User talk:Someguy1221/Archive 4

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Someguy1221. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

---

(Archive 1, January 2007 - July 2008)
(Archive 2, July 2008 - April 2009)
(Archive 3, April 2009 - November 2009)

is there a particular reason you delete certain pages ?

You deleted portal Ethiopia. I am wondering why ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.5.126.131 (talk) 14:34, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

It was deleted because it contained no content other than a map that showed where Ethiopia was. WP:CSD#P1. Someguy1221 (talk) 19:19, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Gamaliel

I have repeatedly asked this editor to explain and support his side of the argument regarding the Mark Levin article. I am sorry to continue bothering you but his behaviour has continued to be atrocious. This afternoon he invited me to enter a complaint against him so I did. Malvenue (talk) 04:53, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Which he has now removed without comment. Is this usual behaviour? As a general comment I find it amazing this person is an Administrator. He certainly doesn't behave like one. Malvenue (talk) 05:29, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

To be honest, I can't really make heads or tails of what's going on. But this is a typical happening on Wikipedia, regardless of the user; at a certain point in the discussion, both sides have repeated their arguments so many times they get frustrated and sometimes act less than perfectly civil. The only thing I can recommend is to file an RFC or a request for mediation. Basically, get some new opinions into the talk page. If you've been arguing this long without resolution, then no resolution is likely to come without new voices. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:48, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I hate to say it but the Mark Levin edit war escalates. Gamaliel refuses to allow anything but his point of view in the article and removes any changes made by myself while continuing to be insulting and flagrantly violating WP:EQ. He has called in his friends to help support his position and now I'm just getting ganged up on. I have made an extreme effort to comply with policy, to work towards a compromise and to follow WP:AGF but I'm getting nowhere. They simply change the edits back and threaten, insult and dismiss any opinions but their own. I have issued a warning on Gamaliel's page which was summarily deleted and made an entry on WP:WQA which has essentially been ignored. Any objective reading of the Mark Levin discussion page should immediately demonstrate he and his co-conspirators are not acting in good faith at all and are the antithesis of what Wikipedia editors should be. Malvenue (talk) 06:15, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm watching, actually; it's not the nicest content dispute, but I haven't seen anyone stray even close to the banning zone. I'd really implore you at this point to open an RFC to get more editors in the discussion. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:20, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I was investigating the procedure for that last night but I want to do it right and it was late so I left it for later today or tomorrow. For the record I don't want anyone banned or punished, I just want to get the content right - fair and neutral. They continue to try to bait me and make false claims as if I want all criticism banned, but the truth is (as I've repeatedly stated) the criticism needs to abide by WP:BLP and be fair, neutrally voiced and balanced. The criticism was reworded, that was rejected. A balancing statement was included, that was reverted. I've tried to find a middle ground and all I've been met with has been insults, dismissmals and ridiculous accusations. Is this the way it normally is on Wikipedia? Malvenue (talk) 13:50, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I think it's a general thing to happen on Earth, not just Wikipedia. As a dispute drags on and on amongst an isolated group of individuals, the assumption of good faith (or the assumption of intelligence) slowly erodes on all sides. An RFC should have been filed a long time ago. Someguy1221 (talk) 22:50, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I would have but to be honest finding the proper codes to type into these edit boxes is not always the easiest thing to do and I want to do it correctly. Citing all the sources in one paragraph took me the better part of an hour and as they don't show up on previews I ended up having to redo them all over again by hand. Malvenue (talk) 04:30, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

More socks to block

Here are some more accounts related to Robseychelles:

• Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Robyseychelles

Brangifer (talk) 04:38, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I've blocked the socks, and the site has been blacklisted. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:36, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick action. Sockpuppetry is such a basic violation of everything we try to build up here in the way of AGF and collaboration, that they give me the creeps. Get rid of them! I wish we did more to prevent them from being a problem at all. -- Brangifer (talk) 05:49, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

TONY WANG

I understand you deleted the article under speedy deletion under the reason of reposting a previously deleted article. The article I posted is actually an updated version with actual citations. The problem with the last article was that the article topic did not have citations establishing notability. Please look at the Seventeen magazine article here: http://www.seventeen.com/college-career/freshman-15-blog/katie-business-fashion and the Daily Pennsylvanian article: http://thedp.com/article/finance-meets-fashion-student-designer which do, in my opinion, establish notability. These cites are added to the updated article and thus is not a repost of a previously deleted topic. For the article that you deleted (which shouldn't have been since it's new), please see it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Zelysion/Tony_Wang

Zelysion (talk) 04:30, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

The first link is to a blog in which Tony actually wrote the content. The second link is to Tony's school's student newspaper. Neither of these would be considered to establish notability. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:17, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

CSD

Hey,
if you delete this article, I would be happy. The author deletes always the CSD... -- Geräusch (talk) 17:24, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

DGG (talk · contribs) declined the speedy as schools do not fall under A7. AFD is the next step. I might look into this a little further at some point today. Someguy1221 (talk) 19:47, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Ping

You have e-mail. Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 21:25, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:45, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Possible_school_security_threat

Regarding this, are you still online and willing to call someone? Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 05:09, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:10, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I'll be emailing you shortly. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 05:11, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Hey Someguy - thanks for taking the lead on this. If you've gotten a checkuser on this and/or notified the police, could you make a note of that on AN/I or on the SPI here? I just want to make sure we keep these up to date so work isn't being duplicated. Thanks, FlyingToaster 05:22, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Nevermind, Hersfold's taken care of it. I'm assuming you'll make the report - if you don't want to or can't for any reason, I'm happy to also. FlyingToaster 05:25, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

		The Real Life Barnstar
		For your cool, calm and collected handling of the recent school threat. Thank you! Basket of Puppies 05:27, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm always happy to help. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:55, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

harry maclean

I apologize.. but I didn't think the part that says... "However please explain why you object to the deletion, either in your edit summary or on the talk page" was mearly a suggestion but rather an instruction.... otherwise someone can just click on every single article for deletion and say..."yo, I disagree"....case closed -Tracer9999 (talk) 07:39, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

