User talk:RayAYang/Archive 8

Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10

AN/I discussion - Ezra Friedlander

Hello, RayAYang. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Ezra Friedlander. Thank you. (This is related to the BLP/N thread on the same subject you helped me on a couple of days ago.) MirrorLockup (talk) 20:34, 1 November 2009 (UTC) Thanks for the notice, situation seems to be in hand. RayTalk 20:27, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Chamberlain review

Yes, I plead guilty, I nommed it because there were lengthy delays at GAN/World History and I was not expecting a review this soon. However, I should have the remaining sections done within a week. I did not write the unsourced sections, and will probably completely rewrite them. This is an important article, it needs to be kept complete for the reader, so I am doing one section at a time. Like I said, it should be done within a week, and I'll drop a note here. Thanks for the review and glad you liked it!--Wehwalt (talk) 20:43, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

The article is ready to go. Need to polish it up in spots, but I'm confident you'll pass it.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:56, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Yup. Congrats! RayTalk 05:21, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

68.215.42.44

Thanks for your note. If the editor is deleting the categories on account of the guideline then that'd be fine. I just wasn't sure why he was doing it.   Will Beback  talk  06:28, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh. I don't know why he's doing it. I just noticed on reviewing that they seem to fall into categories that could be removed per that guideline. RayTalk 06:42, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in SecurePoll feedback and workshop

As you participated in the recent Audit Subcommittee election, or in one of two requests for comment that relate to the use of SecurePoll for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the SecurePoll feedback and workshop. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Risker (talk) 08:32, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Criticism of Charles Krauthammmer

Actually, there was a reference that got deleted in a bunch of POV wrangling back and forth over that section. I've restored it - mind taking a look and telling me if you think there needs to be more? --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 19:53, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

That's great, thanks. I'm a little surprised, though - the WaPo article seems to say it's no big deal, which is actually a good argument for deleting that particular bit. But I won't get involved in that particular content conflict - only I should note that the WaPo article says nothing about FAIR's role, so we probably need another source for that. RayTalk 20:06, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Well, there was originally a great deal more, which I deleted some months back on the grounds that it bordered on politicized rant. At the same time, I recognize that there has been some criticism of the man, and I think that warrants noting in the article. This struck me as the best happy medium we could achieve at the time. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 02:41, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to be so long - I've responded on the talk page. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 15:26, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

James J Cooke Citations?

Please give me some examples of citations?

His books are refernced in other Wikipedia articles as references?

His membership in the Royal historical society is listed on the website?

will these not work?

HELP???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ssnichol1 (talk • contribs) 03:54, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi: I suggest you look at WP:CITE. It gives good examples. Citations are references to sources for the information you're putting in the article. RayTalk 05:22, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Photo request redux

Ray:

Hi, I'm still looking for some photos from the Art Museum there at Princeton. Here's the original post:

Looking for photo of artifact at Princeton Art Museum

Ray, I am looking for someone to drop by the Princeton Art Museum to take a photo of some Mesoamerican artifacts there. If this is possible for you, let me know -- any of these would be great, but I really need a photo of ballplayer pair in third photo down.
Let me know. Thanks very much, Madman (talk) 03:57, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Madman -- I'll see what I can do. I'll need to find a camera first, so it may take a few days. Ray (talk) 04:35, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for any attempt. I've been developing the Xochipala article the past few days and it could certainly use a photo of a stone bowl and the aforementioned ballplayer figurines (which would also be extremely useful for an upcoming article on ballgame gear. Good luck, Madman (talk) 05:47, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Since that time, I have also found a need for photos of these artifacts in the Art Museum:

Of all these, the Young Lord is the most important to me, but any of the three would be much appreciated.

