User talk:Acroterion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Obscured jaguar.jpg Beware! This user's talk page is patrolled by talk page stalkers.




Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is BLP violations, wikilawyering, and tendentious editing by Tdadamemd. Thank you. NeilN talk to me 00:36, 1 January 2014 (UTC)


I'm asking that you please refrain from repeating statements such as the following which I find offensive and an unfounded attack upon my character. They are untrue and are often echoed in forums where such discussions on editor conduct is not permitted.[1] I am trying to rapidly improve but numerous editors have made these untrue statements about me for which there is no evidence and I am having difficulty responding (or not responding). I know that you feel I am confusing criticism of my writings with personal criticism. However no example of my writing relating to what you are referring to below has been presented by anyone and I would appreciate it if you would please refrain from doing it and also ensure others show restraint as I take it personally. I've requested this repeatedly on my talk page and that of the entry being discussed. I appreciate guidance and comments such as "I don't think anybody thinks you were or are acting in bad faith. You must in turn remember that the other editors were acting in good faith as well, and expect to engage them and to persuade rather than to confront or accuse." Comments such as these left on a dispute resolution noticeboard or and edit complaint without the specific example and a link of what I'm allegedly "pushing" are a problem and I would ask that comments such as these be removed: "On the article side, he's trying to present a fringe conspiracy theory as fact" "The complainant appears to be trying to push the article into granting credence to a fringe subject using his personal interpretation/synthesis of tangential sources. He has been advised of potential fringe science sanctions." Thank you. John.Johnvr4 (talk) 18:29, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

You called three good-faith editors' edits vandalism, apparently because you disagree with the edits: the diffs are right on your talkpage, twice. You've been asked repeatedly to stop doing that. That is the issue at hand. Acroterion (talk) 18:54, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
I got the diffs, for some reason I thought it was you I had "accused." We are talking about that issue on my talk page. But, I think I've grasped it this time. Can we talk about the issue I've brought to your attention above? We certainly don't have discuss it further. I only ask that you consider my request and if possible a truce. If you could possibly treat me as you would an almost borderline autistic person I think we would get along perfectly. Thanks John
Johnvr4 (talk) 00:31, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
We've got lots of people on WP on the Aspergers and autism spectrum, and it's very helpful to know that so we can interact productively. Wikipedia is in general a welcoming place under those circumstances (it wouldn't exist in its present form without such editors), and I know several editors who identify as Aspergers or autistic. All we ask is that you stop and consider that your perception of a situation might not match the views of other editors in cases like this, and that we can help you see a problem, or at least let you know that a problem exists, where you might not be able to perceive it. It doesn't always work out, but it helps to know how easily you discern other peoples' intentions. From experience it had occurred to me that it might be an issue here, but it's not something that's easy or even appropriate to ask. In return, please remember that we want to help you, and that other editors aren't your opponents, even if they disagree with you. Acroterion (talk) 01:40, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Yes sir, I appreciate that. I am slow on the etiquette but very good with rules once I grasp them. I have failed miserably to date. Thank you Acroterion! John
Johnvr4 (talk) 15:23, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Acroterion, Can you drop by the talk page of 'that entry' that I'm trying to improve. I've apparently recently put some tags that other editors feel are questionable or inappropriate. I suppose it's no problem to remove them because I think I've read somewhere that they can be removed and text changed during a disagreement or dispute. I don't want to get into an edit war, have an uncivil discussion, or lose my cool again.
I've discussed some my concerns on the talk page and the competency of those discussions and how you feel they can be resolved are what I'd like you to check for any you're doing it wrong. Any suggestion or advice for me (on my Talk page) or in discussion on the Talk page of 'that entry' is greatly appreciated. There's no hurry as some is still being discussed but it doesn't seem to be going anywhere and the amount of 'give' for consensus is about zero. I feel that if I can master editing a controversial subject then I can do almost anything. Could you possibly suggest a volunteer who could help me navigate the process and rules to formally resolve content disputes when consensus can't be reached or resolving conduct issues if they arise? Thank you again, John
Johnvr4 (talk) 18:18, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Sir, I have explained that accusing me of pushing fringe or conspiracy theories is offensive. Yet you continue and without without one shred of evidence.[2] "Both Johnvr4 and John Nobel are pushing a fringe theory in this thread against the mainstream view that the notion of chemtrails are a popular conspiracy theory."
I'm not sure how to stop this.Johnvr4 (talk) 20:48, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Criticism of your proposed edits is not a personal attack, nor does it mean that other editors think you're a bad person. Whether you think so or not, you appear to other editors to be trying to alter the article to present the conspiracy theory as a factual event, and that, in the view of most other editors, is a problem. We understand that you're acting in good faith, and you mustn't treat good-faith objections as personal attacks. We can only respond based on what we see in your contributions. Acroterion (talk) 01:49, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
I am attempting to differentiate actual events from conspiracy theory and explaining where the theory came from. If you take issue with historical and documented facts, then your arguments is doomed. You are making up B.S. about me and throwing baseless accusations veiled as "criticism" and I want it to stop immediately. If you see someone else doing, It stop them. You cannot provide one single example of what you are talking about with my actual edit or my proposed edit or my comment in a discussion. Therefore, the concern is baseless and the expression of that baseless concern in the way you are doing it is a lie. Stop now.Johnvr4 (talk) 14:56, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

