, so I'm beginning to think we've got a COI advert on our hands, anyway... MikeWazowski (talk) 15:29, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do not delete my pages about the members

it took me 2 hours to make those pages. would you please revert on the notability maybe you're right but i don't want the member section on the One Direction page to became huge and filled up with info. The coldplay members all have there own page the only that's notable in the group is Chris Martin i don't even know the other band members name. User: AdabowtheSecond — Preceding unsigned comment added by AdabowtheSecond (talk • contribs) 18:53, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They were not deleted, just redirected to the main band article because they showed little notability outside the group. MikeWazowski (talk) 18:56, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

your edit for stipple

Stipple is the company name so not sure how you've determined it to be a hijacking of the redirect! Any suggestions on what the page name should be? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wmcdonnel (talk • contribs) 21:45, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if anything, you should have created a new page, such as Stipple (company) instead of hijacking an existing redirect, as you most certainly did. However, given than the company is a startup of questionable notability and the article had a very advertising tone, and had already been proposed for deletion, I'm not sure it would have lasted long anyway. MikeWazowski (talk) 21:54, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Niall Horan

You are dangerously close to 3RR on Niall Horan. Three different editors have expressed a different opinion than you. If you think the article should be deleted for notability concerns, then please file an AfD. CharlieEchoTango (contact) 22:52, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One is the article creator, the other seems connected, and Barney was just making a WP:POINTy revert after making a personal yesterday. If you'll unprotect the article, I intend to file an AfD on it to force the issue on the redirect - I don't wish to delete it, but I don't believe the kid has demonstrated any significant notability outside the group. MikeWazowski (talk) 23:57, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I understand there is a background here, but reverting is still edit-warring - it's not a solution. Unprotected for you to take it to AfD, but please do not revert again. Best, CharlieEchoTango (contact) 00:07, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Epic film

It's not vandlaism if i'm making positive work on an article. Instead of giving me incorrect warnings, I suggest you discuss my edits on a talk page. Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:40, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Except you're not making positive work on it. Your edits are becoming increasingly WP:POINTy in my opinion, and you're this close to getting a block for edit-warring. MikeWazowski (talk) 21:46, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to accuse a lot of users of WP:Point as an argument, but I feel you are doing the same to boost your own definition of "epic science fiction" in the lead of the 2001 article. I've made discussions on the epic film article's talk page which you have ignored. I don't appreciate this and if you want to contribute to the article go right ahead and add citations, try to add a conversation than just deleting me based on speculation. Andrzejbanas (talk) 11:27, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Marble

I've come across a couple of pages today where your edit summary said you were redirecting the title to marble, but instead of properly redirecting you actually just blanked the page instead. So just wanted to give you a quick reminder that if you're redirecting, you need to actually put a #REDIRECT, followed by the target title, into the page. Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 20:39, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weird - I could have sworn I redirected all those properly. Must've been a glitch, somehow... MikeWazowski (talk) 21:33, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don (character)

Umm, sir... if Don 3 releases, will u accept "Don" (protagonist of the Don series) as a notable character? Kailash29792 (talk) 17:21, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not without reliable sources that indicate some sense of notability outside the films. Not all movie series characters are notable outside their own films... MikeWazowski (talk) 17:29, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Free Internet Correspondence Games Server

Hello, could you please rename my article from Free Internet Correspondence Games Server to FICGS. FICGS does get google search results. Also I updated my sources. Thanks for the help. Dimvass (talk) 19:00, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One Direction individual pages

when will the faith off the articles be finalized seems like forever? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AdabowtheSecond (talk • contribs) 19:36, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cassidy Turley

Hi Mike, I worked to remove text that may appear promotion in tone or style to adhere to compliance standards and your remarks. Also removed some external links and added a few independent sources to improve references. Can you weigh in as I would like to remove the maintenance templates if that is now appropriate. Thx --Laura Wallace 21:12, 27 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurawallace799 (talk • contribs)

Hi Mike,

My apologies. As you can see, this is my first time adding links to wikipedia. If possible, I'd like to resubmit. Popcornflix, which is listed as a source on Wikipedia, owns all the rights to these movie titles. We'd simply just like to be added as a reference for your visitors to learn more about the movies you have listed on your site. I'll be happy to resend the links in this format:

Movie title at Popcornflix (linking to the Wiki article).

Would this be acceptable?

Thank you, Popcornflix1 (talk) 22:47, 27 February 2012 (UTC)Carol[reply]

I'm sorry, but advertising links like this just aren't allowed on Wikipedia. MikeWazowski (talk) 01:52, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do it for Columbo

As if this were a surprise ... I'd appreciate it if you did not fritter round with this article whilst we are in mediation, Mike. I know how you cannot stay away from yanking my chain when something's cooking that doesn't even concern you ... but please leave it alone. It'll only get reverted anyway, what's the use of you sticking your beak in?--Djathinkimacowboy 04:30, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, what's your problem? Every movie and TV article I have on my watchlist (and Columbo is one of them) has an IMDB link in the external links section - it's not a controversial edit, I was just following standard practice. I don't need your permission to edit or not edit any article, and this has nothing to do with you, so I'd appreciate you dropping the insinuation that any time we cross paths is meant to be confrontational. Go away. MikeWazowski (talk) 04:37, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You know, you were right and I was wrong about the whole issue, and I came here to apologise as well as to let you know I admitted this at the MedCab. But I see you just told me to "go away", so I'll do that. I was only going to indicate furthermore, it's a little funny the way you keep showing up wherever I am having a 'to-do'. You picked one heck of a time to decide to go over to Columbo and fix the error, though I appreciate that you did it. It called it to my attention. So, how about this: we each go away from the other? Can you do that? I know I can, and I did it in the past, yet here you showed up again apparently to avoid a confrontation with me, right?....--Djathinkimacowboy 01:31, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

CoolNovo

I've declined your A7, as it's a web browser not web content. If the article were about www.herbertsfavourites.gb. where one could download it, yes, that's web content. The prog itself, no, sorry. Prod or AfD as it's not spammy in tone. BTW I don't think IMDb is forbidden so long as not used for notability. If it has been while I wasn't looking, someone's going to very busy removing it... Peridon (talk) 17:24, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I retagged it under A10 - seems the editor already created CoolNovo last week. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:36, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seth Morgan Romero

I didn't mean to do any disruptive editing. I didn't know what I did was wrong. I feel the page Seth Morgan Romero has enough references and credibility to stay as a page on its own. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malvinworks (talk • contribs) 21:48, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, it doesn't at this point. Personal pages from Facebook, Tumblr, and IMDB are not reliable sources. Of the two Amazon links, one shows a self-published book (barely a pamphlet, actually) which is not a good indicator, and the other has no mention of Romero. Credibility is in short supply on the article as it stands now. MikeWazowski (talk) 22:00, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How is IMDb not credible? Isn't IMDb more credible than Wikipedia? Ladyxlolita (talk) 19:05, 29 February 2012 (UTC) Ladyxlolita[reply]

Transcreation

Why did you delete the Wikipedia entry for Transcreation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skeptiktb (talk • contribs) 22:17, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did not - I redirected it to the WikiDictionary link, as it was before. MikeWazowski (talk) 22:22, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What does that mean? Where can someone read the article? Wiktionary has none of that text in its entry for Transcreation. Skeptiktb (talk) 22:33, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

edits to Ian Watkins

what if you are now conversing with a reliable source? Do you class tabloid newspapers as reliable sources? Ian has always told me and everyone else that he was never in a relationship with Alexa Chung, only seeing her casually, yet because a tabloid picked up on it suddenly it's fact because it was printed. I AM a reliable source you can trust me on that — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragonninj1 (talk • contribs) 17:44, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, no, you're not. Please read the guidelines on reliable sources - neither you nor the link you're using qualify. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:46, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comments

Hello, you are welcome to contribute to the following page.

WP:Requests for comment/TBrandley

Thanks.

Logical Cowboy (talk) 17:57, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ashley Blake misinformation

Thank you for your swift reply.

Your source, as you say was The Birmingham Post whose article was also incorrect. I was not in a position to personally correct their article as I was sentenced to prison, however my solicitor wrote to the editor to ask for a correction of the facts, to which they agreed. Therefore can you please remove this part the page with immediate effect. I thank you for your assistance in this matter. Kind regards A. Blake — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.144.200.80 (talk) 19:26, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but the Birmingham Post reference (as it reads right now) specifically backs up the claims in the article. Your explanation holds no water. Please do not continue to vandalize the article. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:29, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have notified this user myself after reviewing the edits made and gave a warning and an overview of the rules. I personally think that you should have given more warnings before you gave the final warning. The user's edits may not be considered vandalism, but rather a Conflict of interest. Please hold off on the matter for now, and if the user continues I will take further action.

Thanks. Hghyux (talk) 20:46, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Who are you Mike Wazowski? I am thinking it might be someone that knows me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkd07 (talk • contribs) 06:22, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple issues-tag

You have tagged the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roschier with multiple issues. Since then it has been amended with the help and input from wiki-admins. Could you now take a look at it again, and re-evaluate the tagging. Thank you! --ChristineShaw (talk) 09:58, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

proposed deletion of pre-popping article

Hi Mark,

My name is Yaniv Nizan and I wrote the article about pre-popping.

I noticed that while the terms pre-pop, pre-popping and pre-poppable are widely used in the lead generation industry that turns around $4.7 billion dollars annually and employees tens of thousands of people, the definition of the terms is missing from wikipedia.

My main concern is that deleting this article is indicative of a larger problem that can be thought of as a chicken and egg problem. If wikipedia can't define terms that haven't been already defined elsewhere, and others are not willing to define terms not previously defined in wiki then we are at a deadlock. In other words, someone has to go first and formalize terms commonly used by large amounts of people.

Regards,

Yaniv Nizan (212.25.110.130 (talk) 10:08, 1 March 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Edit war a brewin...

Mike, I just noticed that there appears to be an edit war going on at Star Trek canon. Instead of reverting, please use other methods to make people agree with your version of an article. Thanks! --Jayron32 18:24, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Already discussing it on that talk page - we're dealing with a WP:SPA who's trying to restore his own preferred version from eight months ago. MikeWazowski (talk) 18:43, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It appears that you and the other user are in a content dispute. Labeling them as a [WP:SPA|single purpose account]] doesn't give you justification for edit warring. Also note that having a narrow topic interest doesn't make an account a single purpose account. Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 17:51, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lindsay McCaul

I think your tagging is in error because I provide adequate resource for WP:N and I took all the info from her own website that is personal in nature and found others to back up the information not contained in the official website.HotHat (talk) 05:01, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cassidy Turley

Mike, I did post to your talk page earlier this week. Looks like you've been busy! I revised edit for promotional tone and also scrubbed the references a bit. I removed maintenance tags. Please weigh in if this looks good. Thanks for your help.--Laura Wallace 17:26, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Invitation to Tags Discussion on Karen Wynn Talk page

Hello MikeWasowski, Since you have made edits recently to Karen Wynn page I invite you to join discussion (if you choose to) of possible removal of "References," "Original Research," and "Improper References" tags. This is occurring on the Talk:Karen Wynn talk page. Thanks! Dianeblack (talk) 22:37, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Preemptive warning

In light of the burgeoning dispute between you and Hahnchen concerning Super Hornio Brothers and/or the Unofficial media category, Template:Mario franchise has been reverted to the last stable version; please read WP:BRD and take your concerns to the talk page before this devolves into an edit war. :) Salvidrim! 17:39, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ghanau

It was a copy of http://hi.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%A4%98%E0%A4%A3%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%8A so I deleted it as that. Peridon (talk) 16:33, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apology to MikeWazowski

Hi Mike, I owe you an apology. After a few weeks of reflection as well as reviewing Wikipedia policies carefully, I realized that I was wrong and also misunderstood some of these processes. While I was disheartened that you nominated the My Revenge (band) article for deletion without more discussion about it with me on my talk page; I nevertheless made some poor decisions following the nomination. I do want you to know, that with regards to sockpuppetry - some of the editors on the deletion discussion page who wanted to keep the article were entirely independant of me and I have no relationship or knowledge of them whatsoever. Indeed though, some of the editors who wanted to keep the article did have a relationship with me and liked the article, so they logged on with the specific purpose of wanting to vote to keep the article. I recognize this is not sound Wikipedia policy and I should not have had anything to do with that - but I do want to clarify that it was not me just using separate accounts to support the article, but indeed though some were friends. I apologize for that, as well as my vitriol towards you in on the discussion and talk pages. I am going to take a break, reassess what I'd like to do, and perhaps do some minor editing to other articles for the time being. I wanted to tell you that you're a great editor and a solid contributor to Wikipedia. I am truly sorry for what happened. No excuses at all, I apologize. Sincerely, Vermont Hardcore Punk (talk) 16:40, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cash method of accounting

Hello Mike how are you? That paragraph to which you brought my newly created article of "Cash method of accounting" relates to the tax concept, whereas I am writing the article on GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles). The only sentence that can relate to my article in that paragraph, which I intend to expand is "Similar definition of cash basis accounting is true for financial accounting purposes". As a practicing CPA I am quite aware of the difference, so, unless you have an argument against it, would you please gently revert your edit which deleted the "Cash method of accounting" article and redirected it into the cash accrual concept? You can also consult the sources that I brought forth. Thanks! Markerdryer (talk) 17:47, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Top Foods Monopoly Game

Why did you delete my entry on the Top Foods Monopoly Game? The article was not promotional. The information was presented in a concise factual manner. The article also included useful statistical analysis of the game not available anywhere else. The article was very similar to the article on the McDonalds Monopoly game. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tlovejoy (talk • contribs) 20:12, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Blodsrit

Hello MikeWazowski. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Blodsrit, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A signed band with albums that are not self-released is beyond the garage bands what A7 is for. . Thank you. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 23:51, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OR Academy Award content

Hi.