Thanks, Madman (talk) 22:45, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Gah. Sorry, I took the photos, was far away from the internet at the time, and completely forgot about it. Unfortunately, I couldn't find the ballplayers on display the day I went, but I did get two of the Xochipala pictures. I've put them at File:Xochipala Standing Man.jpg, and File:Xochipala Standing Woman.jpg. I won't be back in Princeton until the holidays at the earliest, but I'll make myself a timed note and look for it when I do get there. RayTalk 05:35, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much! I will include the male figurine in the article. Much appreciated. Madman (talk) 21:48, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Operation FREE

Good evening. I've removed your PROD from this page. If you'd like to take it to AfD, that's your call, but I feel the article meets WP:ORG. As far as WP:NOT#NEWS, I do not think this is a violation of that but like I said, it's your call. v/r--TParis00ap (talk) 03:53, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Are there other sources that aren't in the article? I thought I'd check before taking it to an AFD, as a courtesy, since the article seems to be maintained. RayTalk 03:56, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
I wouldn't call it maintained - just on my watch list. No, I do not have other sources at the moment, but if you wait until tomorrow evening I will try to find others before it is taken to AfD.--TParis00ap (talk) 04:03, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
No problem, no hurry. I came across it doing new page patrolling, and thought it looked like one of those promotional pages that fly-by-night organizations like to set up. On second thought, if you think this is a serious organization, I'll defer to your judgment as a serious fellow editor and leave it alone for now. RayTalk 04:04, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll still give it an attempt to improve the article tomorrow though. If you feel it could use improvement, then it is worth taking a swing at it.--TParis00ap (talk) 04:06, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
I think I've improved this article as well as I can. You are free to judge as you will. v/r--TParis00ap (talk) 20:26, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Rudolf Yanson

Before deciding that Rudolf Yanson is unimportant please review the other pages I have created. You will see that I am trying to cover scholars of the Tibetan language and Burmese language somewhat comprehensively. In certain cases I do not have as much biographical information as I would like to. But after all it is a scholars bibliography and not his biography that makes him important. I do know that colleagues of mine around the world find these pages useful, and many wikipedia articles are devoted to much more trivial topics (star treck ships, manga characters, etc.). I have put a lot of work into these various articles, and hope that from time to time I would be given the benefit of the doubt. The Yanson article has already been tehre for some time, perhaps this shows that other editors do not find it worthy of deletion. Tibetologist (talk) 22:57, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Henry Kissinger

Hello Ray,

My addition to the page on Kissinger did not add any new information. All it did was draw information that is expressed lower down on the page nearer the top.

My paragraph :

Kissinger is not without his detractors who are highly critical of his role in many foreign policy decisions during his time as US Secretary of State. In particular he is considered the architect, along with Richard Nixon, of a massive bombing campaign in Cambodia beginning in 1970. The destruction of Cambodia by this bombing campaign is widely considered a cause of the coming to power of the genocidal Pol Pot regime.

Is reflected in detail in the paragraph which is still on the page :

Kissinger played a key role in a secret bombing campaign in Cambodia to disrupt PAVN and Viet Cong units launching raids into South Vietnam from within Cambodia's borders and resupplying their forces by using the Ho Chi Minh trail and other routes, as well as the 1970 Cambodian Incursion and subsequent widespread bombing of Cambodia. The bombing campaign contributed to the chaos of the Cambodian Civil War, which saw the forces of dictator Lon Nol unable to retain foreign support to combat the growing Khmer Rouge insurgency that would overthrow him in 1975.

All my small addition did was to balance the opening section so that it was not all positive about Kissinger.

I see no reason why my paragraph should be deleted by you.

Please put it back in.

Petewink1954 (talk) 01:41, 22 November 2009 (UTC)Peter.

The proper place to continue this discussion if you wish to continue it, is at Talk:Henry Kissinger. I think my particular issue is that your "widely considered" formulation is not supported by the paragraph below - the most that can be supported is that it contributed to the destabilization of the Lon Nol regime, not that it is a cause of Pol Pot coming to power. There's quite a leap there that seemed to be original research, unsupported by any sourced material that we have. Furthermore, coming as it does after a paragraph mostly in praise of Kissinger (which I am considering moving further down the page, and out of the lead, by theway), it risks giving the impression that the article is a battleground of opposing views, rather than an encyclopedic narrative treatment of Kissinger's career. I think my revision of the lead to include a mention of the Cambodian business is all that can be supported in the lead, which is supposed to be a summary of the most important points of the article. Best, RayTalk 03:52, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

To get a little "meta"