<outdent> You know a little farther up in this conversation where you noted that you had a little trouble with perceptions and etiquette? You're having that trouble now. Please slow down, take a deep breath, and try to accept that nobody is out to get you, nobody's telling lies, and that the issue is that whether you intend it or not, your suggested edits and behavior on the talkpage aren't getting the reactions you desire. You're responding to criticism of your edits with an escalating chain of accusations that, as evidenced in your comment immediately above, are out of proportion to the rather mild criticism that your proposals have received. Please remember that perception is everything, and that your perception of the situation seems to be out of synch with that of other editors. Criticism is not the same thing as an attack: the concerns by several editors are real and are part of the give-and-take of writing about a fringe topic. Your perception of the impact of your edits does not match the perceptions of other editors. That is all that's happening. Acroterion (talk) 15:20, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

If you or another editor can show me where this perception is coming from, I might be able to understand it. So far no one has shown me, I don't understand it and don't think is well-intended criticism. It is an attack on my character. That is how I perceive it, I've explained that is it offensive to me yet you persist. I consider it baseless and the repetition of the concern it without foundation. Are you just repeating someone else's concern or can you please show me a specific line in my edits that is the basis for your concern? How does one respond to perception if you won't tell me what specifically you are talking about? Some amount of basis for a concern speaks volumes about intent. Please share it.Johnvr4 (talk) 19:03, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
I'm sorry you perceive it that way. When I get a little time (I'm at work and backed up with tasks) I'll see if I can boil it down to something concise. In the meantime, please take a walk, eat a sandwich, enjoy the day. There's plenty of time, we're on no deadlines, and we're all volunteers trying to write an encyclopedia, sometimes with misunderstandings and miscommunications. Acroterion (talk) 19:14, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks I'd appreciate it.Johnvr4 (talk) 19:27, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Please take this seriously. Do you think you can have something by Monday?Johnvr4 (talk) 14:26, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCVI, March 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:03, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Legacy Building Solutions[edit]

Hello Acroterion!

I created a page, Legacy Building Solutions, for a big company that sells fabric buildings. They are the number one company that sells fabric buildings and many references were included within the article. I will fix the parts that seemed too promotional and not factual, I'm just asking you to please reconsider the deletion. I would sincerely appreciate it. Have a great evening. Thank you.

-Mandi Renfroe — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mandirenfroe (talkcontribs) 02:18, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

I'd be happy to place the deleted content into a sandbox in your userspace for you to work on. Please think encyclopedia (plain, matter-of-fact Dragnet style prose), rather than marketing prose. See User:Mandirenfroe/sandbox in a few minutes. Acroterion (talk) 02:27, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
By the way, those images don't look like they're free - they appear to be found images from the Internet, and will probably be deleted. Additionally, please work on demonstrating notability through reference to major third-party media. See WP:CORP. Acroterion (talk) 02:30, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much for that. The images were given to me from the owner, free to use, however I'm not sure how to prove that I have permission to use them. I will do my research before I write or post anything else again! Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mandirenfroe (talkcontribs) 03:26, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the love :)[edit]