It's true, but in that case, they'd be blocked for disruptive/pointy edits. I hate to invoke beans, but in my three years on Wikipedia, I have not seen a single case of that, despite the number of disruptively radical inclusionists I've observed. In any event, the real purpose of the rule that PROD can't be restored is that the deletion of an article is defined as sufficiently non-controversial for zero disruption by the fact that no one has disagreed. Once a person disagrees, there has to be a discussion. In the worst case scenario, this just means that the page persists for an extra week. In any event, the user who removed the PROD has since provided his explanation. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:50, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

makes sense.. thanks -Tracer9999 (talk) 12:51, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

I was googling and I noticed that iFashion Network was deleted

Why is this, I have an interview with them Monday so I looked them up and noticed that they had a Wikipedia page, so I went, and I realized that it was deleted, further investigation told me you were the one to delete it, I was hoping to get some background on the company that wasn't provided in the site to get a ahead on my interview and get the job. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Six00varick (talk • contribs) 23:27, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

The article was deleted for failure to demonstrate the notability of the company. It was actually deleted five times, by five different administrators, myself included. Someguy1221 (talk) 10:19, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

AWB

FYI, you accidentally relisted some author-blanked AfC's (which should have just been undone, I think).  fetchcomms☛ 19:34, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Author blanked AfC's should probably be deleted. But either way, they deserve the further attention of reviewers, if only to tag them for speedy. I'd have done them myself but I didn't have the time last night. Someguy1221 (talk) 00:08, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Ah. In any case, I've just redeclined the bad ones (keeping them for historical reference, I suppose). Thanks,  fetchcomms☛ 16:03, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi, if possible, can you use {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} instead in the future? My script doesn't work when given only a barebones afc template. Tim Song (talk) 05:37, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

I've actually avoided doing that since it will state me to be the submitter. I'll just use a pre-filled-out template in the future, in that case. Cheers. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:59, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

That's fine. I need the pipes and the timestamp parameter filled out. Tim Song (talk) 07:29, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

- help me please : Please how do I avoid deleting the page?

Hello

Got a message on the page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Smita28/World_News_Network

This miscellaneous page is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy.

Please discuss the matter at this page's entry on the Miscellany for Deletion page.

You are welcome to edit this page, but please do not blank, merge, or move it, or remove this notice, while the discussion is in progress. For more information, see the Guide to Deletion.%5B%5BWikipedia%3AMiscellany+for+deletion%2FUser%3ASmita28%2FWorld+News+Network%5D%5DMFD Maintenance use only: Place either {{mfd}} or {{mfdx|2nd}} on the page nominated for deletion. Then subst

User:Smita28/World News Network

... to create the discussion subpage. Finally, subst {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Smita28/World News Network}} into the MfD log. Please consider notifying the auth

smita (talk) 06:03, 15 December 2009 (UTC) smita28

The deletion can't be stopped. Per WP:NOT, Wikipedia is not a webhost for business listings or advertisements. Your userspace is meant for article drafts that will eventually be entered into the mainspace. But this article has persistently been deleted, and has now sat idle in your userspace for half a year. If you'd like to continue to improve the draft, you are free to do so, but if that will take quite some time, you'd best copy paste the article to your home computer and work on it at your own pace. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:10, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Earl of Galloway Coat of Arms

I noticed your question while I was leaving a comment on another User:Czar Brodie's talk page. The naked man is called a woodwose or wild man, and is very common in Germanic heraldry. There is an article here, Wild man, where you can can see some more images. The first painting is the original concept, a nude man covered in hair not unlike a sasquatch. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 08:25, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. That one really threw me off. Someguy1221 (talk) 09:09, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

re your question: this coat of arms for real? Yes, see scots peerage, vol IV. However the supporters do at times seem out of place if they do not match. The wild man is a common in Scottish heraldry, and is generally in pairs eg: example1, example2, example3. They are also favored in German heraldry and are in the some European royal arms: Greece and Denmark. As you can see the human figures work well if symmetrical, but also work well if two human figures of different type: eg example4 and example5; but can look odd if human and beast, eg: example6. Note that Arms of Ukraine works well in my opinion as the lyon and man are the same colour. Your ever, Czar Brodie (talk) 09:22, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. This was very enlightening. Someguy1221 (talk) 09:31, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Please answer my question

[[1]]--Mamalala (talk) 05:51, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

one more question[[2]]--Mamalala (talk) 06:51, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

My article: 69.2224.34.10

Link for reference: Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/An_Interview_with_William_(Bill)_French,_a_DCAA_Manager_Engulfed_in_Controversy

Hi Someguy1221:

The interview with Bill French was originally a school project. Because of the GAO reports and congressional hearing at the Senate Committee turned the subject into a public issue thus I though it may be a documentation paper for publication. I did not know Bill’s publicity until I have conducted the interview with some of the supervisors and auditors. He is a notable person at, at least, DCAA and his family. (DCAA currently employs 4,000 people) And the agency is currently under re-construction in its management and practices.

I tried to keep the interview in the original interview format. I did add two paragraphs that were my personal feeling about Bill French (I am going to delete them) and resubmit it. However, I think this paper should be published because it also contains information on Leadership, management, and how to write and document an interview. I found those information could be useful to others’ researching on those subjects.

If you have specific comment or suggestion, I want to hear from you. Thank you in advance.

Iwen 214.25.29.6 (talk) 15:00, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, interviews are outside the scope of Wikipedia's content. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia publishes significant information on notable subjects. Transcripts or descriptions of interviews are outside of the definition of an encylopedia. Someguy1221 (talk) 20:05, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Haitian Earthquake Emergency Aid Links

My IP isn't changing and I did talk to him several times. I don't know how to fill out this form to show you the rest of the conversation. People are dying in Haiti tonight and there should be links on the Earthquake site to aid organizations. There is nothing in Wiki guidelines against that. Why are narrow rule interpretations taking precedence over human life here?

69.171.160.185 (talk) 08:56, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

I'd prefer to keep this conversation at WP:AN3, where it started. I have responded there. But I am going to bed, so that will be my last edit of the night. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:57, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Response to previous reverts

Thank you for reverting the changes that have been made. It grieves me that the students of the Pinedale schools who may access Wikipedia make such vile edits. I have been unaware of the inappropriate edits until today. If such inexcuseable edits occur again, I do hope a guest edit ban on this IP address will address that issue. Thank you very much. -espeed623 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Espeed623 (talk • contribs) 20:24, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I've got a new one

User:Ryulong/Sandbox#Ref_removing_vandal.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:38, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I've contacted AT&T's "security center". I'll let you know if/when I get a response. Someguy1221 (talk) 09:01, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

about Akim Monet page

Dear Someguy,

I hope you remember me, we exchanged a couple of messages last October, about my contribution on artist AKIM MONET.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alessandramigani/Akim_Monet

The page is now ready, but before moving it back to its original location, I would like you to have a look at it, if you do not mind.