Please excuse my ignorance on this, but if you're going to delete the multiple award nominations lists that I've either added or ammended, why are you leaving the very same list on the Academy Award for Best Director page, which has been up since early 2008 (and was essentially the basis for me doing the rest of them)? Thefourdotelipsis (talk) 00:43, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, how does this qualify as synthesis if it's merely a frequency tally? This doesn't qualify as drawing a conclusion not stated in the original source, it's merely a reconstitution of the exact same data. Thefourdotelipsis (talk) 00:46, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Mike, just wondering if I would still be able to get a bit of a better explanation on this with relevant and equitable precedents rather than just an edit summary. And why the four-year-old section on the Director page still seems to be an exception. Cheers, Thefourdotelipsis (talk) 02:12, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Friendly nudge

Hello. Regarding your tag-interaction with Kmhistory recently, while your tag additions are valid, please beware of tag bombing articles. Regards —Eustress talk 01:01, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Holy Musical B@man!

I noticed that you where the initial editor to tag Holy Musical B@man! for deletion. I have now brought it to an AFD discussion. As someone who has edited this article and tagged it before, I presume that I can consider you an interested party to this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Holy Musical B@man!. -Aaron Booth (talk) 18:20, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/bank book, term loan, revolving credit, others

Hi Mike,

You prohibited publication of several entries I made last week -- bank book, term loan, revolving credit, etc. Forgive me for any missteps. I've used Wikipedia for years, but am new to editing. I am grateful for its existence, and certainly want to work with you and others to maintain its high standards. This is an important resource that demands high quality and diligent enforcement.

I've since read extensively in an attempt to educate myself. I've read about Conflict of Interest, neutral point of view, verifiability, what Wikipedia is not, copyright compliance, etc.

Please help me understand something. When I posted the article, my talk page (below) stated that I was involved with putting online the Leveraged Finance Primer. I do help maintain the website on which the Primer resides, and I never tried to be deceptive about this. The site does not produce a revenue stream. It has a neutral point of view. It is created by a reporting and research division of Standard and Poor's as a service to the leveraged finance community. It is meant to help that community, particularly students and those new to the industry, in understanding key terms and dynamics. The information is presented in an exceedingly neutral form, by industry professionals. These professionals are not in the business of sales or trading, but rather reporting.

We note that many terms used in the industry are not addressed in articles currently in Wikipedia. The articles are of use to the leveraged finance community. Just as importantly, they are of use to a public that is becoming -- as a requirement against the sort of blindness that caused the financial collapse of a couple years ago -- more educated. As the market changes and becomes more robust, it will be important for the public to understand terms such as a "dividend loan" to perform policing and over watch of the financial community.

There is a subscription-based website that this division of S&P produces. However, we've created this new free website especially to help educate the industry in a neutral way. On it is a "Leveraged Loan Primer" which some experts have put time into creating. This Primer contains terms which those new to the industry will need defined. This is the primary reference which we'll use in creating new Wikipedia entries.

Again, we don't sell S&P services on this site or in the Primer. It is created as an information vehicle only.

We think information on the website and in other internal copyrighted documents can be enormously beneficial to Wikipedia users.

I am working to get complete copyright information so I can supply that as needed when I quote directly or reference the site. I will have permission, but want to make sure all copyright is in order before proceeding. Can you please confirm that once this is available, that I will be able to post this material?

Again, we believe that defining terms and dynamics of this industry -- most not at present addressed by Wikipedia -- is precisely in lines of supplying the community a verifiable resource with a neutral point of view.

Thanks

ORIGINAL "TALK" PLACED ON "TERM LOAN" PAGE-- I originally created this page and provided the reference: http://www.leveragedloan.com/primer/ This is a new online source, expanding upon the hard copy brochure published by Standard & Poor's: "A Guide to the Loan Market," Copyright 2011 by Standard & Poor's Financial Services LLC (S&P) a subsidiary of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. This is the most requested document concerning Leveraged Loans in the $375 billion leveraged finance community. The Primer is written by experts with decades of experience in leveraged finance. The lead writer is Steven Miller, who is Director of Leveraged Commentary and Data at S&P. Among other things, he hosts a Forbes blog dedicated to leveraged finance. He is one of the preeminent authorities in this field in the world. We put the publication online as a service to the asset class and leveraged finance community, and are spending considerable time creating, updating, and adding attribution to Wikipedia articles in this niche area of finance. Again, as a service to those who work and study leveraged finance. We find that many key terms -- such as this, "term loan" -- are not included in Wikipedia. For that reason, I created this short article yesterday, attributing it to the online Primer. We also find that some terms listed can be improved and are therefore pasting in a couple of sentences, where appropriate, to articles in order to provide the Wikipedia community with more detailed and updated info — Preceding unsigned comment added by Misterwl37 (talk • contribs) 19:48, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The problem was that nearly everything you poster was a direct copyright violation - i.e. a word for word copy/paste of the material on those websites. As to whether it can be posted, it would be better if you were able to supply references to sites NOT controlled by you or your company, so that any conflict of interest/promotional aspects can be cleared up. MikeWazowski (talk) 20:55, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mike, I had external links deleted when I tried to link out from certain wikipedia pages to sections of the LeveragedLoan.com's online primer. I thought these links added to understanding of the topic by Wikipedia users. I don't understand why my external links were omitted but those by investopedia were not, especially since investopedia links wikipedia users to its pages with advertisements. (See "high yield bond," and many other pages.)Misterwl37 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:28, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mike, Some examples of where investopedia linked out to its site (which has ads) to help explain certain terms in wikipedia: "investment grade," "leveraged buyout," "high yield bond," "leveraged finance." When I tried to do the same, linking from "syndicated loan" to our Primer, you deleted that. I think our Primer, written by top industry professionals, offers great information to wikipedia users. Why were we deleted while investopedia was not? Thanks Misterwl37 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:42, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PRETTYBIRD

Hi Mike,

I contested the speedy deletion of the page by leaving a comment in Talk:PRETTYBIRD. I have removed a significant amount of content and revised as much information as possible to adhere to NPOV guidelines.

Redfriday27 (talk) 23:38, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Page "Rémi E. Ballot"

Hello,

Following your message, I add a biography and sources.

Sincerely, Lebosscali — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lebosscali (talk • contribs) 05:57, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Paul MJ Miller

Following an email regarding proposed deletion of the page Paul MJ Miller for lack of references. Numerous links and reliable references have now been added to verify the information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maximusazurri (talk • contribs) 13:54, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rytmus

Please do not speedy tag articles which have interwikis, references and countless more references on their interwikis. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of "no assertion of notability". Rytmus is clearly notable, he's one of the most (unfortunately) influential hip hop musicians in CZ/SK and has appeared all over the idol shows there as a judge, I started that article as a stub because I don't have the time or energy to translate the whole article from cs.wiki yet. As for Kontrafakt, if anything I think this could redirect to Rytmus, because he's the only one who's really notable. - filelakeshoe 17:00, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did not speedy Rytmus, I redirected it, as I did not believe him to be notable outside his group. While you may disagree, do not lecture me, as I did nothing wrong in my edits. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:12, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted Page

Hi Mike, You deleted our page, Navigating the Product Mindset. Can you please provide insight into how we could get the page back up? Thank you, — Preceding unsigned comment added by ULdialogue (talk • contribs) 14:24, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't delete it, I just flagged it for deletion, as blatant promotional pieces like you posted for your company just aren't allowed on Wikipedia. MikeWazowski (talk) 14:52, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mike can you please review the Scotiabank Caribbean Carnival Toronto Wikipedia page about a user deleting some valuable websites and in the process blocked my other username SMCKINNON_SBCCT I jsut choose that username not to website or group and I should have unblocked.SMCKINNON (talk) 06:53, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hey Mike, if you connect the letters SBCCT to Scotiabank Caribbean Carnival Toronto, you'll figure out pretty quickly why I blocked that account. On User talk:SMCKINNON SBCCT there is a kind of explanation for the two accounts but it doesn't make a damn bit of sense, and one could actually interpret the events as socking. SMCKINNON, you need to consider that this is an encyclopedia, not a means for you to promote an event with which you appear to be connected. Speaking of which, I just found something else I think is interesting, but I will place that on your talk page. Thanks Mike. Drmies (talk) 16:33, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats


 The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
For helping prevent Wikipedia from being used for fraudulent purposes. Regards —Eustress talk 00:09, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nice sleuthing with the sock ID here. As a cautionary note, I would remind you to beware of WP:WH, as I've noticed your edits on several pages attributed to kmhistory. But I'm bestowing this award so you know your efforts are not going unnoticed. Cheers —Eustress talk 00:09, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks... :) I'm not trying to hound her, but she's had a history of problem contributions, so I figured giving her new article a look as prudent - which is how I noticed it was full of copyvios, in addition to her own COI with the organization. MikeWazowski (talk) 00:13, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hunger Games

At this site they have confirmed news of tracks included in the film so why is the possible tracks ludicrous. http://hungergamesdwtc.net/2012/03/credits-for-the-hunger-games-reveal-songs-included-in-the-film-links-to-listen-too/ AND HERE http://hungergamesmovie.org/category/hunger-games-soundtrack/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justinhaff (talk • contribs) 09:52, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Those are fansites - they are not reliable sources. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:30, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They have sourced it from Lionsgate themselves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justinhaff (talk • contribs) 22:22, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please even report to UAA if necessary

Hello, you recently put a deletion tag on User:Classified4newspaper's page. I agree with you. It would be more nice if you would be reporting to WP:UAA, as it violates the username policy (Promotional). No need to report, I've already reported. Thanking you, Dipankan says.. ("Be bold and edit!") 14:17, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Zenprise: Multiple Issues

Hello Mike,

Thanks for taking the time to review the Zenprise article. I have made edits to the page (removed some claims and provided evidence of others) to resolve the issues you raised. I'm appreciate and welcome further suggestions and critique when you have a moment. Thanks.

Shogrefe (talk) 15:38, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

re: Multiple issues usage

Hi Mike. This was a bit redundant; as per the {{Multiple issues}} documentation: "Please do not insert tags that are too similar or redundant with each other" - I'd say one of those would have sufficed! Cheers, Nikthestoned 17:30, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Email

I've sent you an email. DH85868993 (talk) 01:51, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Toaha Qureshi MBE DELETION

Hi Mike

Thanks for leaving the trail. I got the message yesterday that the article may be deleted in ten days and then it was deleted the very next day. I have refernces to include from credible sources. However the question is HOW and WHERE to add as ther articel has already been deleted.

Please advise,

Kind regards,

Freud

Freudmiller (talk) 13:37, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't delete anything, just flagged it for possible deletion - if someone added a speedy to your article later I have nothing to do with that. MikeWazowski (talk) 15:25, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Page Deletions

"I can do whatI I like, and you have shown no real indications of notability for this on its own - it is up to you to convince us otherwise on the talk page"

Seriously?..

I joined Wikipedia three days ago, read the rules, and apparently know more about this website's policy than a frequent editor who has been here for many years. Contrary to what you say, you can't simply "do what you like" on here. There are rules, and I suggest you read them before deleting articles that I have written.

Flagging is fine, speedy deletion requests are also fine, using the talk page is fine, but arbitrarily deleting articles like you have been is not, because you are not an admin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghudner (talk • contribs) 03:39, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unlike you, I do know what I am doing here. Unlike you, I know that what I was doing was a redirect, not a deletion. I do not need to be an admin to redirect pages that I feel are not notable. MikeWazowski (talk) 04:05, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Choke the Word

Hi, Mike.

You've marked Choke the Word for deletion due to questionable notability and lack of results in a Google news search. I was wondering if the band's recent nomination in Westword newspaper's 2012 Music Showcase competition (as noted here) would be sufficiently notable for a stay of execution?

Thanks!