Hey Acroterion... thank you for the quick response hope your doggy is better...and you are doing well. I ram into a few "time snags" but will be back in gear next month or so.. Much love, Poekneegurl Poekneegurl (talk) 03:53, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 29[edit]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:48, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Jeanne Calment edits[edit]

Hi! You wrote me a message about my edits in Jeanne Calment article, supposing they are unconstructive. Sorry for my poor English (I'm from Russia), but my edits were correct: I had only corrected the mistake of the previous edit of "23:47, 21 March 2014" made by‎ user "", who misunderstood the sense of record dates. Please, look by yourself: in the first record-box Florence Knapp finished to be the Oldest recognized living person NOT in 1888 but in 1988, when she died, etc. I guess, user "" misunderstood the record dates thinking they are the dates of lifespan (from birth to death) of the supercentenarians mentioned, but it is not so. Best regards, LevGr from Russia.-- (talk) 03:59, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

You're right, maybe to infobox needs a comment to prevent confusion. Please accept my apologies for the warning. Acroterion (talk) 11:19, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much-- (talk) 18:19, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Grateful if you could let me know why you deleted my page "Testee Awards" for G3 Vandalism — Preceding unsigned comment added by TesteeAwards (talkcontribs) 22:39, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Page removal[edit]

"No explanation of significance (real person/animal/organization/web content/organized event))"

Page was about a real person whom more people know of than other "public figures" also featured on this site, why is the page still removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by XHarriz (talkcontribs) 01:35, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

See Wikipedia's guidelines for notability of individuals at WP:BIO. Notability is defined as significant coverage by major independent media with a reputation for fact checking and reliability. If you can provide three newspaper articles about the subject, you've got notability covered. Acroterion (talk) 01:59, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

User:UFO and Bermuda Triangle[edit]

See User_talk:UFO_and_Bermuda_Triangle#April_2014 and [3] JoeSperrazza (talk) 01:37, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Nerds and Monsters - deleted?[edit]

Hello Acroterion,

I'm with Slap Happy Cartoons - we produce an animated series called "Nerds and Monsters" (currently airing on YTV Canada and CiTV UK) which we've asked the editors to write an article for - and in clicking the link I noticed that you have deleted a page associated with it (copyright infringement I believe.) We didn't write anything, and I'm not sure who did - we simply requested an article be written. Do you need anything from us that will help in the writing of the article? Thanks so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vacant3 (talkcontribs) 04:13, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

The version I deleted was clearly copied from elsewhere on the Internet. There is no prejudice to re-creation, though as someone with a conflict of interest, you should read WP:COI and approach the subject carefully. Acroterion (talk) 02:27, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Will do. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vacant3 (talkcontribs) 14:17, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Pennsylvania State Police[edit]

I added a misconduct section tot his page, and it is not completely bad, I think. But I have messed up the reflist. There is something called RefList2 att he bottom of the page, but it does not show the cites for my new section. So I added a RefList as I usally do, and that seems to have gummed up the works. Little help? Paul, in Saudi (talk) 09:41, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

You just messed up the closing term (you did <> instead of </ref>) in one ref. Fixed now. Acroterion (talk) 02:29, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. Paul, in Saudi (talk) 02:43, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Creating a page for 'FRANKIEonPCin1080p'[edit]

I'd like to start a page providing basic information regarding the very popular youtube content creator for several video game breakthroughs. Please advise. Thank you!

If the subject has received significant coverage in major independent media, then it would meet the general notability guidelines. Please review WP:GNG and WP:WEB to see if the subject qualifies. Acroterion (talk) 02:35, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


Hi Acroterion, You have recently delete page Dance101. Could you please advise if the article requires a re-wording or it is completely unacceptable? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dlikane (talkcontribs) 02:24, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