I look forward to hear from you soon

Thank you

(Alessandramigani (talk) 11:50, 1 February 2010 (UTC))

The truth is, it still doesn't establish that Akim Monet is notable. You have added a considerable amount of information about Monet and his work, but not any content on the reception of his work, which is what would grant him notability. The article would still be deleted. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:05, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

New page created by me

I have created a page on Intership Ltd. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sixth6sense. Please may I know your opinion on this page? Will Wikipedia accept it? Sixth6sense (talk) 05:58, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't really know what brought you to my page specifically, but OK. I think the article makes an assertion of notability, which may rescue it from speedy deletion. However, there are no sources provided. Without sources, any article is at risk of being deleted, either by proposed deletion or a deletion discussion. I would recommend listing sources such as newspaper or magazine articles about the company or its operations. If you have more questions, you may feel free to ask me, or you can try at the help desk, which will generally provide quicker responses. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:58, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks - Loren Legarda

Thanks for jumping in and protecting the page, effectively forcing a discussion (and digging me out). It's harder than I thought to encourage two editors to discuss something when you don't have the technical ability to simply protect the disputed page. Hopefully this won't get any uglier. —LedgendGamer 09:05, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Neutral ?

You wrote to me recently about an addition that I made to Robert Gallo's entry on here. You made a claim that Wikipedia wishes to remain neutral on matters. I find this this very hard to believe. While you have no problems allowing non facts about Gallo's heraldry in HIV research, you seem to have a problem with someone pointing to official documents that prove otherwise. I believe that this shows bias towards any information that shows difference of opinion to what Wikipedia believes to be the truth. At the same time, Wikipedia has no problems at all allowing slanderous and very doubtful information on Robert Gallo's scientific peer Professor Peter Duesberg. One cannot help but to think that Wikipedia is not so much interested in the facts than they are suppressing information that goes against the biased nature of the administrators. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TruthSeeker38 (talk • contribs) 07:24, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

The only bias is toward reliable sources. It's decidedly non-neutral to craft your own opinions, or reiterate the opinions of an unreliable source, based on primary literature. Wikipedia doesn't concern itself with the truth because the fact of it can be debated endlessly. A far less endless debate is the one over whether a fact or opinion has been reliably reported. Someguy1221 (talk) 09:22, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Final discussion for Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:

1. Proposal to Close This RfC
2. Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 03:28, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

--Shimon Yanowitz (talk) 16:00, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Ares Kingdom page

Please reconsider declining the recently submitted entry on Ares Kingdom. Wikipedia has an entry for two of the members' previous band, Order From Chaos, so it makes no sense that Ares Kingdom would be rejected as insignificant or important. This page will certainly grow as time goes by.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Ares_Kingdom

Verymetalsound (talk) 06:23, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I'd actually question that Order of Chaos is even notable, as it has never released on a major label. Although you are free to resubmit. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:45, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Borderline personality disorder page

Dear Someguy1221,

I am editing the Borderline personality disorder intensively, recently. I would like to ask for your advise about a specific issue with this page, as well as some more general advice. Please refer to the following paragraph that I found under Psychotherapy:

Dialectical Behavior Therapy is an innovative method of treatment that has been developed specifically to treat this difficult group of patients in a way which is optimistic and which preserves the morale of the therapist. The technique has been devised by Marsha Linehan at the University of Washington in Seattle and its effectiveness has been demonstrated in a controlled study (reference http://priory.com/dbt.htm).

I found quite a few problems with this paragraph:

• It reads too much like an advertisement of original-research.
• It has peackock and weasel entries.
• It uses an odd, unclear jargon, which seems inappropriate.
• It has a dubious link, which is inserted improperly.
• The said link appears only in the "Further reading" section of a spawned article: Dialectical behavior therapy.
• The said spawned article seems to be full of similar (deemed) flaws and faults.
• Similar (deemed) flaws and faults seem to have infiltrated a parallel article: Management of borderline personality disorder.
• The cited source seems to confuse "study" and "trial". It seems to rely heavily on concepts such as "Budhism", "Zen", "Meditation" and "spiritualism". It seems to deal with the well-being of the therapist (...?).

Can you please explain to me how I can suggest the nomination of Dialectical behavior therapy for deletion? can you please also suggest to me where and how I can seek support and advice, as well as tips and suggestions of experienced editors and admins for the purpose of helping me edit better and being a better overall editor? How about recommendations of pages to edit? When I first joined Wikipedia I had some useful contributions inserted to my talk page, but I seem to need updated contacts whom I can turn to for these matters. Can you please help me by having a link appear for me, for where I can read your reply? I appreciate your help on this. --Shimon Yanowitz (talk) 16:00, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Instructions for nominating an article for deletion can be found at WP:AFD. However, I should first note that deletion is only recommended in two cases: 1) The article is on a non-notable or unverifiable subject, and as such, an article on the subject should not exist regardless of its content; or 2) The article and all previous revisions are so irredemably riddled with non-neutral point of view, spam, original research or other damning issues, that a rewrite would necessarily start with obliterating the existing page. Short of that the consensus at AFD will almost uniformly be to leave the article in the hope that someone fixes it.

As for finding tips for editing, there is an extensive body of documentation on editing (in terms of the technical aspects of writing an editor interactions, as well as editing style and policies) at Help:Contents. If you're looking for help specifically with regard to psychology articles, you may want to ask specific questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Psychology.

If you have more questions, you are always welcome at my talk page, as well as at the help desk. Someguy1221 (talk) 09:14, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your reply. I don't need assistance with scientific background (e.g. psychiatry), I think, but rather with procedural Wikipedia matters, regarding which your tips were right on target. I also felt I needed to have someone(s) whom I can consult with, every now and then, on such matters.