Shawn — Preceding unsigned comment added by XON2000 (talk • contribs) 21:23, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TameraSmith

Mike,it seems as if you may have a personal problem with some of the people referenced because you are continuously "finding issues" with the articles. Are you a staff member of Wikipedia? If so please direct me to the supervior so that I can fix the issue. This is the 4th time you have been noted to have a bias against my submissions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TameraSmith (talk • contribs) 13:34, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is discouraging me from utilizing Wilkepedia as a company. If they are having such issues for good service is to provide better solutions for the problemes. I'm beggining to feel singled out for an unknown reason. Marlon Campbell is a legitimate filmmaker and all people and references are extremely I am beggining to feel you have a personal problem with the articles. The situation will be handeled. Thank you for your concern and I will update the quality of the referenced issues to meet your company standards.- Tamera Smith — Preceding unsigned comment added by TameraSmith (talk • contribs) 13:40, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

reliable source

excuse me, but we are the reliable source. We own the name "TwinSister" under trademark laws with copyright and have so informed this other Twinsister who has repeatedly neglected to make a change in their name. They know they must change their name, but for some reason, decided not to. We have been fair and understanding and even told them to add one or two words, but they have still asked to share "our" name. This can not be done. There is only one "TwinSister" and they are form PA not NY, as there is only one "Kiss", one "Heart", one "Styxx"....you get the point. If they do not comply, there will soon be a lawsuit.It has been 8 months! blessings, linda holt of The holt Twins & TwinSister — Preceding unsigned comment added by Holt Twins (talk • contribs) 14:55, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is the link to the trademark page- http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4007:9mmc9q.2.1 This is the link to the copyright page(Logo)- http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?v1=1&ti=1,1&Search%5FArg=twinsister&Search%5FCode=FT%2A&CNT=25&PID=XsLC_olrKAuPEvj6EHefdwl3&SEQ=20120316113432&SID=4


www.holttwins.com www.cdbaby.com/all/twinsister www.myspace.com/holttwins www.facebook.com/TwinSisterBand musicallyyours@dejazzd.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Holt Twins (talk • contribs) 15:58, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OptrixHD

Mike,

Can you assist me? Can you tell me exactly why our Wiki has been deleted? I understand you are not supposed to advertise companies on here, but I see companies (competitors) Go Pro on here and a company I used to work for Sensear here as well. Does the wording need to be changed? Is it my user name?

Thanks in advance,

Pam Allan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.108.22 (talk) 15:29, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mike,

For the moment I'm a little lost reading your message. My english is not as perfect as I wish but I keep on learning. I really don't understand all the Wikipedia rules...

... So could you help me to find the right way to avoid to be deleted.

Thank you very much in advance. Kind regards. Cool-morning-lights — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.247.9.200 (talk) 20:06, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ON24

Hi Mike,

Regarding ON24, the current Wikipedia entry does not reflect the company at all. It was last updated in 2009.

Since that time, ON24 has been covered by the Associated Press, AFP, CNET, and Success magazine.

I tried to update the entry based on the below copy and citations, but I was told I was writing an advertisement. What can I do to make this current?

Thatcurtis (talk) 00:05, 17 March 2012 (UTC) Curtis[reply]

The text you added was unambiguously promotional. Wikipedia does not exist to create a separate marketing platform for companies. MikeWazowski (talk) 03:38, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, MikeWazowski. You have new messages at Talk:Samuel H. Wood.
Message added 03:46, 19 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

VQuakr (talk) 03:46, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

deletion of THE PEOPLE'S FILM FESTIVAL

Please take a look at the content of my recent posts. If you feel once again that this is in violation,kindly inform us of WHAT EXACTLY IS acceptable and what is not. We have looked at other film festivals and their postings and tailored ours along the same line. Please review other similar festivals before deleting our postings without a more detailed explanation instead of the general excuse you used to delete our last posts. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tptp149 (talk • contribs) 07:51, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you're referring to List of film festivals in North and Central America, you'll notice that every other festival listed has an article, or has references to reliable third party sources - your entry did not. Thus, it was removed. MikeWazowski (talk) 13:15, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your treatment of Kmhistory

Look before you give him templates. Check the talk page of Samuel's article again before you use the erroneous SPS tags, and make sure you're using the correct definition. He really feels bitten by you; the last thing we want is to lose him.Jasper Deng (talk) 19:33, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Erroneous? She is the one in the wrong here, Jasper. Don't forget, she's the one who engaged in lies and deception to keep a puff piece article about herself. She's brought this on herself by not understanding how things work, and denying her own COI in various articles. Her original additions to the Wood article were some of the most blatant promotional copy I've seen recently. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:37, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
She's changed now. Your definition of WP:SPS and the templating was completely unhelpful. If someone has a COI you guide them, not shove them off. In either case it isn't worth an edit war over.Jasper Deng (talk) 19:39, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently the self-published tag was restored accidentally with a rollback - however, the primary sources tag is valid, and if she removes it again I will treat it as vandalism. The reasons for it have been explained to her, but she refuses to accept them. This is not my problem - until the situation is corrected, I will restore the proper tag. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:43, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, she disputes your concern, and I do to. Please take this to the article talk page. Primary does not mean focused on, it means non-third-party.Jasper Deng (talk) 19:44, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are six primary references in the article, direct links to articles written by Wood. These are primary sources. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:45, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Then be specific and point them out; 6 is not too many out of the 20ish or 30ish total I see.Jasper Deng (talk) 19:46, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Gordon Swaby

I added yet another citation from a reputable source. 6 sources a few of which are from two of Jamaica's leading newspapers. He's also made a lot of radio and TV appearances. What else do I need before the messages are removed?Ojamaican (talk) 15:15, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Peter N Peregrine

Hi Mike,

I have made the additions you asked on the page I created for Peter N. Peregrine. Could you look at it again and see if they are sufficient? Thank you,

KingH81 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingh81 (talk • contribs) 16:15, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Added several additional external citations to establish notability. Please remove the tags you placed on the entry. Thank you. Kingh81 (talk) 14:07, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dick Cheech

I know this man and he is a friend of mine, I made this page for him, how to i correctly source him without being deleted, as you have proposed this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Badretro (talk • contribs) 18:41, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wait...

Why did you redirect the Xbox Portable page to Xbox? KuhnstylePro, his talk his contributions!

Because there's no indication the Xbox portable is a real item at this time - would you prefer I flag it for deletion as a possible hoax? MikeWazowski (talk) 15:03, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Palpatine

I've semi protected Palpatine per your RFPP request, due to the IP-hopping. Nonetheless you really ought to be using the talk page to give the reasoning for your side of the dispute. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 21:51, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

George Schindler article

Perhaps before making assumptions about other editor's intentions in creating an article (or better, to explain your own reasoning) you could include some communication on the article's talk page so that there could be discussion about what improvements are needed? Just placing "tags" and nothing else seems very counterproductive. --MrMagix (talk) 00:59, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Steel Panther

Hi Mike,

Why did you flag the Steel Panther article? The content I added are strictly facts and I plan to cite all of it once I figured out how to cite correctly (new to wiki). The content added has no promotional purposes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steelpantherwiki (talk • contribs) 01:36, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Look at your username - you appear to be editing on behalf of the band, which is why I added the COI tag. I did not remove any of your additions - but they do seem rather promotional. MikeWazowski (talk) 01:38, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Can't you argue that ALL fans are technically editing on behalf of the band? Can you give me an example of what you find to be "promotional?" That way, I'll know what I need to change. How can I get you to remove the COI tag? I honestly intended to add factual infomation that was missing that adds to the article. I plan to add more as well.

And are you a fan or do you simply monitor all of Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steelpantherwiki (talk • contribs) 01:59, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Never heard of the group before - your username basically set off red flags. MikeWazowski (talk) 02:02, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mike, Can you please address my other questions? Sorry for the poor formatting earlier

Notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Editor placing COI tags on articles and not discussing. Thank you. Ron Ritzman (talk) 16:24, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

source citings

Ah. Thank you MikeWazokski. Okay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Exstraap (talk • contribs) 21:40, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Palaye Royale

I manage the Band Palaye Royale how do I go about submitting a proper wikipedia page for them? Is there someone I can contact and speak to directly? Stephanie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Palaye Royale (talk • contribs) 21:49, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Best of CN

OK, enough! Why do you think Best of CN is minor? It's a block, CN hasn't done blocks for 2 years now. Plus, it's not a block that airs premieres like most do, it's a block that airs older cartoons. And this is also going to be a Cartoon Planet revival, it'll be hosted by Brak and Zorak, it'll have songs and comedy bits between shows. Andy Merrill confirmed it. It's an improvement for Cartoon Network, when was the last time CN cared for their older shows and characters, huh? And seriously, if you think Best of CN is a minor thing, there are a lot more minor things in the CN article than this.--Vasko444 (talk) 17:49, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As has been explained to you, just because something exists doesn't make it notable. You've never provided independent references from reliable third party sources, just primary sources that mention it exists. Big whoop. As for "other things", I'd suggest you read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS first. MikeWazowski (talk) 18:38, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

KNME-TV

Hi. You edited the page KNME-TV--I changed it to redirect to New Mexico PBS. New Mexico PBS is the NEW NAME for this organization--they dropped KNME.

I also corrected broken links which are now broken again. I'm not sure why you prefer to have incorrect information up here?

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nmpbsjmraz (talk • contribs) 21:16, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You do not start new articles, you edit the existing ones. And you have a COI, for the record. MikeWazowski (talk) 21:19, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll try to do that. I'm going to go ahead and fix those links AGAIN so they actually go to the correct page. THANKS!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nmpbsjmraz (talk • contribs) 21:22, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, no, you will not. The station's callsign has not changed, and the page correctly identifies them as "New Mexico's PBS". MikeWazowski (talk) 21:25, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What?

What I gotta do to you do not get the page that I did?

Renan C. Nunes (talk) 23:53, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

on saving: Glenzo999

Ok, I was not aware that I saved it. I thought that i previewed it. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glenzo999 (talk • contribs) 23:54, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike,

I left a message on the talk page of ToastTV asking for suggested amendments after re-editing the page - is there a particular reason that this is now scheduled for speedy deletion?

Thanks, Vicky — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vickytoast (talk • contribs) 14:07, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Internecine

Why was Internecine deleted? As I am director of this movie, I think I know that it is coming out in 2014, as I planned that date. I am a 13-year-old indie filmmaker, and am just trying to get an article for my film out. Nobody besides my school district Holmen School District and you know that I am making it. The film is currently having it's script written by me, and I started to be a user on wikipedia so I could post articles about my movie. If it is okay with you, I will recreate the page. FireBird Studios (talk)

You just answered yourself - the film doesn't exist yet, it's not being made by anyone notable, so it utterly fails the requirements for notability on Wikipedia. MikeWazowski (talk) 20:51, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Brickell World Plaza

I appreciate your comments, but the text deleted was inaccurate to the building description. I work directly with the ownership and those comments are negative in regards to the actual and current status of the building. I request your revisions to be undone and respect my revisions. Thank you, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lulides1976 (talk • contribs) 23:44, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How was it inaccurate? The text you removed was referenced to what appear to be independent reliable sources. I'm sorry if you perceive them to be negative, but unfortunately, you or your employers/partners do not control or own pages on Wikipedia. If you can show (through your own links to independent reliable sources) that information is false, that's another matter - but just because you don't like something presented factually is not a good reason for removal, and further such removals without legitimate reasons or sources will be reverted. MikeWazowski (talk) 23:52, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Alleyne School

Hello Mike

I have permissions from Richard to use his material.

his email is:richardstephens4@aol.com

mine is murad@tajstevenage.com

I am a governor at that school

Murad

Mortuzac (talk) 23:47, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You need to go through the OTRS procedures to verify that - otherwise it will be removed again. Please also keep in mind the conflict of interest and promotional guidelines. MikeWazowski (talk) 23:52, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Brickell World Plaza

If you are not letting actual facts to be displayed in Wikipedia I request the deletion of the entire article. The facts and comments expressed by Daniel Christensen are negative and not true. The comment regarding the window panels that were temporarily protected has nothing to do with the building being environmentally conscious. I don't know the real reasons why Mr. Christensen had to provide such negative comment, but I request it to be removed from the Talk section. My intention is not to promote the building, but to mention the actual facts of what the building has to offer. Brickell Financial Centre II, as expressed by Mr. Christensen in the article, is not part of the project and his comments are negative in this regard. I hope this serves as the "neutral" explanation you requested. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.84.105.176 (talk) 00:13, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! about Notability

What's the standard of Notability? --Zhwxy (talk) 02:24, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are several standards - has there been significant coverage of the department itself in independent reliable sources? A quick Google search on "Nanjing University Literature Department" shows only 5 unique results, and four of them are all from one source. So no, I'm not seeing a not to indicate notability, which is why I redirected the article to Nanjing University. MikeWazowski (talk) 02:29, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for responding. I konw your questioning. Actually the name 南京大學文學系 (Nanjing University Literature Department) was adopted in 2007. It's former name was 南京大學中國語言文學系 (the Department of Chinese Language and Literature, Nanjing University), or it's a major part of it, and it mainly comes from it. And also the current Nanjing University School of Literature (School of Liberal Arts as offically translated) was also mostly from the former Department of Chinese Language and Literature. -Zhwxy (talk) 02:36, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

