en User talk:Safehaven86 Archive 5

Please comment on Talk:Joan Crawford

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Joan Crawford. Legobot (talk) 00:08, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Artist's impressions of astronomical objects

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Artist's impressions of astronomical objects. Legobot (talk) 00:05, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (clergy)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (clergy). Legobot (talk) 00:06, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Username policy. Legobot (talk) 00:05, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 14 September

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the American Federation of Teachers page, your edit caused an ISBN error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources (medicine)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Identifying reliable sources (medicine). Legobot (talk) 00:08, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Route diagram template

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Route diagram template. Legobot (talk) 00:06, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

CEPR

I saw that you placed back some information that was removed from the article. Some of the information was removed by a former employee and other content was removed by a self-proclaimed Chavista. I was trying to place back the content in a balanced manner with less emphasis on the Venezuelan topic. I added such information to the CEPR article through my reading on Venezuelan topics. CEPR is/was very active in Venezuelan politics and economics through the Bolivarian administration. In multiple articles on Wikipedia and through other outlets you can find CEPR discussing Venezuela which is why I placed the section in the article.--ZiaLater (talk) 04:54, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for the explanation. Let's work together on talk. Thanks. Safehaven86 (talk) 15:05, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So I know CEPR is pretty involved with the United States, suggesting shorter work days/weeks, healthcare, etc. CEPR is also devoted to work on other projects such as in Latin America. They have some work on Haiti, Venezuela and other countries. One of the most controversial things I have found about CEPR through my reading is their association with Venezuela. This is very important for those who work on Venezuelan studies since CEPR has published much information on Venezuela, with some described as slanted or distorted toward supporting the Venezuelan government according to some of the sources that were provided in the article (there are more to if you need them).

A lot of this information involving Venezuela has been removed in the past through by:

Former CEPR employees (Kriswarner 1 2 3)

Chavista users (Tellectualin, formerly Riothero 1 2, safer than their website that may be bugged)

There has been more controversy in the past as well and it does not surprise me that Kriswarner's first edits in months is to criticize my edits and demand reversions of my work. Kris has also tried to remove information linking current CEPR employees to Venezuela as well. Since this information may seem sensitive among former CEPR employees and pro-Venezuelan government users, I can see why this information has been continuously removed from the article. My recent addition to the article, however, is much less than the previous additions I have made. I did this in order to provide more balanced information in the article. Also, what I provided covers much of what CEPR puts out itself (see if you can find a few of our friends in that link as well). So , thanks for talking to me through this, it is a lot better than the constant reversions I have been experiencing the past couple years. I know it may be seem complex but this is a complex situation.--ZiaLater (talk) 18:08, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Since I didn't get a reply but you replied to others, I placed some back as a proposal before I forget about the edit. Go check it out. I took out the funding information and reworked some of the sections.--ZiaLater (talk) 23:21, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

TAFI

If you could, please take a look at my noms at TAFI. Would appreciate some more input on several articles. Cheers. Wikipedia:Today's articles for improvement/Nominations.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:12, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'll take a look! Safehaven86 (talk) 15:38, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh thank you! If you could, please also review Paul Anka, Alice Bah Kuhnke King Carl of Sweden, Gustaf & Bill Skarsgård, Molly Sanden and Kerobokan Prison at TAFI. Would really appreciate it. --BabbaQ (talk) 18:02, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I do not want to be a drag.... But if you could review my oldest noms that I mentioned above as soon as posdible I would really appreciate it. As otherwise they will soon be closed as unreviewed within a day or two. And that would be too bad. So thank you for your help... Sincerely.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:55, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please... ;)--BabbaQ (talk) 21:56, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:B'Day (Beyoncé album)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:B'Day (Beyoncé album). Legobot (talk) 00:07, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Grand Duchy of Lithuania

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Legobot (talk) 00:07, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Foundation for Economic Education Logo.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Foundation for Economic Education Logo.jpg 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. Abel (talk) 03:21, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your RSN comment

Your comment at RSN is inappropriate on a number of levels. Given the related ANI, you should probably be added as a party to it. ~~How about removing the comment along with my response, as long as no one else comments on it further per WP:REDACT.~~ --Ronz (talk) 22:25, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Could you elaborate on how you think my comment is inappropriate? I'm also not sure which ANI you're referring to. Thanks. Safehaven86 (talk) 04:38, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you can't see it, then it needs to stay. If you've never been involved in any lengthy dispute, then perhaps you've been getting away with such comments. If you are unaware of the related ANI discussion, then never mind as it's basically closed at this point with no real action.

Take a look at WP:FOC, WP:BATTLE (and all the policies/guidelines linked in that section), the instructions on the top of the WP:RSN page. --Ronz (talk) 14:07, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Um, ok. Safehaven86 (talk) 14:32, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Have you ever looked at WP:TALK? If you can try to follow it closely, you shouldn't have any problems. --Ronz (talk) 15:22, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]