One specific question I am hoping you can help me with, further, is: Can a reference used in one article, be easily incorporated into another article, and how? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.143.227.163 (talk) 23:59, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

So thank you very much for your tips and for welcoming me at this page. --Shimon Yanowitz (talk) 23:15, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

If you're unfamiliar on how references work on Wikipedia, please see help:footnotes. Unfortunately, there is no endnote-like repository of references on Wikipedia. A reference used in a given article may be recalled within that same article without recopying all of its information, but this does not work across pages. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:08, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, again for your reply and support. I remember seeing somwhere that there was such an option, but to be honest, there are so many (seemingly entangled) help pages, that I don't remember where I saw this. I could have misinterpreted, and I have no reason to question your answer. It has just ocurred to me that I can simply edit the source article, copy the reference info from it, then paste it to the destination article. Once again- many thanks! --Shimon Yanowitz (talk) 00:53, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Re: Edit filter manager

Do you want the edit filter right? Someguy1221 (talk) 08:34, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Not really, I'd rather you guys just stopped making over-enthusiastic filters, and didn't mark filters as private unless absolutely necessary. Gurch (talk) 09:46, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Saban troll

It seems he's back as 64.228.129.155 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), on a new ISP.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:31, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm confused; wasn't he always using Bell Canada? Someguy1221 (talk) 08:55, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

It's still a Bell Canada IP address and he's whitewashing Power Rangers content from Super Sentai pages.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 09:35, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I'll look into Saban's history this weekend, and start communicating with Bell Canada. I have slightly higher hopes on this one than the last; Bell actually responds to complaints, unlike AT&T. Someguy1221 (talk) 10:09, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

So you got no where on the ref removing IP who is on SBC IPs? Because he's up and active again, too, now that the rangeblocks on his four major ranges have expired.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:24, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah. I sent them one email when you first told me about him, and another when the rangeblocks expired. Nothing but the automated responses. Someguy1221 (talk) 03:27, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Othmar Zeidler

Sorry for not writing down the source back then. It's tough to find any references outside his work at the Strassbourg lab. I don't think this is where I originally got it from, but I now added as reference Joseph S Fruton's "Contrasts in scientific style: research groups in the chemical and biochemical sciences", Memoirs of the American Philosophical Society, Vol 191, 1990, page 373. ISBN:0-87169-191-14 has this entry: "Zeidler, Othmar [1859-1911]. Strassburg Dr.phil. 1873 (Baeyer; worked on compounds of chloral with bromo- and chlorobenzene). Became pharmacist in Vienna." (indeed in 1899 he was pharmacist in Fünfhaus near Vienna)

14 seems a crazy young age to write a dissertation. Perhaps Fruton had already copied an error. Gerhard Oberkofler (in Leopold Ruzicka, 1887-1976: schweizer Chemiker und Humanist aus Altösterreich‎ - Page 44) also has an 1859 birth year, and even writes "Othmar Zeidler (1859-1910) aus Wien hat das Pharmaziestudium an der Wiener Universität absolviert (1872) und war nach weiterem Chemiestudium in". Say what? In 1872 he broke off pharmacy his studies at the University of Vienna (as a 13 year old) to study in ..(Strassbourg, I suppose). Prodigy indeed, or 1849 or something once transmogrified to 1859.

His brother Franz Zeidler (born 1851, Vienna) appears more famous in his life. There is an obituary in the Zeitschrift des allgemeinen Oesterreichischen Apotheker-Vereines, Volume 39 (1901) [3]. Othmar is mentioned as collaborator and introduced in the sentence "Nach Oesterreich zurückgekehrt, war er als Stipendist am I. chemischen Universitätslaboratorium unter Prof. Lieben thätig, zu welcher Zeit sein Bruder, der jetzige Germialvorsteher, Herr Dr. Othmar Zeidler, Assistent an diesem Institute war. Im Jahre 1878 kaufte er dann..." Othmar was, if I translate this well, well before 1878 back in Austria, as an assistant in a chemical lab. No clue what the title "Germialvorsteher" means. From all I can find about these people, they were Austrian. Strassburg in 1873 was, since 1870, back to being German at the time. Perhaps that's were the ubiquitous label "German chemist" comes from, but I changed the categories to Austrian in the article. Afasmit (talk) 08:11, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the hard work. I was really hoping some source or another would mention the fact that he was only 15. I gave up after seeing a few dozen journals completely ignore it. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:51, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Help

I'm a new user and don't know anything about Wikis. Please help me learn! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chiaki Utada Hikaruyama (talk • contribs) 07:00, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I've replied on your talk page. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:05, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Happyeggplant

This user you blocked (some time ago) is currently requesting a fresh start. I figure we might as well, but either way you're welcome to comment if you're interested. – Luna Santin (talk) 04:49, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I completely agree with you; no objections. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:03, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Barntrout

User:Stevertigo/Trout

Wikipedia:Help_desk#Someone_trying_to_delete_a_credible_article

I looked at the text of the article and I found it to be a major copy and paste job from http://drjudywood.co.uk/articles/a/bio/Wood_Bio.html. I have deleted it this evening and just letting you know about it since you responded to that user. User:Zscout370 ^(Return Fire) 07:22, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

It would seem there is an abundance of reasons to delete that article. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:56, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I am trying to keep it something I can point to in policy. The article is salted until I get OTRS permission. User:Zscout370 ^(Return Fire) 08:02, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for Talk:Judy Wood

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Talk:Judy Wood. 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. Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez 09:00, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

RE:Lamb's Conduit Field

There is no block exasion, I was blocked for three days and that time has passed. The dispute on this page is over BlackJack using his own personal website as a source. Policy dictates: "Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason self-published media—whether books, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, blogs, personal pages on social networking sites, Internet forum postings, or tweets—are largely not acceptable." and continues "Self-published material may, in some circumstances, be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." This criteria for using self-published material isn't meet and so BlackJack's website should not be used as a source. I was replacing links to his website with an alternate source, CricketArchive, which is considered reliable. I can understand why BlackJack might be upset about this but I fail to see why you have taken his side in this dispute. --88.111.56.64 (talk) 10:18, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

I see now I was wrong about the block evasion. I appologize. Regardless, I'm not going to unprotect an article so you can edit war on it from a rotating IP. Follow dispute resolution if you want to be heard in the proper forum. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:50, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm not upset. I'm merely tired of all this tedium. If our IP user would like to look at the list of contributors in the CricketArchive (CA) site he will see the name of the author of the From Lads to Lord's (LTL) site. CA do not highlight the names of people who merely wrote in to ask a question or two. The people listed there all made significant contributions to CA and, in this case, the contribution was something like 98% of the site's 18th century coverage, all of it based on what you can see in LTL with the addition of the detailed scorecards where known (LTL does not include detailed scorecards because they are out of its scope).