208.123.30.105 and Berenstain Bears

I've blocked the abovesaid IP for 31 hours. I've decided to replace your "only warning" message with my block message even though the IP hasn't edited since the "only warning", because any further disruption after your original "last warning" should've warranted a block. With that, and with the other disrupting IP user also blocked, I don't think page protection is necessary at the moment. Deryck C. 17:57, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your email. I note that you have removed all my amendments (plus some made by someone else?). I am unable to cite my sources yet, as they are not published. However, there are several inaccuracies and some glaring omissions in the page as it now stands. I am the authorised biographer of George Mitchell, creator of the Black and White Minstrels and as such, I feel a strong need to correct the mistakes in the Wikipedia feature. However, the biography is not yet published. Is there a way I can at least correct the inaccuracies? Thanks for your help. Penny PennyVR (talk) 21:24, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding TWELP vocoder

Hi, I don't understand why you removed the information regarding TWELP vocoder. Users should have complete information regarding all vocoders in the world. If you removed information regarding TWELP vocoder, then you should remove information about other vocoders too. Otherwise, this page doesn't give complete information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.23.62.214 (talk) 23:37, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Vocoders

Hi Mike, You deleted much more information than I've added. The information about TWELP was located on the Vocoders page before me. I just tried to wide this information. Please return the information that was before my changing. Thanks, Alex

The Black and White Minstrel Show

Hello Mike,

Sorry you didn't like the truth about the B&W Minstrels. I was there, you see -- even though I'm a Canadian I was one of the lead singers in 2 productions, director of a professional chorus in the Liverpool version (Dec/Jan 61-62), I trained the singers for 3 productions including the Victoria Palace which ran for 10 years, sang on 2 of the LP's and in the recording chorus for the 1961 TV season. I knew everyone involved. George Mitchell did not create the show, BBC producer George Inns did. He devised the format and the total concept of having the men in blackface. Even Mitchell's obituary in The Telegraph, 29 Aug 2002, confirms this. And quoting pop psychologists about embarrassment is certainly below the standards of what Wikipedia should be all about. Why is no one embarrassed about Al Jolson? Read the Wikipedia article about Jolson. Lenny Henry's sudden announcement of 'contractual obligations' doesn't ring true. I knew Bob Luff, who was the money man behind the stage productions and also Henry's agent. He would never have compelled Henry to do the show against his wishes. If Henry's career is declining, and I don't know that, it's certainly a neat way of putting yourself in the limelight. Black performers had no qualms about working with Jolson in blackface. This whole article needs to be rewritten with accuracy. Minstrel62 (talk) 02:51, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Greg Bennett (Graphic Designer)

So what is the best way to get a listing up for Greg that is considered acceptable? Greg modeled his content after other living designer listings on Wiki. This is our first try at all this, and the process has proved to be frustrating, as the info on verifiable sources has been difficult to parse and seems to generate more questions than answers. We pulled in sources beyond Greg's own site for references - external interviews, design shows, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexdotbarber (talk • contribs) 06:50, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We're No Heroes

Hi there, I recently put some work into the article 'We're No Heroes' that you have removed. It took me a very long time to do and it was without a doubt for the benefit of the article as a whole, making it very much more comprehensible and to the point, easier to read and more reliable. Please withdraw these changes and alter the article back to how it was in it's last edit. Thank you.

In actuality, your edits removed a large section about the history of the group without re-incorporating that content into your revisions. I've also noticed a serious problem, in that all your edits seem to be adding poorly referenced promotional content about Jordan Andrews an his company - this is unacceptable, and I've restored the article back to a version before your promotional additions. Please discuss any further changes on the article talk page before you attempt to restore them, as this type of promotional editing is severely frowned upon. MikeWazowski (talk) 13:24, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The content I added is not in anyway meant to be promotional at all, but informative and to the point. No where in my revisions is there any wording that even suggests some kind of promotional intent. The revisions I had made incorperate recent developments in the groups history and work with Jordan Andrews. Sorry for coming accross confrontational but i promise you this is not my intent, iv'e just tried to fix many flaws i've noticed within this article. All the best and thank you. 


 — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArtoriumFF (talk • contribs) 15:43, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

P.S: Just a little something to help you in youre desicions to edit this article, I've personally conducted interviews with this group and the original history of this group as written in the article is not acurate nor backed up but relevant references if you notice, so my edit had removed all info that had no relevant references and also cleaned up the groups 'history' which after personally talking to them a while back i am deffinetly sure they would have not wanted included in the article as it was. Sorry again for the trouble, I hope we can come to a middle ground on this, i would very much like to work alongside you in making this an up to standard article, your help would greatly be appreciated!

Also could you please help in either showing me how to add citations and footnotes to relevant referances, what references in the article constitute at primary so we can replace this and get them up to standard. The latest edit is a compremise between the original and the latest edit. Please work with me as a team to get this up to par, I am sure after readin the above messages you will understand. Much appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArtoriumFF (talk • contribs) 16:14, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey MikeWazowski

I never said that others do vandalism in this encyclopedia, you said that you, just say in my edits "vandalism PLEASE do not" because all the administrators and users (like you) always call me Vandal without justification, and absolutely NEVER I appreciate the issues here, just threaten me again and again with wicked pleasure.--OliverDF (talk) 15:20, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

vandalize which here are:

1. Most of the anonymous users, and here unfortunately not attempt to identify those who vandalize.

2. Some registered users, and again here unfortunately not attempt to identify and differentiate those who vandalize, vandalize those who do not like me (I've never vandalized here).--OliverDF (talk) 16:13, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WNH

Please refer to my recent messages to you on your TALK page, i want to clear this up and bring this article up to standard working with you as a team to make it the best it can be. so with nothing but good intentions i promise you the edits i have made and adjusted are for the best, they are greatly more acurate speaking from a direct secondary source to this group and the collective of artists involved with them as I have wrote national interviews and articles about these artists, unfortunatly not having the pleasure of meeting them as of yet! So thank you for your care however let us try find a middle ground, i am sure you will be pleased with my last edit but lets try get this up to standard now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArtoriumFF (talk • contribs) 17:00, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I understand that I was not giving reasons for my edits, which from the normal persons perspective such as yourself you would see as some kind of article vandalism, however my edits a re far from it, as stated many times now it is in the total interest of the article. There is wrong information with no relevant references, broken links, mispelled names and words, bad grammer, there has been recent developments that contradict the article of the subject and needed up dating. Etc, I'm sure you can now see I have a genuine interest in making this work with you... — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArtoriumFF (talk • contribs) 17:10, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Spencer Sacia

Hi Mike, My username is User: HorrorDirector. I am involved in the making of the 2014 horror/slasher film "Internecine", in which Spencer Sacia is both an actor and a director. I have looked it up and the page Spencer Sacia have been deleted two times, the first because it did not conform with Wikipedia's guidlines, and the second for being a blatant hoax. Both were not created by me, and I, not trying to be rude, and not being a blatant hoaxer, am going to recreate this page. If you would like to contact me, please go to my talk page. I would also like to become an admin on Wikipedia. Is that possible?

Thank You. HorrorDirector (talk) 21:00, 30 March 2012 (UTC)HorrorDirector[reply]

Without reliable sources that indicate notability, the article will likely be deleted again. And as a new editor, you have no chance of being made an administrator - not without a lot of time and effort, and without acting as a COI account, as you appear to be doing at this time. MikeWazowski (talk) 21:18, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Shot (Card Game)

Hello MikeWazowski. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Shot (Card Game) to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 15:28, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Aaaaarrgh! Previously dePRODed - I should have checked! My conscience wouldn't quite let me speedy it as a hoax, which implies intent to deceive. Ah well, off to AfD... JohnCD (talk) 15:36, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Superman Goes Greek

It was only an April Fools Day gag XD I would have reverted it myself first thing tomorrow anyway. Jienum (talk) 19:48, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Templars of Kayne

Sorry, I meant to let you know that I had de-PRODded that, in fact I intended to AfD it myself, but I got distracted. JohnCD (talk) 20:24, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On Paul Petrie's page

Hi Mike, thank you very much for helping me improving the page on Paul Petrie by pointing out shortcomings and potential verifiability issues.

I wanted to ask you if you could be so kind to point out a little more precisely what sections you feel need more work or what statements you think are more problematic, so that I can focus on them. I will add references to his work from secondary sources in the "Work" section, do you also feel his biography needs more work?


Thanks a lot, in advance, for your help.Best Regards
Fgep (talk) 14:18, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you

The Modest Barnstar
You are among the top 5% of most active Wikipedians this past month! 66.87.0.230 (talk) 17:35, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Reason

Please look at WP:STARWARS's talk page to see the given reasons. Also, even if you can't find my reason to be good enough, try to look for other reasons.Lucia Black (talk) 03:50, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, MikeWazowski. You have new messages at TheGeneralUser's talk page.
Message added 18:12, 7 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

TheGeneralUser (talk) 18:12, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Columbo

Do you consider what I had deleted are anything relative to the subject Columbo? B3430715 (talk) 17:00, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter - you do not delete talk page comments by others, especially considering how involved you were in the recent unpleasantness. Let them be archived by proper procedures. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:08, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Then archived it. Yes, I'm involved, so what, everything is there, you want it, look at the history. But how shall others continue the talk? B3430715 (talk) 18:25, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Inaddition, you shall also restore this and this. B3430715 (talk) 18:41, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fyi

I'm guessing you already saw this, but in the event you didn't, here it is. [2] I can't say I'm terribly surprised. Oh well... Erikeltic (Talk) 02:40, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Optical Express

Hi there,

I just made a revert to a talk page (my first) over at Optical_Express - because I thought the text was libelous under Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Editing_comments - but looking back though the page history it looks like you've taken the oppersite position previously - can we talk about the reasons for this? It would be cool if I could get a bit more of an insight into how the guidelines should apply… Fayedizard (talk) 05:21, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

please look at the history of this talk page to see comments deleted by MW. That tells you what you need to know.94.9.64.45 (talk) 06:08, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DRAGON BOOSTER sock of Padmal?

Hello. I think you have mistaken this user here. DRAGON BOOSTER has been over 2 years now. Padmal has been known to create socks with names of good editors. He even tried to impersonate Vensatry. I'd suggest you to remove the report on DRAGON BOOSTER. Cheers. — Abhishek  Talk 16:09, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cartoon Network Studios

Turns out Johnny Bravo Goes to Hollywood is real: Google search. (I'm surprised too.) Trivialist (talk) 02:04, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Domain coloring with Color wheel graphs of complex functions

just wondering why you unmerged it???? Glenzo999 (talk) 15:51, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
I think you deserve this! Glenzo999 (talk) 16:02, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DUDE!

I am not making test edits! im merging them! SHEESH! I asked for an admin for a move lock! please stop! Glenzo999 (talk) 16:16, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need for a merge - they are separate subjects, there was no consensus for a move, and you should not be merging them. Continuing to do so will only get you blocked. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:18, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]


DEar MIKE:

I would like to stop this editing war with Domain coloring and Color wheel graphs of complex functions merge/unmerge. I will leave it up to someone else to merge it. Sincerly, Glenzo999 (talk) 16:24, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apology

I am disappointingly sorry about that WP Revolution. I resigned my account temporarily, but I decided to just go with the rules. WebTV3 (talk) 21:50, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
With so many things helped, you should be awarded with this barnstar. "With great power comes great responsibility", Uncle Ben said, and you've overwhelmingly exceeded expectations here on Wikipedia. Take this barnstar in honor that recognition. Thanks, Mike. WebTV3 (talk) 23:22, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The World Tomorrow

Mike, Pleased leave articles on Wikipedia alone that you have absolutely no education about. I am one of the program producer's. The World Tomorrow program is not "new". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garnerted (talk • contribs) 15:47, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That is not your article. Please read WP:OWN.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 16:12, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Minecon

Dear Mr Wazowski

RE: The minecon controversy (that was a bit of a typo wasn't it) I feel that all of the sources referenced provide ample evidence that the fall-out was a notable part of the event. The information is drawn from secondary sources of proven longevity and reliability. Both PC Gamer Magazine and Edge magazine are substantial and notable publications. Secondly I do not believe that the notability or otherwise of the podcast in question is relevant to the issue at hand. It has already been established by the article that Notch is notable as was MineCon, therefore it merely needs to be demonstrated that the events formed a notable part of minecon, not that every single one of the protagonists are individually notable. The sources are sufficient to establish this, indeed edge magazine not only published a number of articles but also included it in their weekly round-up of notable news[1] and their yearly round of of indie gaming related news which largely discussed minecraft[2].

I hope you understand my position more clearly now and if you have any suggestions of potential refinements to this section they would be very welcome.