I thought long and hard before uttering the word "terrorist" at WT:BLP#BLP issues in redirects, because we've both seen the issues go round and round, and I was afraid it would muddy the waters. But, gods bless 'em, Wikipedians do love a fight, and I thought that talking about something topical that pulled in a lot of discussion at RfD and then DRV would mean we'd get more participation. Apparently not. I'm open to talking about any example that you feel presents things in a snappy way, there or here. (Watching) - Dank (push to talk) 03:34, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Not with me, it wouldn't :) I'm the original "Voldemort! Voldemort! It's just a name! Voldemort!" guy where "terrorist" is concerned. I think it's a good illustrative, actually. I'll think over and reply to your comments at WT:BLP in the morning, or it may be another day or three - real life is threatens to interfere. Best, RayTalk 04:04, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

That was a incisive question at my RfA. Thanks for the kind words too. Fences&Windows 22:37, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure, and g'luck :) RayTalk 20:05, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

-Hawaii Samurai (talk) 06:56, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

PROD of Hope House

I have removed the PROD for the above article, as I have found sources for the above organisation from a couple of newspaper reports, and have expanded the article accordingly.

I have also moved it to Hope House (Memphis, Tennessee), as this is a more accurate title, and have made the Hope House article into a disambiguation page leading to the 2 "Hope House" articles currently on Wikipedia.

I thought it would be polite to let you know!

Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:24, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Wow! That was fast! Good work, glad I was wrong. Cheers, RayTalk 18:28, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Interwiki poll by chance

Changed prod to speedy

In regards to the article California Sunshine, which you proposed for deletion, I have marked the article for speedy deletion, as I think that the article meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion. In cases where it applies, speedy deletion is preferable to proposed deletion. I have left the {{prod}} tag in place, so that if speedy deletion is rejected, your proposed deletion will remain in place. Thanks! Logan Talk Contributions 23:03, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I was reluctant to speedy an article that'd been around for years, but it seems your judgment was right on. :) RayTalk 15:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Prod of Cities (game)

I saw this prod and realised I knew the game, so I knew it wasn't really WP:MADEUP. A prod wasn't appropriate as it had been deprodded already by the article creator in mid November, but I see no need to be bureaucratic about it. It already existed as Geography (game). I've turned that into a redirect to Word chain, which I created out of a redirect. Fences&Windows 01:39, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Huh. Yeah, I'm not always good about checking the talk page for oldprodfulls. I try to be, but somehow it hasn't stuck in my memory as being on the checklist when I propose something for deletion. Thanks for the heads up. RayTalk 03:19, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Kissinger

I noticed you reverted User:Vexorg's quote section in the Henry Kissinger article. I agree with your removal of those sections and said so to vexorg some time back (see user talk:vexorg). Please feel free to contact me on my talk page if you need any help in dealing with this situation. I will also leave a short note on the Kissinger talk page explaining why I think the quote section should be removed. Bonewah (talk) 17:57, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, will do if it becomes needful. RayTalk 19:56, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
I see there's a joining of forces here. This indicates some sort of agenda. Can you people explain such a passionate need to avoid the inclusion of the Kissinger quotes? Particularly as these quotes are properly sourced. Oh and Ray A Yang you appear to be a major editor of the Kissinger Article. I may remind you that it's not your article. I appreciate one can get attached to articles that one is a major contributor to. Can you explain why Wikipedia readers should be denied inclusion of these quotes in the article other than some sort of biased agenda on your part? Vexorg (talk) 04:34, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
It's common for Wikipedia editors to offer each other support in dealing with problematic editors (such as, say, those with a history of edit-warring or long block logs). I do not consider myself a major editor to the Kissinger article; I have contributed one section and done some amount of cleanup, source-finding, etc. I do hope to become a major contributor to it, but real life does keep interfering. The list of articles I wish I had time to contribute seriously to is quite long. I maintain a certain amount of interest in it because it remains a magnet for violations of the BLP policy, specifically the section abjuring us to be neutral and conservative when writing about living persons. I suggest that, if you have substantive arguments, you bring them up at Talk:Henry Kissinger - but judging from the discussion on your talk page, it seems that Bonewah has described the situation perfectly, and you're pushing a POV. If your purpose here is to show up and accuse me in vague terms of sinister intentions, please go do that at Wikipedia Review, and not on my talk page. RayTalk 19:09, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
To accuse me of POV only exposes your POV. I have no bias, I simply want to prevent Wikipedia from being edited with a bias. There is nothing wring in having a quote section in an article. it's obvious that those removign the quote section are uncomfortable with the content of the quote section rather than the section itself . So transparent Vexorg (talk) 05:45, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Jaikoz