Our friend might also note that, in Lamb's Conduit Field, CA has been retained as the reference for the London v Mitcham match because they got that one first (it was unknown until last year) and LTL also acknowledges CA in respect of this match. Unlike a couple of people who claim to follow cricket on WP, I play fair and give credit where it is due.

As for reliability, I would tentatively describe myself as a subject expert as I have been published by CA, the ACS and the Cricket Society among others. Several other members of WP:CRIC are certainly subject experts and none of them has ever challenged the reliability of LTL. If they did, I would take notice of them, but I will not take note of people who are pursuing childish, spiteful campaigns of invective (for whatever petty reason) behind IP addresses.

If LTL is unreliable, then I challenge him to quote one specific match reference which is a significant error (i.e., excluding typos) that would mislead a reader. Unless he has seen something that several other pairs of eyes have somehow missed, he can't. Note that this is not the same as disagreeing with an opinion. The site is only unreliable if the factual information is wrong.

I might also add that LTL can be quoted by WP as long as it is clearly acknowledged as the source. Articles like Lamb's Conduit Field are based on the content of LTL and so they must cite LTL or breach WP:COPYVIO. In that case, if our friend is correct that LTL should not be used, then virtually the whole of Wikipedia's 18th century cricket coverage would have to be deleted. I somehow don't think that would go down too well at WP:CRIC or with the site's cricket history readers. Having said that, they would have to rely on LTL which would thereby increase its circulation. ----Jack | ^talk page 06:55, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

If that website is yours, then Wikipedia is not required to link to the website to acknowledge material that you have imported yourself. You are the copyright holder, and by placing the content on Wikipedia you have licensed it to us under the same terms as every other contributor: "You irrevocably agree to release your contributions under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL." Only other contributors who import text from that website would be required to acknowledge it, and only if the release on the website were rewritten. As it stands right now, it is not compatible with our Terms of Use. We need an explicit statement of license for individuals who do not own copyright to import that text. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:34, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Bromley Common

Further to the above, I forgot to mention that he has predictably attacked this article again, thereby proving that he is driven by my contributions list. He has latched himself onto me and has no other purpose on this site. ----Jack | ^talk page 08:11, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Tunguska, CastleBravo

The question here is, which is the most powerful bomb exploded Castle Bravo or Tsar Bomba ?.

Castle Bravo explosion is the most powerful n weapon ever tested as you know but a line in this article claims otherwise.

The following line "Tsar Bomba, the largest nuclear weapon ever detonated" directly contradicts the fact.

Looking back, I think I may not have been very clear in my comments. :) Cosmos 07:18, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

You are right..Please revert my inserted tag. I do not know what I was thinking :)

Cosmos 08:45, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Our ongoing George Harrison socks

I saw that you and Spartaz have taken care of the returning socks regarding the Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dmerkurev/Archive person who keeps wanting to add items on George Harrison's page. I wanted to let you know that there are a couple other anon IP's that I have tracked as being part of this. The first one Special:Contributions/128.97.12.95 only made one edit but it was to put Kadaolsa's edit back in. It geolocates to Los Angeles so it is most likely the same editor. The second is from a bit further back Special:Contributions/128.97.12.85. It made a different kind of edit so it might not be the same person but the IP also geolocates to LA. Since they are anon IP's I know that there may not be anything that you can do but I did want to make you aware of them. Thanks for you time and cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 18:39, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Serena Software closed AfD

Hi - I came across the deletion of the Serena Software article when a linke to the article from Silver Lake Partners was removed last week. I had a discussion about the AfD with User:Haakon who proposed the deletion of the article but probably should have discussed with you as well since you closed the discussion. The proposing editor seemed to think it was reasonable to go to a deletion review but I thought it might be a preferable first step to discuss with you. Once the article is undeleted, I would be willing to try to develop a decent WP:NPOV start level article.

I saw a cached version of the article so I understand where you guys were coming from but I don't think teh AfD looked to closely at the subject of the article. First of all the company was public from 1999 until it was acquired for $1.2 billion in 2005 in a leveraged buyout transaction.(SEC website) so it is hard to say this is some small insignificant company.

As I laid out for Haakon, just a quick glance of would reveal third party coverage from a number of reputable news sites: NYT, USA Today, Marketwatch,Red Herring, Silicon Valley / San Jose Business Journal , Silicon Valley / San Jose Business Journal , San Francisco Business Times, San Francisco Business Times, Business Week, Industry Publication, Industry Publication, NYT, NYT. I think there should be more than enough to work with on this. |► ϋrбanяeneωaℓ • TALK ◄| 13:53, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm actually not the one who closed the AFD; that was Cirt (talk · contribs). I'm sure if you start by making a userspace draft that establishes notability and cites those sources, you'll have no trouble getting the page unsalted and created, be it through Cirt or through deletion review. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:14, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok< i see you deleted the recreation. Can you drop the article that was there into my userspace and I will work on it. maybe at User:Urbanrenewal/Serena. Thanks |► ϋrбanяeneωaℓ • TALK ◄| 15:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Done. Good luck. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:00, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Email

Please check your email. KnightLago (talk) 15:14, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Bloodbath in Paradise

The song is notable (as are several from that album) due to their controversial nature. Miracle Man sparked quite a lot of controversy in the press over its music video and lyrics (primarily about Jimmy Swaggart). Bloodbath in Paradise was about Charlie Manson and added to the belief that Osbourne was a Satanist etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ShredderKing (talk • contribs) 11:09, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Please review the guidelines on notability (WP:N and WP:MUSIC). In short, Wikipedia does not take your word for it that the song is notable. You have to prove it by providing reliable sources discussing the song. Someguy1221 (talk) 21:08, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

How to put yourself in the wrong

Grrr. I hate it when well-established editors put themselves in the wrong by rising to trollbait. I initially blocked the IP in question for a week on sight, for harassment (particularly since their spate of puerility on Masticate followed a prior block which expired on 14th May for vandalisng the same article) and they're now requesting an unblock on the grounds, basically, of provocation. I don't feel inclined to remove or reduce the block (on the grounds, basically, of "you provoked them first") but if you feel a variation to that block's appropriate, please feel free. I've left the unblock template up in any case, so someone watching the unblock requests category should be along soon anyway. Cheers, Tonywalton ^Talk 09:29, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