Many Thanks

  1. ^ http://www.edge-online.com/news/news-round-november-21-25. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  2. ^ http://www.edge-online.com/news/2011-round-indies. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)


DisneyCSIfan socks

I see you've been following the various socks of DisneyCSIfan. I caught up with a couple more, plus the underlying IP and filed a new report this afternoon. I thought I'd let you know, just FYI. --Drmargi (talk) 21:17, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't surprise me... MikeWazowski (talk) 20:01, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Checkuser just confirmed, but he/she has gone quiet while the SPI wheels grind at the pace of an iceberg. They'll probably abandon this account before it is blocked and be back shortly with a new one. --Drmargi (talk) 16:17, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Aaand we're blocked, but not the IP. They'll be back. --Drmargi (talk) 17:00, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chitti (character)

You would, of course have a reason for redirecting it despite it satisfying WP:GNG? Secret of success (talk) 05:42, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You know, deleting messages posted on your talk page that oppose your views does not help your cause. Messages are always saved in your page history in case you're worried about anything. In the meantime, I kindly ask you to discuss your actions at Talk:Chitti (character) first and then a unanimous conclusion can be made on what to do with the page. Until then, do not blank and redirect the page. Thanks. EelamStyleZ talk 22:57, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well done my friends, I hope he agrees. Kailash29792 (talk) 03:53, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Berenstain Bears

Mike, I'm wondering whether you are being too hard on User talk:208.123.30.105. My impression is that this is a child who is editing in good faith, yet you started with a level 3 warning. Recently on List of Berenstain Bears books the editor removed his/her own edit. I have added a welcome message with a link to advice for young new users. RockMagnetist (talk) 16:36, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That editor is an IP hopping vandal who has disrupted the article MANY many times over the last year, changing IPs a lot... it may have been the first time I warned that specific address, but it was NOT the first time the editor had been warned. MikeWazowski (talk) 00:29, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I see what you mean. It's an odd combination of childish interests and internet sophistication. RockMagnetist (talk) 05:38, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]


MADtv

Could you please explain how the series had no connection with the humor magazine? I've always thought it was based on the magazine. - PRProgRock (talk) 15:11, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No one's saying it had no connection - this is the problem when you continually change things based on something you're obviously don't know about. There is a distinct difference between your blanket "based on" version to the factual version about the name being licensed. The makers of the Magazine had no input into the show, and apart from one or two instances (noted in the article), the show was *not* based on content from the magazine. I'm sorry that you appear to not be able to tell the difference, but the added detail about the licensing of the name is a necessary point, as the two ways to describe the connection have two different connotations. Your version does not give a true picture of the situation, but the original wording does. Do not change it again. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:47, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So, MADtv is not an adaptation of the issues, it is just inspired by the magazine in terms of humor. Am I right? PRProgRock (talk) 02:41, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Look, I understand why you are so angry. I'm not being rude, I'm suggesting something. Can you PLEASE stop chasing me around Wikipedia? Let someone else deal with me, okay? PRProgRock (talk) 02:38, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not angry - you just refuse to understand why your edits are problematic, and you continue to edit war, something you promised you would not do when you were unblocked. You're just going to get blocked again if you keep this up, you know. MikeWazowski (talk) 03:50, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Friendly question

I was just wondering, did you get your username from Monsters, Inc.? PRProgRock (talk) 17:53, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, what do you think? The Shadow-Fighter (talk) 22:43, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agents of Secret Stuff (2010)

I have no idea what kind of shape the two previous versions were that had those two versions deleted,[3][4] but the current version... though it started off as pretty crappy,[5] has gone through some improvements.[6] What was nominated as a 93-word unsourced stub, is now somwhat better than when I found it. You are invited to revisit the article, and the above deletion discussion. Best, Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 23:35, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion?

I noticed that your main user page has been vandalized several times. I would like to suggest requesting permanent protection of your main user page. I'm only trying to help, no offense intended. PRProgRock (talk) 02:06, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please try NOT to chase me around this site. PRProgRock (talk) 16:40, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please try to follow the rules, not edit war and complain when you are correctly reverted, and generally try to understand WHY people are reverting your contributions. MikeWazowski (talk) 20:09, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Spy vs. Spy

Listen, Mike, have you even READ the more recent issues of MAD Magazine? Since at least 2000, the issues have shown Spy vs. Spy in full color, and from what I can tell so far, Peter Kuper is the only MAD artist who has drawn the Spies in full color. PRProgRock (talk) 16:58, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Speedy deletion of Movim

I have left you a message on the talk page. Please let me know if there is anything in particular that is missing on the page. Etenil the destroyer (talk) 18:32, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Spy vs. Spy...again

Listen, Mike, have you even READ the more recent issues of MAD Magazine? Since at least 2000, the issues have shown Spy vs. Spy in full color, and from what I can tell so far, Peter Kuper is the only MAD artist who has drawn the Spies in full color. PRProgRock (talk) 15:06, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See this link, and read the list VERY carefully, and then you will understand that info about the strip being in full color since Peter Kuper's inception. PRProgRock (talk) 15:35, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

thanks mike for helping.

thanks for undoing that bad edit on me page. i would have done so next time i was signed in. but thanks to you it get removed sooner.

i just don,t get why some users do that. i know sometimes i make mistakes or do some edits that some people don,t think are right. but there no need really for the way that ip user acted the way he or she did. but thanks again.

--Iniced (talk) 20:13, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A brief question on your reversion of my edit here

Can I just briefly ask you why you reverted my edit above and commented that it was my personal opinion? I actually agree with Altman and Gross in their book TrekNavigator that ST TAS should actually be considered canon in the Star Trek universe since Gene Roddenberry created the 1970s show and exercised full editorial control over it with the help of DC Fontana. But legally, it was Roddenberry who suddenly changed his mind in the 1980s and said that ST TAS should Not be canon so what is wikipedia to do here? Disagree with the law and Roddenberry's estate? All I'm saying is that my opinion is while ST TAS should be canon according to Gene Roddenberry's wishes and estate, its not. So, I was actually just following following Gene's edict here. Do you have a response? My edit just stated the obvious--that while certain elements of ST TAS have been incorporated into episodes considered canon by Roddenberry--ST TAS is not unfortunately. Nothing more. Thank You. I hope you understand my edit on Gene's rather strange treatment of ST TAS. --Leoboudv (talk) 02:52, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Disagree with the law"? What law? There are no laws that govern what is canon and what is not - and Roddenberry's estate has no control over Trek, so it doesn't matter what they think. Your edit stated, without attribution, that the animated series is not canon. Surely you understand proper referencing by now? The animated series has been recognized as canon by the official Star Trek site, which is run by the current owners of Trek, so in that regard I have no problem with removing something like what you posted, and would (and will) do it again. MikeWazowski (talk) 04:45, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank You for your reply. Please don't be offended. I just wanted your pespective on the situation of ST TAS. CBS today controls Star Trek, not Roddenberrry's estate, but they generally try to follow Gene's wishes here on ST TAS. It would have been simpler if Roddenberry never hired Arnold as an archivist to deal with fans letters on Star Trek in the 1980s since this situation would not have occured. But now that he did, some book writers like Michael Okuda have also chosen reluctantly to omit ST TAS from their treatment of the Star Trek universe. As an aside, I remember reading Star Trek.com's statement acknowleding the existence of ST TAS and their decision to give some coverage--though not acceptance on Canon--to this series years ago. But then CBS fired a whole bunch of startrek.com staffers and that link is now dead. Even startrek.com's fans ratings of various Star Trek episodes is gone. What a pity. All the reviews I wrote for various Classic Star Trek shows on startrek.com have disappeared too--just deleted I guess. With an owner like CBS, it feels like Star Trek doesn't need enemies today. They call it costcutting unfortunately. With kind Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:10, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple Issues Tag on C-Rayz Walz Article

Hi MikeWazowski, I have been trying to improve the article on rapper C-Rayz Walz. After I added a biography section, you came and tagged it as relying heavily on one source, containing references which do not meet Wikipedia's guidelines for reliable sources, and maybe containing original research. I realized that I had made a mistake in citing my content, accidentally only putting in one source where I had intended two. I also realize that the sources I used are not as established and legitimate as they could be. I assumed that the original research part could have been referring to my interpretation of the interview I found. Due to the lack of information on C-Rayz Walz, I can't really do anything about how reliable the sources are, but I did add another source and changed my wording when talking about the interviews. The rest of the article is pretty biased and I plan to work on it more. I am very new to Wikipedia, and I would like to hear further suggestions from you. Please let me know if you believe some issues have been resolved or if there is more I could do! MarchionessGrey (talk) 15:17, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Speedy deletion declined: The Contortionist and Intrinsic (album)

Hi MW. Just a note to let you know that I didn't think these ought to be deleted via speedy; there's just enough coverage (in such places as Alternative Press and in the Arkansas Times for example) that suggests the band might be notable. Feel free to take it to AfD of course. Thanks, Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 04:12, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Jesse Liberty

I have asked for a deletion review of Jesse Liberty. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Msnicki (talk) 17:23, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Emigrant

Dear Mike, 

  I added a little bit more on The Emigrant's short story page. I truly consider this short story not only a world record (as many) but a great condensed version of the drama of every emigrant. 
  Certainly, the author has no page in English --he is young. But he has in Spanish.
  Even more, the short story has been translated, at least, into twenty languages. I found this on the web today: 2005年墨西哥作家路易斯•费利佩•洛梅利（Luis Felipe Lomelí，生于1975年1月10日）写作了《移民》（El Emigrante）：“¿Olvida usted algo? -¡Ojalá!”（您忘了？但愿如此！）这一全文只有4个词的作品，是迄今为止最短的西语小说。
  I hope this would do and that the page will remain.
  Regards,

Okigbo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Okigbo (talk • contribs) 00:10, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]


H. G. Wells' The War of the Worlds (2005 film)

Mike - I don't see a quote from the film's director as undue weight. If it's balance that's needed, discuss that. Separately, I don't see a quote from SFCrowsNest as non-notable - you reverted out that under the "undue" edit summary - that was a positive comment, not negative. The article is under attack from someone, who has gone so far as to put up a robots.txt on eveofthewar.com to block archive.org's archive of that site. A bit of help, preserving the integrity of the article, would be appreciated. --Lexein (talk) 03:17, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion should probably take place at Talk:H. G. Wells' The War of the Worlds (2005 film). --Lexein (talk) 04:09, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Corner Stone Cues

What parts about the Corner Stone Cues page is not suitable? I only posted facts. There is no puffery and everything stated is neutral. I did not mention any awards or the quality of the music. Which has been performed by notable artists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jsthornton7 (talk • contribs) 04:09, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Belobogism

I looked at your G3 speedies on the two subsidiary articles, but thought that as the main article is at AfD the best thing to do was to bundle them in there and let them sink or swim with it. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 15:32, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Mike

Hi Mike, I edited the section of that page with the notes: (WP:NPOV, WP:RS - Michael Yon and Jonn Lilyea do not meet RS standards. Neither of their views were represented here with NPOV.)) I thought that was enough to explain the edit/removal especially for a living person. After reviewing Wikipedia's standards for sources, neither of those bloggers seemed to qualify. The news item this entire section was created around is also already mentioned on the page in the "Public Life" section, but with proper context and a credible source (the Army Times). THanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BigbonesABC (talk • contribs) 16:02, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Creation of Shubh Film

Hello Mike,

Greetings!!

I was trying to create a page for Shubh Film, which is the leading film production company in our state Chhattisgarh. Shubh Film has produced 3 all time hit movies in Chhattisgarhi Cinema. As all other film production houses are listed on Wikipedia. Shubh Film should be listed as it provides information for the visitors from Chhattisgarh.