An article that you have been involved in editing, Jaikoz, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jaikoz. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. --Explodicle (T/C) 17:15, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks Ray! I love those books too. I couldn't believe my user name wasn't taken already :) CordeliaNaismith (talk) 17:28, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

IP attacks on the Krauthammer talk page

I'm getting a little teed off at whoever's doing the drive-by ad hominem attacks over at Talk:Charles Krauthammer. I just wrote something very pointed and very harsh, and then erased it before posting because I don't want to lose my cool. But this person is really getting on my nerve - think I'd be justified in a.) putting him on notice that I'm taking it to WP:ANI and b.) actually doing it? He's polluting the ground, and I note that his only edits are to that particular talk page. What say you? I'd appreciate some advice before going further. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 07:26, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Secret Maryo Chronicles (3 nomination)

Since you participated in the DRV for Secret Maryo Chronicles, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Secret Maryo Chronicles (3 nomination). Tim Song (talk) 07:39, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Notification: Proposed 'Motion to Close' at Wikipedia:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC re: a 'Motion to close', which would dissolve Cda as a proposal. The motion includes an !vote. You have previously commented at this page. Jusdafax 07:00, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

RFA Thanks

Lauren Bernat

I recently recreated the article as Wii Fit Girl and was quickly reverted due to the previous AfD. However, I feel that the version I wrote clearly addressed the complaints of the article being about someone who is famous for only the YouTube video, in spite of the fact that she has been sued for the video, the lawsuit being covered by several news media outlets such as Fox News, she has appeared as a spokesperson for Electronic Arts' EA Sports Active, and has spawned several homages and "copycats". Perhaps the original version that was deleted seemed to be covering a person who was only famous for one thing, but this one I think clearly shows that she has done more than just be the Wii Fit Girl. If you could give your opinion on the matter to me, that would be excellent. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 06:16, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

I recommend you take your concerns to Wikipedia:Deletion review. RayTalk 02:29, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Well, DRV says to contact the closing admin before bringing it up, and I decided to go the extra mile and ask everyone. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 04:08, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Happy RayAYang's Day!

User:RayAYang has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as RayAYang's day!
For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,
enjoy being the Star of the day, dear RayAYang!

Peace,
Rlevse
00:06, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:06, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! RayTalk 05:57, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Community de-Adminship - finalization poll for the CDA proposal

After tolling up the votes in the revision proposals, it emerged that 5.4 had the most support, but elements of that support remained unclear, and various comments throughout the polls needed consideration.

A finalisation poll (intended, if possible, to be one last poll before finalising the CDA proposal) has been run to;

  • gather opinion on the 'consensus margin' (what percentages, if any, have the most support) and

Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Biographies_of_living_people#View_by_Badger_Drink

LOL. Bearian (talk) 02:10, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I try :) RayTalk 04:13, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

My view

So you're saying that my view is bad because it's too sensible? Just wondering. RoryReloaded 04:34, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm saying I like your viewpoint, but it's much too sensible for people to follow it, given the current state of tempers (I'm a little guilty on that score myself - I was highly irritated by the initial round of summary deletions, and wrote some stuff along those lines, but have hopefully settled down some now). RayTalk 04:39, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

De-prodding

Hi Ray,

Thanks for sourcing articles you've de-PRODded. If only more editors did this. Your work is much appreciated. Firsfron of Ronchester 08:00, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced mathematics BLP lists

Hi RayAYang, thanks for helping to fix unreferenced mathematics BLPs . Note there are two overlapping lists at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics#Unsourced mathematical biographies, So when you deal with an article it might be helpful check both lists for items to strike. Regards, Paul August ☎ 20:18, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Right. Oops. Thanks, will do. RayTalk 20:19, 23 January 2010 (UTC)