I considered reducing the block myself right after all this, but I agree with you and BWilkins. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:17, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Malicious Virus-Infecting Link

On the help desk, a user claims that a link on the article mentioned is malicious. The Norton report shows it can cause 33 viruses. I thought that I should let an admin know. I didn't want to open it for fear I would get it. Click here for the help desk entry.
~QwerpQwertus |_Talk_| |_Contribs_| 04:47, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Andrew Duck MacDonald

Hi there! My name is BlueCheerbabe on here. I am personal friends with Blue Cheer and the late Dickie Peterson. :( Duck has asked me to put a photo up on Wikipedia. Also there is a facebook page of Duck from Wiki that someone put has put up. Can I edit that? There is no place to add a photo. Could you answer some of my questions? I would appreciate anything you can tell me on these matters!

Thanks,

Gabrielle —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluecheerbabe (talk • contribs) 15:09, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Images for instructions on uploading images to Wikipedia. However, please note that for living persons, Wikipedia will only host photographs that have been published under a free license, or released into the public domain. If the photograph has been previously published with a copyright claim, we will need either an explicit notice on said website that the copyright is a free one (such as CC-SA-BY), or an email to info *at* wikipedia.org from an email address that is publicly associated with the original publisher.

If that all sounds too complicated...it is. It's much easier to just upload one of your own photos of Duck, and release it under a free license as you upload. If you have any questions or troubles, just let me know, or visit the help desk, where you will likely receive a quicker response. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:31, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Duck's Photo

Hi there! I was able to upload the photo on Wiki's page. Now I have another question. The Facebook page from Wikipedia on Duck, how would I edit that? Do you know how it got there? Is it a bot? Duck would like me to be able to add a photo to that.

Thanks for your help! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluecheerbabe (talk • contribs) 21:16, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

It appears your photo has appeared there. But anyway, that's facebook's thing. They haven't worked any kind of deal out with us. Our content is fairly easy, and free, to mirror. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:36, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Vanish

Hi,

Following this revert, I see that you tried to help the user - however, they appear to have remained puzzled and frustrated, so I had to remove this - but I placed their request in CHU, and I wrote some stuff on their talk page.

Sad business, but...I wasn't sure if you knew about WP:VANISH or not, so wanted to drop you a note here.

Best,  Chzz  ►  08:38, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

yeah, I just forgot to mention that. Thanks. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:43, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Mmm, I should've looked at your edit-count etc before putting that; sorry.  Chzz  ►  08:47, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

No worries. Editors can actually go years without noticing something. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:59, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

duck's picture

Hi there, I'm trying to rename Ducks picture and I am nervous about doing this. Can you explain how I can do it?

{{rename|Duck and The Kim Simmons Band.jpg|2=uploader request: please rename to fix .. }}

Is this what I put on the edit page????

thank you! ----

Renaming photographs is not something I'm familiar with. You can send an email asking this question (per my answer below) or you may consider asking this at the commons help desk. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:30, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I'm trying to do something else now with Duck's picture and I am in a big mess!!!!! You said we can send you an email but I couldn't find your email address. I am a total newbie here if you didn't guess by now!

I was trying to change the information on Duck's photo from "Thekimsimmonsband" to "Duck and thekimsimmonsband." I now have 3 photos', 2 with the original and 1 with the one we want it changed to. Help!  :)

----

Bluecheerbabe —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluecheerbabe (talk • contribs) 01:34, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

I guess I'm a little confused. I only see four versions on the same image that you uploaded, unless another one has been deleted. You can send an email to info *at* wikipedia *dot* org. I'll forward it to someone at the Wikimedia Commons. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:28, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

zenon software

Hi Someguy1221!

Thank you for your review and comment on my article about zenon software. It was declined due to few sources. However, I didn´t want to write a seperate articel about zenon software; I only wanted to translate the German article about this theme which has been already accepted by wiki. The English version is not a new article, but a translation, so why do you refuse the article if the German one has been accepted?

Thank you for your help! Yours sincerely, CD33 (talk) 10:34, 17 June 2010 (UTC)CD33

Please review the guidelines referenced in the decision to decline. I don't know why the German article exists, but all Wikipedia's are operated by independent sets of editors and administrators, and have different policies. While these policies generally agree with one another, some subjects may be kept on some projects but deleted on others. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:05, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Expanding_Earth

I recently had to explain planetary science to a man who was a devoted follower of one of the patently nonsensical forms of the 'Expanding Earth Hypothesis' - which is apparently just what it sounds like. The article needs some serious editing to reflect reality and the scientific consensus, if you want to fight some more pseudoscience. Michaelbusch (talk) 03:51, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Looks like a tough one; is there really much direct criticism to properly balance the article? The only pseudoscience I deal with on a regular basis is AIDS denialism, and fortunately that theory generates enough followers (such as former health ministers of South Africa) that actual scientists occasionally devote publications to debunking it. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:41, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Beyond the fact that these guys reach flat-earther levels of rejecting observation, I'm not sure. I'd be tempted to collapse down the article on the grounds of non-notability. A quick search through Bad Astronomy and related debunking outlets finds nothing on the idea besides it being the pet of Neal Adams, a comic-book illustrator.

why did you remove my edits?

excuse me, why did you remove my edits on the Federal Reserve System page? I have enhanced the accuracy of those sentences—I did not provide separate sources, because the information I added was already present in the sources there (second edit, in Jekyll Island souce, first edit, in the Fed FAQ page question #5). —ganjadi (talk) 09:41, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Could you specify where it is stated that it was conceived in secret? It sounds a little off from NPOV. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:53, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Warnings

Why are you warning the users instead of the admin biting new users? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.171.233.134 (talk) 05:05, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Warning of users is not restricted to admins here.   — Jeff G. ツ 05:06, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Re: Hm?