Thanks, Simplify.buzz (talk) 19:03, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Except that there was no indication of notability for the company. Just because something exists doesn't automatically make it notable. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:06, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Sesame Street

What's wrong with deleting or replacing the distribution? Especially if it's unsourced --Smartie2thaMaxXx (talk) 13:17, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And yet you offer not sources of your own - your continued reversions to your preferred version smack of edit warring and borderline vandalism, and you've been warned bout this by other editors as well - do not do it again, or you will be reported. MikeWazowski (talk) 13:23, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am not a vandal. I'm trying to be constructive. Does any source say that Sony BMG/Warner Bros./Disney-ABC/etc. was a distributor? Think about it. Anyways, surely you have rented some of the videos, and they say which is distributing. Does that count as a source? --Smartie2thaMaxXx (talk) 13:23, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion Of FigHunter

Hello as the FigHunter page has been deleted via a speedy deletion, would it be possible for you the userify the page, or allow me to add it to my userspace or something so that it may be edited? I believe that it can be edited quickly to show the importance of FigHunter, which itself is hugely important to a great many people online. Any suggestions or help are greatly appreciated. --Phoenix Pyres (talk) 15:26, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an admin, nor did I delete the page. I can't help you. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:23, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am korean... korean rock band nemesis is korean...not Bahasa Indonesia — Preceding unsigned comment added by N-sis (talk • contribs) 20:21, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Anna Fitch Ferguson

Hello MikeWazowski. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Anna Fitch Ferguson to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. Electric Catfish 21:23, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Vineyard Power Co-operative

I stubified this offensive copyvio, and then removed your tag. If you still think it stinks, then send the issue to WP:AfD. Bearian (talk) 22:34, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Tutti frutti frozen yogurt

Hello MikeWazowski. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Tutti frutti frozen yogurt to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. Electric Catfish 00:38, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The River (book)

Hey I just got your notification about The River page...I'll revise it so it fits wikipedia...sorry. New to this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.52.168.103 (talk) 13:35, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Master

Are you sure N-sis (talk · contribs) isn't the master? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:39, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should let the admins sort it out. Anyway, I had just added N-sis to the SPI report. GrayFullbuster (talk) 14:45, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good plan, and thanks for tagging. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:47, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
N-sis was the first one I noticed, the earliest one created of the batch - do you think there is another? MikeWazowski (talk) 14:50, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I'd already filed the initial SPI on N-sis yesterday - see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/N-sis. The new one on 푸른잎 that GrayFullbuster filed should be redirected to the original. MikeWazowski (talk) 14:52, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'll just request the SPI clerk to redirect my report to the older one. Also, fixed the tags on those 3 suspected accounts. GrayFullbuster (talk) 14:58, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Daratan gigir

Oops... I posted the article in the wrong language and now it's gone. Anzhyo (talk) 23:17, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Wow. Thanks for the auto-bot reply. I feel so valued. — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Milner (talk • contribs) 23:21, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great Hymn to The Aten - your deletion of a reference item

Hi Mike: I read your comment, "Undid revision 506805666 by Salim e-a ebrahim (talk) removed WP:OR disguised with 'reference'". It seems you have detected something incorrect in what I did because the reference you deleted was meant only to show that the hymn was translated by the referenced persons and that therefore it was not something created by me out of my imagination in order to assert an opinion [WP:OR (Original Research)] as you felt I had done.

I have no axes to grind since I am not an Egyptian or a Pharaoh-phile. What I stated is right there in the hymn itself staring us in the face! Clearly, I had nothing to do with the hymn itself since I have no expertise in reading hieroglyphs - and that is why the need of that reference to show that it is a bona fide translation - and you removed it! How does that help bring about a better article? After reading the hymn in translation please let me know whether I have stated something that is not there in the hymn itself. People have even compared it to Psalm 104. Clearly therefore it is to be regarded as a hymn and not even a poem.

The only thing that really shook me up was that this Pharaoh was living before the coming of Moses and was asserting that there was a "unique/sole God" or "spiritual Presence" on earth.

I hope I have clarified my side of the matter. On your side I see that you do a lot of reverts. Are you an Admin? If so then since I am new and getting my feet wet could you please tell me what it was that you have found in that reference which seemed to you to be like Original Research?

Regards Salim e-a ebrahim 03:49, 11 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salim e-a ebrahim (talk • contribs)

from Preciousconsort (dan Altieri author, regards Shangri-la in Brown University people--class 1971

Dear Mike: I do indeed think there was an error. I have since adjusted my entry of coauthorship of Shangri-La in my Brown University People literature entry. However, i do not know exactly which point I made that was being contested: Shangri-la by Dan Altieri and Eleanor Cooney (both authors dividing the work by chapters) was the result of a search for authors by the original publisher in the 1930's for LOST HORIZON. According to the editors at Wm. Morrow publishing back in the mid-90's, they had been looking for someone(s) to author a sequel to their famous book by James Hilton. We (dan a./eleanor c.) were recommended and after a lengthy time getting our story line approved by the surviving members of the Hilton estate (miss Porterfield (?) et.al. other names escaping my present memory), our story and style was highly approved--we were then granted the licence and the contract to do the official sequel to LOST HORIZON--I do notknow of the other (sequel) mentioned in a brief article in wikipedia regards James Hilton, ,however, -- I do know that this other book ("Messenger"(?) I am not disparaging this gentleman's work or talent but) was not authorized either by the publisher of by the surviving members of the Hilton family. Therefore, making our Shangri-la truly the only approved sequel--this is fact. Thanks Dan Altieri author and Brown 1971 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Preciousconsort (talk • contribs) 19:01, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no article for this person, so the listing was removed - I've gone through and removed quite a few redlinks on that page now. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:06, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mike from Dan Altieri (precious consort)

Hello. I am Dan Altieri. I was Brown class 1971. I wrote the book (with Eleanor Cooney) published by William Morrow in 1996, Shangri-la. William Morrow was the original publisher of LOST HORIZON in the 1930's . They gave us the job to write Shangri-La-- Am I doing this right--Please please help me, I do not understand all the computer talk. I am trying to clear up any confusion. All facts are correct.Please talk to me in straight language and do no remove me from Brown people literature? Preciousconsort (talk) 19:17, 11 August 2012 (UTC)dan Altieri preciousconsort[reply]

First off, if you really are Dan Altieri, you should not be writing articles about yourself or trying to promote yourself on Wikipedia - this is a conflict of interest, and strictly frowned upon. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:22, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hell MikeWazowski from Preciousconsort dan altier Brown 1971

Hi Mike --please allow my entry to run. you can find the namesof my books under Amazon.com or type my name and the correct titles: The Court of the Lion; 1988, Deception:a novel of murder and madness in T'ang china 1994, (german title for one Eiserne Kaiserin), next, Shangri-la:the return to the world of lost horizon, 1996 and last a french title La Revolte des Lettres, please match my name onany or all these books, Also please cite Daniel Altieri Brown university 1971 thesis which has been archived in the John Hay Library at Brown U., this will prove my existence--please check your facts before deleting me. thankyou againPreciousconsort (talk) 19:55, 11 August 2012 (UTC)daniel altieri precious consort[reply]

answer for mike Wazowski from Dan Altieri/preciousconsort apology can you help

Mike, daniel altieri again. I apologize for entering my own entry on Brown U. people pageliterature. You can confirm my eixistence and place at Brown-- I am recored in the John High Library with a thesis. I had contacted Brown, they knew of me and my books which were sold at the Faunce House Bookstore so many years ago. I asked how I would get proper entry onto the literature page at Wikipedia, they did not know how. I apologize for taking this on myself. Tell me how to straighten out this situation. There are others book fans etc, that would be able to reenter the article for me. I hope some of my old professors might still be there, I think Eric Widmar might yet be--he was quite fond of The Court of the Lion and quite delighted for us. Amazon will provide proof of the books.Please help me to rectify this oversght and again my apologies--I have difficulty with computer things. Again, sorry and thankyou for maintaining high standards, but perhaps you can helop me--you are notme--therfore, perhaps... please help me to reaffirm my proper place in the Brown u. People entry.You have the four books (more to come later) above and if using theproper names cited, they will appear on many sites. Please champion this difficult cause for me. I have well-earned my place as author and Brown Person. Stay in touch until we remedy. thank and desperate. Sincerely, Dan Altieri — Preceding unsigned comment added by Preciousconsort (talk • contribs) 20:08, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sesame Street

Hey Mike,

I have a couple of issues with your edits of this article. First off, your additions to the infobox: I reverted them because they're unsourced. I'm not as concerned about their additions, however, since content in infoboxes don't always need to be sourced, but it would be nice to know where you got the information. My biggest concern is the separation of the "History" section into two sections, and the new "Series outlook" section. The content in both sections is a synopsis of History of Sesame Street, so it best belongs in one section. Remember that this is a FA, and it was vetted with the three paragraphs in one section. I'm not sure the folks at FAC would approve of the change. IOW, I think that we need, with the exception of the addition of new material (which at this point, isn't very likely), to keep it as faithful to the approved FA-version as possible. Consequently, I'd like to revert your changes and keep the information in one section. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 21:01, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: User:Mastectomy Products/sandbox

Hello MikeWazowski. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Mastectomy Products/sandbox, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: looks to me like an attempt by a newbie to write a neutral article - what's it supposed to be advertising? Thank you. SmartSE (talk) 20:40, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Eric B. Hughes

Why try and delete this page? This page was here for awhile, and you say he is no-one of nobility, that is downright silly. This guy is an award-winning writer/ filmmaker with 3 films in the can at the moment- why delete? There are links to his work, there are articles and interviews with him. Why was his page removed without discussion in the first place? Makes no sense. There are probably more than 500 writer/ directors with a Wiki page that don't deserve one, and no-one ever wants to delete them. Why so aggressive - what's your point? Bellatarr (talk) 21:52, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion

Cecelia Condit's Wikipedia page that has for some time included a post or citation saying that it needed to be written using more encyclopedia terminology. I tried to update and do that this morning. This afternoon I saw that there was another post stating there might be copyright problems. The material that was used was written by Cecelia Condit and has been used on many sites and in many screenings to describe the work. It is commonly used, but they are the Cecelia Condit's words.

Please inform me what I should do. And thank you for your help.Ccondit (talk) 22:08, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

George Campbell Tinning War Artist Recent Entry

Thanks for help updating reference for Tinning. Now, I'm trying (unsuccessfully) to link the "RCA" after Tinning's name to the "Royal Canadian Academy of Arts." Currently it directs to RCA Victor. Please advise or make the change. Thanks again.Dentist1946 (talk) 01:28, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Spy vs. Spy

Actually, I'm not connected with PRProgRock at all; I just added the cite template to the Spy vs. Spy book for readability. (Frankly, I never thought "Spy vs. Spy" was ever that funny...) Trivialist (talk) 13:18, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I know you aren't - I was referring to the IP that added that book "reference" right before you edited - the book is just a collection of reprints of strips - it does not make the claim PRProgrock says it does - that is just WP:OR on his part - and he's been indef blocked on several accounts over this. Sorry for the confusion. MikeWazowski (talk) 13:21, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. After I posted this I realized that I slightly misinterpreted your edit summary anyway. :) Trivialist (talk) 13:25, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

epic

I think you might need to create a whole discussion or consensus on the whole epic thing going on the Star Wars article. Jhenderson 777 13:43, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Betty Logan's had one going on on the FilmProject for some time.... MikeWazowski (talk) 13:46, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
For this particular article? Jhenderson 777 13:48, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
On epic in general - I seem to remember there was a huge discussion over this last year too, in regards to this and 2001 - I remember the consensus being for its removal on the individual films... MikeWazowski (talk) 13:52, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. What about when they are cited such as in the Lord of the Rings movies? Jhenderson 777 14:05, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tutti Frutti Frozen Yogurt

Hi MikeW, I've cleared the CSD tag on this article and left a note on its talk page. Feel free to list at WP:AFD if desired, I won't really be following up on this any furter. Regards, — xaosflux Talk 04:23, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Mike!

Thank you very much for coming through and reverting to the last good copy on the Tony J. Fernandez page. Another user/editor keeps changing the page with bad copy and I'm not in Wikipedia often enough to remember the reference procedures. I was trying to replace the bad copy with the old copy before I'd had coffee this morning. So, anyway, I know you're a busy person, but I do appreciate what you do here and I just wanted to thank you. Content Scribbler (talk) 22:48, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tony J. Fernandez

Hi, Please remove my page from Wikipedia effective now. I have been vandalized twice this week and do not have the time nor desire to be checking for vandals everyday. Thank you, Professor Tony Fernandez http://www.professorfernandez.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.103.6.101 (talk) 02:17, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but this is not a valid reason for deleting a page. MikeWazowski (talk) 02:22, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tony J. Fernandez

Tony J. Fernandez has requested his page be deleted. I was the one who uploaded the page for him. I was the one who put the tag at the top. I will find another reason perhaps? Can we delete all the information and just let it be deleted because there's no info there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ContentScribbler (talk • contribs) 03:33, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Where can I submit a new version about The News for consideration?

jimm@jimmbudd.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.145.238.39 (talk) 17:59, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DistiStock Deletion - Help

Hi Mike,

If I understand correctly, the page I submitted, DistiStock, was marked for speedy deletion because it was interpreted as advertising.

Just to provide a bit of background, the DistiStock application was developed by the company I work for. Initially it was only used for a specific client, but with the client's permission, we decided to release it to the general public after the Japan earthquake in 2011. The earthquake hit one of the most populated semiconductor manufacturing areas of the world and a lot of large manufacturing companies were forced to shut down operations. In turn this led to a rise in the number of counterfeit and sub-standard components finding their way into the supply chain, even in very big companies and government agencies like NASA, the U.S. Navy and many others.

Our intention in releasing DistiStock publicly was to try to get some integrity back into the industry and help curb the already visible degradation. Everything in the article is verifiable.

I checked Wikipedia for other similar articles. It turns out there are numerous articles about companies and products. There is even one about America II, a competitor of our client. In fact many of the electronic component distributors that DistiStock includes also have Wikipedia pages, for example DigiKey and Mouser.

Any advice you can give would be greatly appreciated. I understand that I'm not too neutral, but it's not because we're trying to make mega-bucks. It's because this is a one of a kind product that represents a new direction in supply chain sourcing. Please help point me in the right direction.

Gunter Richter 19:43, 16 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by EstockGuru (talk • contribs)

Sandra Navidi

Your request for speedy deletion indicates that your Duplication Detector has identified a phrase on the article "Sandra Navidi" that was copied from a website. You are correct, but please note that a reference had been provided for this phrase (note ref # 11). Is this ok? Or do you think I should remove this phrase entirely? Whytestone (talk) 00:32, 17 August 2012 (UTC)Whytestone[reply]

Hello Mike, I see now that the Sandra Navidi article has been removed from Wikipedia. As I stated in my earleir comment, the phrase you objected to was given the proper reference, which I believe adheres to Wikipedia's policies. Therefore it should be permissible, should it not? Shall I re-write it as a new article without that phrase, and re-publish it as a new article? Whytestone (talk) 17:27, 17 August 2012 (UTC)Whytestone[reply]

Pb creating the Saphon Energy Article

Dear Mike,

I tried to create an article about Saphon Energy (www.saphonenergy.com) but I guess I did something wrong...

Khalil Zouari — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khalil Zouari (talk • contribs) 13:58, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

--65.94.112.88 (talk) 03:02, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

El emigrante (short story)

See Talk:El emigrante (short story) for a discussion of the copyright concern. The story is an unsubstantial excerpt from a book. I will ask for advice on this from the experts, but am fairly sure there is no issue. Aymatth2 (talk) 16:58, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Dear 'Mike Wazowski'

I would just like to say that I am disappointed that such a minor edit could cause yourself to conflict my input even though I haven't breached any terms of editing Wikipedia. I believe that the content I added to the page was not in any way harmful or should be deemed untrustworthy when it was in all aspects, true. Such minor details should be overlooked if said content is helpful and informative towards other patrons of the page. I am simply asking you for the common courtesy to provide other fans with the knowledge they seek out from the page. Regards, Caterbomb — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caterbomb (talk • contribs) 02:03, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

John D. Caputo

Hi Mike, I was wondering if you'd be ok with my removing the {{COI}} from John D. Caputo? I've done a bit of cleanup and it seems like issues with neutrality/promotion are taken care of. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 14:39, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd leave it up for a few days, at least - Caputo himself edited the article just over a week ago, and an apparent WP:SPA hit it just yesterday. MikeWazowski (talk) 14:45, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I'll take another look at the article in a few days. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:02, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Master's School

Hi there, I just wanted to let you know I've removed your request for speedy deletion on Master's School considering it does not fit the A7 criteria which state, "An article about a real person, individual animal(s), organization or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, with the exception of educational institutions.". If you feel I've done this in error, please let me know or revert my changes. Thanks! -Bgmur (talk) 22:58, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please Back Up Your Reasoning

I'm not sure how the edits I made are promoting Rochelle Huppin or advertising in any sense. I simply explain how she got into cooking. Where she went to school. The restaurants she has worked for and the organizations she supports. Oh and the company SHE founded. If you are going to "tag" my edits and change it back to the other version, which is terribly written, I'd like an explanation. With that said, I changed it back to what I wrote yesterday. Grevihill30 (talk) 13:14, 23 August 2012 (UTC)Grevihill30[reply]

Centerity Systems

Mike, I was trying to add Centerity Systems to a table under "comparing network monitoring systems". There are over 50 other vendors listed on this table. Also, the table links to another page providing a brief product and company summary description. I did what everyone else did only less so yet my contribution was deleted. Why? Why can't my company participate like everyone else? Marty — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwpejko (talk • contribs) 21:50, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First of, please read WP:COI - you shouldn't be writing or editing on behalf of your company. If it truly is notable, neutral third parties should be writing about you, not you yourself. MikeWazowski (talk) 22:04, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Mike, thanks for your comments but on the table I mentioned "comparison of network monitoring systems/software" and the links to the corresponding vendor descriptions, none of those parties are neutral third party contributors. All of those pages were contributed by the vendors themselves. Also, in my opinion, the table of listed vendors incomplete without Centerity Systems as there are over 50 vendors listed who are our direct competitors. I think I understand the mission of Wiki and will try to comply but note that the examples I modeled my additions after (the table and links to vendor product descriptions) came directly from the other contributors that are still listed and linked. Additionally, all I was trying to do was to create a placeholder for Centerity that would be improved over time. I am a first time user so I assumed that modeling what already exists is the norm. I will try to do better. Marty — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwpejko (talk • contribs) 13:50, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You should also read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS - obviously, your company is important to you, but you can't (and haven't) been impartial as to its real standing. If it is actually notable, someone else will write about you. As to your claims about other vendors writing their own articles, you offer no proof, and that still doesn't affect your company or articles about/linking to it. MikeWazowski (talk) 14:38, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]


the sad case of Steven St. John

well, I came up w/ no WP:RS either. Might be a bit of a leap to call it a hoax, but w/o RS it would go as a Bi WP:PROD anyway. Absence of proof is not proof of absence, so I WP:AGF and invited creator (same name and middle initial) to show me some sourcing and I'll bring it back. Cheers, an happy editing. Dlohcierekim 23:00, 24 August 2012 (UTC) ' Oh, thanks for the due diligence RS check. It's good to check first and tag later. Dlohcierekim 23:01, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I looked everywhere, couldn't find a thing. Given how the article started, I don't expect that we would ever find reliable sources for that claim. :) MikeWazowski (talk) 23:03, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If i get overturned at DRV it'll be the first time. hat'd be a kick-- first deletion after a long hiatus. Dlohcierekim 23:16, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DIBELS and Cheesemaker13

I saw your request to block this account for promotional editing. Another administrator has declined, for now, to do so.

FYI, see Talk:DIBELS#Potential article sources. The backers of DIBELS were the subject of a major ethics and criminal investigation a few years ago.
--A. B. (talk • contribs) 00:39, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

han shot first caption

In reference to this change

Was that your caption? Because the grammar is unintelligible and syntax is awkward. Unless I'm mistaken, that's adequate cause for an edit. Simply reverting it and saying "unnecessary" seems a bit dismissive of the issue that was raised in the edit. If you have a better suggestion for how to fix it, I have no problem with that but the current wording is inelegant, at best.

Proud Anselmo (talk) 18:25, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Precious Consort on Shangri-La James Hilton article/Brown University

Dear Mike: I do understand why you had to delete my Brown University notable reference--it is a deserved place--If it might help I shall produce great newspapers reviews etc. but understand the necessity to operate within the regulations However, I DO NOT COMPREHEND the deletion of the SHANGRI_LA SEQUEL article--yes it could be shortened. BUt despite being one of the authors approved to write it by Hilton estate survivors Porterfield and Hill in 1996 and chosen by the publisher of the original who holds the sole rights--the return of the brief mention of "MESSENGER" in its place, is a dissservice to the Enclyclopedia. ONce again, no one can simply write a book and call it a sequel to a famous property. LOST HORIZON is copyrighted and not in the Public Domain. This is clearly now against publishing law. Mr. DeMarco can write whatever he wishes, but he cannot call it the sequel to LOST HORIZON--this is a privilege accorded to those chosen to write it by those who own the rights to it. This deletion and return to "Messenger"now borders on copyright infringement. Please make this correct for the owners of the rights to LOST HORIZON Wm. MOrrow PUB. et. al. and those many loyal readers of Wikipedia. Now regards Notable listing for BROWN please tell me which great reviews to cite and where to cite them: London Times? Die Spiegel Germany, Le Monde Paris, Le Figaro Paris. San Francisco Chronicle Sunday entertainment? and BTW further Regards SHANGRI-LA: Is Mr. DeMarco a personal friend? I am certain he is a fine gentleman, but he does not have the approval to write the sequel to LOST HORIZON. There have been many many writers, from high school students, English majors etc.to others, who enjoyed the original story and were inspired to write stories and essays for their claassmates. None are official. Please respond. If I were a TV producer with lots of money, but did not own the rights to say, STAR TREK, could I create a new series to that name? We feel greatly wronged. What fact in Shangri-La sequel article is under question???Preciousconsort (talk) 21:14, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

please make this right.

What part of WP:COI have you not understood? I've explained this several times to you - you have a clear conflict of interest on this matter, and you should not be using Wikipedia for promotion and advertising of either your book or yourself, especially since you've shown that you cannot be neutral in regards to your contributions. And "copyright infringement"? Really? For removing blatantly promotional content? Do you actually have any idea what you're talking about in regards to copyright? As for this DeMarco person, I have no idea who he is - and this is not a discussion about some third party, this is a discussion about YOU. Please stop trying to game the system by adding promotional content for yourself. MikeWazowski (talk) 21:53, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Also, "unofficial" things can be notable - see Star Trek: Phase II for one recent example. However, I want to make one thing clear, here - any further attempts by you to remove your competitor's book will be treated as nothing more than vandalism on your part. Your book is mentioned in the article, and given equal treatment with the other - the only preference given in listing the other one first is because it was published first. MikeWazowski (talk) 22:27, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Rasputin (film 2011)

Hello MikeWazowski. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Rasputin (film 2011), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article has been edited since it was tagged and is no longer a copyvio. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 21:24, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Brown University notable people

Dear Mike Wazowski and Orange Mike: Please help me to return to a rightful place on the Brown Literature notable list. ORANGEMIKE suggested I provide one very good review proving the notableness of my literary reviews (those not written by me but for me)--I can select San Jose Mercury News, Kirkus reviews, Publisher's weekly how many and which ones? Please help. And Mike Wazowski said if I thought the deletion was in error--it was not--I should not have put it there myself--but now it is up to you torealize my long won notable status in literature and put me back up.ThanksPreciousconsort (talk) 22:00, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mike regards blatant promotion

Dear Mike: Dear SarahStierch: Dear OrangeMIKE HELP: regards correcting SHANGRI-LA LOST HORIZON SEQUEL: Please--this is not an act of blatant promotion. Eleanor Cooney and I, Daniel Alteri earned and won the right to write the sequel to LOST HORIZON. It was difficult,. we had to prove our abilities to the publishers. Only one such right was licensed by the Hilton estate and the owner of the literary rights Wm. Morrow/Harper CollinsPublisher. This is a fact. Wikipedia writes from the facts to the best of its knowledge. Please feel free to contact William MOrrow publisher legal department for ascertaining these facts and please do not say I am self-promoting. The sequel was given to us, legally granted by contract. It is a fact, that is all. Wikipedia deserves nothing but the truth in this article--sorry if you do not like me.Preciousconsort (talk) 22:29, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is also a fact that you have added blatantly promotional content about yourself and your work to Wikipedia, and tried several times to remove the mention of a competitor. This activity will stop. MikeWazowski (talk) 22:34, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dear editors_my act of "disruptive" editing for the James HIlton article sequels came about only after a long and very difficult discussion with the Talk pages--I did not want this published as an encyclopedia article. I wrote the article in the James Hilton sequel section to provide the editors with the acts or where beside myself they might obtain them.
The story of Shangri-La or the sequel to LOST HORIZON was wrong, Frank DeMarco did not have the literary rights to write the sequel to Mr. Hilton's famousLOST HORIZON. WE did. But try as I might through the talk pages politely and respsectfully to get them to correct this, I could get nowhere. The knowledge of shangri-la its publication and coming into being as the legitimate sequel proposed and licensed by those who own the literary rights to LOST HORIZON was going nowhere--no one would fix it. I wrote the article so someone would see it and rewrite it themselves(I thought the eduit was going into the Hilton Losts Horizon Talk pages. The truth concerns me, it reflects on my accomplishments. Please understand how hard it has been for me to get anyone to notice and fix the "There are two sequels to.... FALSE>" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Preciousconsort (talk • contribs) 23:14, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, the line is not false. The other book is billed as a sequel to the original. This is a fact. There have always been unauthorized sequels to famous books - whether they're signed off on by the original author or their estate makes no difference. Would you remove any mention of The Wind Done Gone from the Gone with the Wind page? What about Wide Sargasso Sea in regards to Jane Eyre? You WILL NOT remove the other book again. MikeWazowski (talk) 23:23, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possible HarvSquad/Bernard "Rockit" Harvey hoax

'HarvSquad' are also credited at Believe (Justin Bieber album)#Track listing . You'll need to 'Show' the 'Swedish bonus track/Spotify bonus track'. That the article in question was 'born' fully formed by a new editor whose only contribs is adding or removing redlinks is very suspicious; seems you're right. RashersTierney (talk) 00:29, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Bernard "Rockit" Harvey

Hello MikeWazowski. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Bernard "Rockit" Harvey, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: If this is a hoax, it isn't a blatant and obvious one. I'm seeing almost 7000 Google hits for a search of '"Bernard Harvey" "Justin Bieber"'. Thank you. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 00:56, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weird - I did Google searches on "Bernard "Rockit" Harvey" and "Bernard Rockit Harvey" and they only show that Wikipedia article. The only provided references are to a site that allows you to add your own name to any album, and is therefore completely unreliable. MikeWazowski (talk) 01:04, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) To follow up on that - it looks like he has actually played bass for Bieber, and I think the song credits are probably genuine. I'm not sure about the other claims, though, and he may not pass WP:BIO or WP:MUSICBIO. Probably an AfD is the best place to sort everything out. Best — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 01:07, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Mover

Hello

Thanks for the message, I as about to edit The Mover but it's been deleted. The Mover is a magazine for the moving industry, it is an independent magazine providing information for moving companies.