Sorry about that. That happens more and more of late. I think it is a bug in the system when a bunch of edits try to go through at once and not something intentional. I do apologize for that and would have readded your post if I caught the glitch. Don't worry, it has happened to me before. Might be something to take up with the Bug Department (do we have one of those?). Again, my apologizes. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:36, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I have had it happen once myself. I might search out the Bug Department and see if they can fix it. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:24, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Articles for creation

How do I Sign Up For WikiProject Articles for creation? --S1312 (talk) 16:57, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

There is no official "signing up", but that do you intend to do? I should be able to offer some guidance. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:01, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Institute of HearthMath

I would like to request reconsideration on the Institute of Heartmath. However, I realize that 3 different admins have previously deleted this article. I've revised the draft. It is on my userpage. Can you tell me what needs to be done to improve the article? It seems clear to me that the organization passes notability. Thank you. Dcsm23 (talk) 14:22, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm not really sure. You might wish to ask a wider audience at WP:FEEDBACK. Regardless, just remember you'll have to pass through deletion review to get the article recreated. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:57, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Can you tell me how to list the article at DRV? I don't understand that page. Thank you. Dcsm23 (talk) 19:19, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Go to Wikipedia:DRV#Active_discussions, and click on the "edit" link next to today's date. Then add the following template (filled out):

{{subst:drv2
|page=
|xfd_page=Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Institute of HeartMath
|reason=
}} ~~~~

Someguy1221 (talk) 09:43, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Dcsm23 (talk) 14:53, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Reply

Hello, Someguy1221. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Pending_changes/Feedback.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Dc987 (talk) 00:07, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Pluto2.JPG listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Pluto2.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 16:09, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Lester Coleman

Hello. I noticed that last year, you blocked User:Timpanycecelia for her edits on Lester Coleman. There may be socking and/or COI going on that article now that is possibly related. I e-mailed OTRS about this and it was suggested that I contact you (the blocking admin). I believe User:Wikieditor4508 and User:AutusaNY may be socks of User:Timpanycecelia, especially since Wikieditor4508 claims to be named "Timpany Celia". I had blocked those two, but this edit [4], stating that User:Timpanycecelia was not actually the person named Timpany Celia, led me to unblock, since I was no longer sure that Timpanycecelia and Wikieditor4508 were the same person. I don't know where to go from here on this, but something needs to be done since it is causing disruption and there are BLP issues involved. I was hoping that since you handled the original OTRS ticket, that you might have information useful in dealing with this.

I would appreciate your help. The solution may be obvious but at this point I am too confused to see it. Thank you. Evil saltine (talk) 14:10, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Ugghh, and I was so happy when that nightmare ticket was finally closed. I've asked Celia to confirm her identity to OTRS, and I'll file a request for checkuser. Someone (we've always assumed Coleman himself) has a long history of very strange patterns of disruption surrounding that article. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:29, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I second the throwing star below. Evil saltine (talk) 17:19, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

It's appreciated

		The Original Barnstar
		I just saw the way you handled a certain OTRS ticket, and I just wanted to say you did a good job. J Milburn (talk) 15:20, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:36, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Buzz_Foto

Hello Someguy1221,

I hope that you are doing well. I was wondering if you have reviewed this article that I have created (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Buzz_Foto). I have been working on it for a long time and I think that it is finally ready for approval. I am new to Wikipedia Article creation and I have already been through some ups and downs, a little trouble here and there, but I finally learned the procedure. I do believe that —"fetch·comms" wanted "someguy" to review it for final approval and I was wondering if you can be that guy? I guess my funny didn't work too well. Can you please let me know if this article needs more tweaking or can it be approved? Thanks for your time.

--Mambopolice (talk) 09:39, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Holy crap, someone actually listened to advice... Anyway, I have made some final tweaks to the article, and moved it back into mainspace. Good work. Someguy1221 (talk) 09:21, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Special:AbuseFilter/346

The filter's description is "Large non-English contributions"; is it also intended to match long test edits and also new test pages regardless of length? [5] [6] [7] PleaseStand ^(talk) 02:50, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

It wasn't intended, it just sort of happened. When I created the filter, it didn't cross my mind that some editors would actually add half a kilobyte of punctuation to an article, but I should have realized it would catch article creations with no actual content. In any event, I don't believe the filter blocks any good edits, but maybe it needs a better description/warning. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:14, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks :)

Thanks for reverting edit on my user page :) JV Smithy (talk) 05:42, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Repost of Deleted File

User Communicat has posted File:Disgraced.jpg [8]. The picture is identical to the recently deleted , except Communicat now claims the picture is “copyrighted and unlicensed” instead of his previous claim that the picture is copyright of Stan Winer.[9]. In discussion of Communicat’s post of , User Petri Krohn [10] provided a link showing the picture is being used by the International Institute of Social History. [[11] This would seem to indicate the picture is copyright of that organization as opposed to either of Communicat’s claims about the copyright of the picture. Edward321 (talk) 23:57, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage

Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:49, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Band article deletion

What was the purpose for deleting my page? I'm going to post it again and again whether you like it or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ndh777 (talk • contribs) 19:12, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Answered on your talk page. Someguy1221 (talk) 00:08, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

New page "Tamils released from detention" for review

Hi Someguy1221

I have created a page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sixth6sense, could you please review it and guide me. Will Wikipedia accept this page? thanks Sixth6sense (talk) 10:21, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

You can submit an article through WP:AFC (just select the option to "submit" at the end of the process) if you want an article to be reviewed. This is the fastest and most efficient way to receive the review and feedback you are looking for. Someguy1221 (talk) 00:23, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Edit change for Xeni Jardin

I am afraid you were incorrect to say in your edit summary that someone "claimed" that Xeni Jardin was a pseudonym. "Pseudonym" is just another word for: "false name, alias, incognito, stage name, pen name, assumed name, nom de guerre, nom de plume, professional name." (Collins Thesaurus of the English Language – Complete and Unabridged 2nd Edition. 2002 © HarperCollins Publishers 1995, 2002) I happen to be the person who chose that word to describe Xeni Jardin's name because I thought it was the right term, and the only one that properly identified the fact that it is also her professional name.

...but if you think that most people reading Wikipedia are illiterate, then have it your way :) Maybe "careful reading" of the dictionary, rather than just the source, might help those readers. --Skol fir (talk) 16:48, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

It wasn't just the reading, but also the content of the OTRS ticket, which I unfortunately can't show you due to Wikimedia's privacy policy. Some time ago, Xeni Jardin was just a nickname, but it is now her legal name. Someguy1221 (talk) 00:17, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation, Someguy. Now I understand. :-) --Skol fir (talk) 01:43, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Merge

Hi, Thanks! Please let me know how to carry out a merge Klarav1 (talk) 08:00, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Merging and the help page it links to provide a good start. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:09, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Special:AbuseFilter/346 again

Hello. I have an idea that I think can improve this filter. Currently, if a large edit contains one English letter it will pass the filter. What I propose is an approach that depends on the ratio of English letters to total no. of characters.