Is it possible to use the name 'The Mover' and create another page of the magazine?

Thanks

Marianne Lee The Mover magazine (talk) 13:07, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Nina-Gai Till for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nina-Gai Till is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Ubelowme U Me 23:21, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

Steven Zhang's Fellowship Slideshow

In this issue:

  • Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
  • Research: The most recent DR data
  • Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
  • Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
  • DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
  • Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
  • Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

--The Olive Branch 19:17, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Correction with bio page

Hi Mike,

I wanted to ask you about the bio page for Oren Wilkes. There was a consensus to keep the page when it was last proposed for deletion. We provided ample reliable/ credible sources:

http://theybf.com/2011/08/03/fresh-meat-meet-oren-wilkes-the-new-face-of-nivea-for-men

http://www.essence.com/2011/08/15/eye-candy-oren-wilkes/

http://unbiasedwriter.com/the-mix-up/oren-wilkes-shares-his-story-with-subarus-first-car-experience/

http://www.vibevixen.com/2011/08/men-in-fashion-model-oren-wilkes-becomes-the-new-face-of-nivea-for-men/

http://www.bvwellness.com/2011/06/11/nivea-for-men-kicks-off-new-campaign-in-las-vegas/

http://globalgrind.com/style/track-star-jason-richardson-celebrates-olympics-bid-2012-photos?gpage=4&#gtop

http://www.hauteliving.com/2012/01/haute-event-dinner-with-world-champion-and-nike-athlete-jason-richardson/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqX1QzMqZlw

http://www.glammedia.com/content-creators/featured-creators/


I can submit more if needed. Every single source used on here has its own wikipedia page. Please let me know what I need to do to get the article approved and fixed. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robert Josepha (talk • contribs) 02:03, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Shindig (video chat platform)

Mike -

The page had previously been named "Shindig Events", and had been approved and posted. I changed the name to the above, and then received the tag about deletion.

The content is the same. Why is the content now not approved?

Thanks,

Kent — Preceding unsigned comment added by KentFrederick (talk • contribs) 21:38, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

KentFrederick (talk) 12:21, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. How's it going? Happy to get this right, here. Let's chat. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.86.105.2 (talk) 23:23, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry and thanks

... for this. I should have looked closer. Cheers - DVdm (talk) 14:20, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No prob - looked like a pair of kids operating together.... MikeWazowski (talk) 14:22, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Declined Speedy on Fadi Malkawi

I reverted your speedy deletion nomination on Fadi Malkawi. It had already been nominated for A7 and declined, as the article asserts significance (playing on national team). If you wish to pursue deletion, you'll need to take it to AfD. Regards, GregJackP Boomer! 04:45, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion?

Hey mike, My article Cluebotng was tagged for speedy deletion, could you explain why? Also, Im curious, could you tell me if you have a bot that tags articles for deletion, and how does it work? Cheers,Tempuser124 (talk) 21:21, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bart Rossi

I tried to tone down the promotional tone of Bart Rossi. Can you point out particular phrases that you're uncomfortable with, that make you feel it is still spammy? I realize that the overall notability of this subject is doubtful, and I suspect the original article was posted in an attempt at promotion, but the man does make his voice heard, so I was loathe to move to deletion outright. Since I was the one who tried to clean it up, I'd like to know your thoughts on what I missed in terms of its promotional tone. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:59, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The entire thing reads like an ad to me, and the version I saw was after you cleaned it up. A local personality of questionable notability, created by a WP:SPA with no other contributions. I did a quick search on the guy - found only one hit on Google News, and it's not an article about him. I suspect that will be the case on almost anything we find on him - it'll be him commenting on some other story, but no significant coverage of him. MikeWazowski (talk) 14:06, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Contested prod

Hi mate, quick a quick note to let you know I contested your WP:SPEEDY prod at Alexander Russell (naturalist). I've had a crack at moving the article away from the original text and have cited a couple of other sources. If you still think it should be deleted, I won't contest another prod or an AfD nomination. Just thought it might have been one that was worth saving and there seems to be a few sources that are usable. Let me know what you think. Cheers, Stalwart111 (talk) 05:08, 19 September 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Heavy cartoons?

! JamesBWatson (talk) 13:06, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Avast! Me old lysdexic self, messin' with me typin'.... MikeWazowski (talk) 18:33, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sterling E. Murray

Yes y r right, the Sterling E. Murray article is not good or B A D, but other wikipedians may be able to make it better.

B U T :

Have a look: the article David J. Buch has an interesting history: very good work by 71.57.46.117… That’s Wikipedia … Thornton Arbre enchante (talk) 09:07, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The King of Dungeons

Dear Mike,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_King_of_Dungeons http://www.pandora.com.tr/urun/king-of-dungeons/274150

In regard to the above-referenced (links) article which I have placed in Wikipedia recently has been deleted with the reason explained in the link by Wikipedia as copyright infringement caused by pasting.

The pasted section in the article is the short description of the book titled The King of Dungeon which also appears at the back of the cover/jacket of the book. The copyright of the whole pasted text is owned by Mrs. Selma Elanora Grayen, who is the author of the book. www.pandora.com.tr has been given the permission by Mrs. Grayen to display the text in question in their web page that presents the book for online sale. I have the full permission from Mrs. Grayen to use any text material copyrighted/owned by her to use in any informative or introductory articles related to the book.

The only pure reason for this regretful complication ensued is that it was practically easier, for the sake of time saving, to do the paste in question at the time of the preparation of the article for Wikipedia than to to take it out of the exclusive text file which I have.

I would be grateful if you assist me for the rectification of this matter. Thank you.

Best regards, Mark Karindash mkarindash@yahoo.co.uk — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark Karindash (talk • contribs) 09:46, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The King of Dungeons: The Series

Dear Mike,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_King_of_Dungeons http://www.pandora.com.tr/urun/king-of-dungeons/274150

In regard to the above-referenced (links) article which I have placed in Wikipedia recently has been deleted with the reason explained in the link by Wikipedia as copyright infringement caused by pasting.

The pasted section in the article is the short description of the book titled The King of Dungeon which also appears at the back of the cover/jacket of the book. The copyright of the whole pasted text is owned by Mrs. Selma Elanora Grayen, who is the author of the book. www.pandora.com.tr has been given the permission by Mrs. Grayen to display the text in question in their web page that presents the book for online sale. I have the full permission from Mrs. Grayen to use any text material copyrighted/owned by her to use in any informative or introductory articles related to the book.

The only pure reason for this regretful complication ensued is that it was practically easier, for the sake of time saving, to do the paste in question at the time of the preparation of the article for Wikipedia than to take it out of the exclusive text file which I officially possess.

I would be grateful if you assist me with the rectification of this matter. Thank you.


Best regards,

Mark Karindash

mkarindash@yahoo.co.uk — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark Karindash (talk • contribs) 10:05, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - received message in regards to Vassal Gradington Benford III page

Hello Mike,

I received a message and I want to admit that I am a newbie to wikipedia in more ways than one however I wanted to make sure that the Vassal page was up and running. I am a fan of Vassal's work, especially through the 90's, and I am in the Entertainment biz as I develop and pitch TV show concepts. I know of Vassal's work through a few producers that I deal with and I decided to create a page when I realized his other page had been removed for copyright issues. I deal with many top producers and Vassal's credits, I thought, should at least allow him a page.

If I have not sourced an article or cited an article correctly per any type of Wiki convention please let me know. I would definitely like to see a Vassal page up and running successfully. Like I said, I am around a few of his peers and I'm pretty sure he would like a page up since he has produced on a handful of albums.

Interstingly, I am enjoying the time I am taking on Vassal's page and I am looking forward to contributing my 2 cents a bit more. Researching can be addictive but if sifting through the web is my addiction, I'm proud of it.

Thank you as well for your part in making Wikipedia an educational platform that more people, like myself, are beginning to contribute to.

Best,

BME2012 (talk) 04:49, 21 September 2012 (UTC) Marv (Wiki Newbie)[reply]

Shindig (video chat platform) - not coming up when searched

Mike -

FYI:

1. When I use plug the term "shindig" in the search box on wikipedia.org, I see a number of shindig-related choices, but my page - "Shindig (video chat platform)" - doesn't come up.

2. When I search "Shindig wiki" on Google, the page doesn't come up (although other Shindig wiki pages come up).

3. When I search "Shindig video chat" on Google, the URL for "Shindig Events" comes up (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shindig_Events) but not for "Shindig (video chat platform)".

Any thoughts on how the above can be corrected?

Thanks,

Kent — Preceding unsigned comment added by KentFrederick (talk • contribs) 19:21, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mike -

Just saw that Shindig (video chat platform) appears in the search listing when Shindig is searched. Thanks.

One more question though: Shindig (video chat platform) isn't listed among the choices on the disambiguation page. How can I get it put there?

Thanks,

Kent

KentFrederick (talk) 02:15, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Lolahp2.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Lolahp2.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:14, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Classic bugsbunny.png)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:15, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:16, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dakar Academy

Hello and thanks for tagging this for notability. The tag's still there; you may want to consider reading WP:Notability (schools) and WP:NOTABILITY, and putting you reasons for the tag on the talk pg. Alternatively, taking it to the Notability Noticeboard or AfD would get it resolved; however, high schools are pretty much always found notable. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 10:18, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

John P. Hoffmann webpage

I've never really understood wikipedia and how to fix the pages. I am a primary source of John P. Hoffmann and got the information from him directly so how can I make the page so it is correct and not have all the the Error Boxes on it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Runnerboy1 (talk • contribs) 14:09, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Italics

Sorry, I must have misremembered WP:QUOTEMARK. I thought short films were among the things listed in that guideline, which I now see is not true. Either that guideline was changed, or my memory was wrong. Thanks for pointing that out. And thanks for finding and adding that SFC story on Wieber to add to his article. Nightscream (talk) 22:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:50, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Talk:Who Framed Roger Rabbit#RfC: Is listing every speaking character actor in the cast section relevant?

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Who Framed Roger Rabbit#RfC: Is listing every speaking character actor in the cast section relevant?. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 16:32, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize

I apologize for not stating the reason behind my edit. I edited the section again and I expressed a valid reason behind my action. The section was an opinion or view made by an unprofessional YouTube critic. It also dealt with unofficial artwork by an unofficial artist. I felt that this Opinionated section could damage the integrity of the Wikipedia page. I hope you see my edit as fit and necessary and that it was done with the best interests of the Wikipedia page and The Legend of Zelda in mind.

I apologize

Parkavenue359 (talk) 00:42, 23 April 2013 (UTC)parkavenue359[reply]

I apologize for not stating the reason behind my edit. I edited the section again and I expressed a valid reason behind my action. The section was an opinion or view made by an unprofessional YouTube critic. It also dealt with unofficial artwork by an unofficial artist. I felt that this Opinionated section could damage the integrity of the Wikipedia page. I hope you see my edit as fit and necessary and that it was done with the best interests of the Wikipedia page and The Legend of Zelda in mind.

CAN YOU HELP ME PROPERLY CREATE THE PAGE? THANKS .

CAN YOU HELP ME PROPERLY CREATE THE PAGE? THANKS . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:C43F:8E0:4D26:95DA:C493:BEFA (talk) 01:02, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mike,

I appreciate your email but you did not answer my concerns: First, I am not new to Wikipedia. Secondly, my page (which is my bio) is heavily sourced and should not be deleted. Third, I find it impossible to add a simply photo of myself to my bio page (I have already downloaded the photo to Wikipedia).

Thank you,

Hank Plante

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:45, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Classic bugsbunny.png

⚠
⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Carniolus (talk) 12:05, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Classic bugsbunny.png

Hello. A tag has been placed on File:Classic bugsbunny.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Kailash29792 (talk) 12:20, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Roboinvest for deletion

Hi - as someone who has recently contributed to Roboinvest, I wanted to let you know that a discussion is taking place as to whether it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted. DarjeelingTea (talk) 22:30, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:TorchwoodMD poster.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:TorchwoodMD poster.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 12:55, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gioguch has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Have a nice day! Gioguch (talk) 04:21, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Mermaids the Body Found (TV FILM)" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Mermaids the Body Found (TV FILM). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 30#Mermaids the Body Found (TV FILM) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Dominicmgm (talk) 21:56, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Thierry noritop has been proposed for deletion

Hello Mike, I'm Thierry Noritop. I received an email from Otr500 stating that the article has been proposed for deletion. I confess I don't really understand why, but I concede that I don't have the career of Bruce Springsteen or David Bowie... so there must be few people who consult this article. Tell me what I can do to improve this article. Thank you for your understanding and help. Best regards. Thierry PS: I send you my discography on Discogs https://www.discogs.com/fr/artist/819515-Thierry-Noritop — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cool-morning-lights (talk • contribs) 07:46, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]