The "count" function gives the number of times string X appears in string Y. According to the abuse filter documentation the result of:

 count( "foo", "foofooboofoo" )

is: 3

and the result of:

 length("Wikipedia")

is: 9

The "rcount" function gives the number of times regex X appears in string Y

I propose the following line (I'm not entirely sure of the syntax):

 & (rcount ("[a-zA-Z]", added_lines) / (length (rmwhitespace(added_lines)) + 1)) < 0.05

i.e: the ratio of English characters to the total number of characters (minus the white space) is less than 5%

The final version will be:

 article_namespace == 0
 & !"autoconfirmed" in user_groups
 & (old_size == 0|edit_delta > 500)
 & (rcount ("[a-zA-Z]", added_lines) / (length (rmwhitespace(added_lines)) + 1)) < 0.05

Needless to say, this will be first tested in log mode and the warning and the tag will need tweaking. Sole Soul (talk) 07:45, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Cool. I've set it up as Filter 377, in log only mode. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:55, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

The filter is working as intended. The catch rate is much higher than the old filter with one FP until now. Some suggestions:

• Change [a-zA-Z] to [a-zA-Z0-9].
• Raise the threshold from 0.05 to 0.1 since the filter is in test mode.

Thank you. Sole Soul (talk) 16:13, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

• Please see MediaWiki_talk:Abusefilter-warning-large-nonenglish-addition for a proposed warning message. I reviewed the hits of this filter and it is working as intended. Thank you. Sole Soul (talk) 02:18, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

All updated, thanks for the work. By the way, do you know why this edit slipped by the filter? Someguy1221 (talk) 07:08, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I do testing of the Abuse Filter on The Test wiki. When tested the edit was caught, so probably it was just a glitch. Sole Soul (talk) 17:12, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

And what about tagging, it's useful you know. Sole Soul (talk) 17:32, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I do not know what I did

Hello

On my userpage you told me that I had done something. Can you please inform me as to what I did? I am new to wikipedia, and if people such as yourself are going to simply insult me on my wall, then I will have to report you to the administration. 115.64.159.41 (talk) 11:27, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

If you don't know what you did, it probably wasn't you. You are accessing the internet through a DSL service provider, which causes your IP address to frequently change. Since this is the only way we have to identify unregistered editors, this can cause messages to get received by the wrong editor. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:00, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Question about declined article.

Hi,

I created an article about a published children's book called The Secret of Crescent Grey and the article was declined because he said there was no relevance to incude it in the encyclopedia. But have read and seen other article on the same subject that socialy subject matter-wise are less relevant such as Harry Potter series.

Crescent Grey has a fan base and has many pop-culture, classic literature and social refrences.

While Harry Potter is almost an entire fantasy, Crescent Grey although is also a fantasy it is notable because it has a real world setting and includes infomation about art, literature and London with refrences to many areas of England and London including but not limited to the British Museum, Big Ben, British Library, Tower of London, an area called Chiswick on the West Side, Richmond Park, Stonehenge and Hyde Park.

Crescent Grey is in the same catagorey and notable for the same reasons that Harry Potter, The Golden Compass, Percy Jackson rate, the Gideon Trilogy and other children fantasys are.

The question I have is how woule I go back and edit the opening paragraph to include why the book is notable and to change the articles of creation title from 'Crescent Grey' to 'The Secret of Crescent Grey'?

After writing the intitial article I noticed that I could easily edit everything except the opening paragraph and title and would gladly include why the book and article is noteworthy.

RMH0099 (talk) 13:47, 15 December 2010 (UTC) Richard M. Hooper

"it is notable because it has a real world setting and includes infomation about art, literature and London with refrences to many areas of England and London including but not limited to the British Museum, Big Ben, British Library, Tower of London, an area called Chiswick on the West Side, Richmond Park, Stonehenge and Hyde Park." That actually has no bearing on notability. Please see the notability guideline. No matter what is written in a book, notability is demonstrated by the degree of coverage it has recieved in reliable sources. I see that since I declined your submission, you have added more sources, and other reviewers have seen it. Another reviewer should come along soon enough to look at those sources and make a decision. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:05, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Seeming sock puppets

Sorry to disturb you and I know it's too late now, but I noted that three IP addresses have been used by a single person to vandalize pages related to Hello Kitty, Onegai My Melody, and Ni Hao, Kai-lan as they seem to support each others' edits. The IPs in question are: 76.117.98.193 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), 71.58.37.146 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), and 69.242.55.122 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), which are addresses used by the vandal who was using the now blocked 68.44.142.99 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), and seemingly supported each other. They seem like they're used the same person to me due to the kinds of edits the former two dished out. Just discovered this after reverting edits at the Kai-lan article (first using an anonymous IP myself in my sister's laptop before logging in with my own laptop). Shall I report this to WP:AN/I? Thanks in advance. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 06:47, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Naveen Jain

Could you comment on the talk page about your removal of the new section (Discussion here)? The editor is pretty clearly a sock/meatpuppet, but I don't think there's enough evidence for a report yet. Until we have more evidence, we should treat him with good faith as a new editor in way over his head. --Ronz (talk) 06:02, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

WP Articles for Creation in the Signpost

WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Articles for Creation for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Also, if you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 02:57, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Can you oversight some of those edits, please? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 07:33, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

The edits have been rev-delled. I'm not an oversight though, so you should email them if you want more. Cheers. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:35, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

RevDel is good enough. Thanks. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 07:36, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Help

Hi, thanks for helping! no idea how to even leave a new comment cos im so new to this and trying to edit as quickly as i can! Thanks alot!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamie.chen (talk • contribs) 08:28, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Help!

Hi there, so how do I go back to the page where I was drafting and you helped by creating a userspace draft? I cant seem to locate it anymore. Thanks! Jamie.chen (talk) 08:42, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Someguy1221. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Edit_filter/Requested.
Message added 02:42, 12 February 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sole Soul (talk) 02:42, 12 February 2011 (UTC)