It would be fine for the studio's website, but it was inappropriate for Wikipedia, as it was promotional in tone. "Located 3 minutes from Chadstone Shopping Centre, this fantastic venue is available to everyone, first timers, regular social dancers, competitors, performers, kids, mums, big people, small people, people from all walks of life" and "DANCE101 offers a wide range of dance lessons and with the new HQ, its getting bigger by the minute" are hardly the sort of prose expected in an encyclopedia. Furthermore, there was no indication that the business is notable by Wikipedia's standards. Please see WP:CORP for more on notability. If it's notable enough for inclusion in a global encyclopedia, which appears to be doubtful, it would need a complete rewrite. Acroterion (talk) 02:35, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

HAER links?[edit]

Hi, thanks a lot for adding the HAER links to Oregon Electric Railway. I was going to poach one of them for Tonquin, Oregon but I see that the links don't work. Is the site down or did something else go wrong? Valfontis (talk) 19:08, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

The site's up. Maybe they changed the path so the template won't work? Elizabeth Linden Rahway may be able to help. Acroterion (talk) 19:31, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
I think I figured it out--the links appear to be lacking a forward slash at the end of the url. Valfontis (talk) 19:36, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
You needed a leading zero, not a slash. Per the template documentation, the ID "Always consists of a two-letter state abbreviation (all lower case) followed by four numbers." Elizabeth Linden Rahway (talk) 22:06, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Richard Ramirez[edit]

Hello, Acroterion, just thought that I should notify you that Richard Ramirez is not living, so there cannot be a violation of the biographies of living persons policy for edits pertaining to him. Cheers.Hoops gza (talk) 19:11, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm aware of that. However the BLP violation was the insertion of a fictionaln account of an attack by Ramirez on someone's teacher (who was named), all of which has been revdel'd. Acroterion (talk) 19:29, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Ricky Castorena[edit]

Hello. So I had created a Wikipedia page for the author named Ricky Castorena. He wrote the book entitled "The Marked" and is writing a new book, thankfully. But before I could finish, you had deleted the page. I saw the tag about references and I was beginning to add them but the page was deleted before I could do so. I ask that it be put back up or I be allowed to recreate the page. While yes, he isn't widely known throughout the world, he is still an author and is known by a few people in my home town and his home town and I feel that he deserves a Wikipedia page. Again, I ask that the page be put back up or I be allowed to recreate it.

RevanCrow95 (talk) 00:13, 6 April 2014 (UTC)RevanCrow95RevanCrow95 (talk) 00:13, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

You've got it backwards. Wikipedia documents pre-existing notability. It isn't a place to promote someone or to provide publicity for a subject that hasn't yet received significant notice in major third-party media. Wikipedia is a world-wide encyclopedia, so subjects should be known by more than a few people in their home town. Acroterion (talk) 01:10, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
Oh by all intentions, I had no means of promoting him or anything like that. It's just a lot of people ask me about him when I bring up what book I am reading and when they say they have never heard of him, I thought that a Wikipedia page would be good place for people to at least learn about him. But I had no intention of promoting him or anything like that. But I understand if I am not allowed to recreate that page for him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RevanCrow95 (talkcontribs) 02:58, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
No apologies needed. He just needs to become notable before he would be eligible for an encyclopedia article. Happy editing! Acroterion (talk) 03:02, 6 April 2014 (UTC)


Can I have evidence of your claims that this IP has a history of abuse? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:16, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

You mean the history of copyright violation, distortion of sources, undue weight and POV pushing at Kik Messenger‎, all from a series of Telstra IPs that have necessitated two protections, with the added feature of a gross personal attack from one of those IPs against another editor that I had to revision-delete? The attack removed any reasonable supposition of good faith on that subject from that IP range. Acroterion (talk) 14:43, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Telstra is Australia's largest ISP, any evidence that this exact static IP address was responsible for every single edit? Intuitive thought, not logical, assumption, not fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:19, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

You're not fooling anyone. If it had been a named account instead of a highly dynamic IP, it would have been permanently blocked for the attack. With your highly dynamic IP (Telstra IPs are more frequently changed than most), the next best approach is to place long-term protection on the article. Acroterion (talk) 17:32, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

World Trade Center controlled demolition conspiracy theories[edit]

Did I just do an oopsie? Isn't that a WP:1RR? Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 18:28, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Not that I'm aware of. Acroterion (talk) 18:30, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

To Acroterion[edit]

Dear Sir/Madam

I have finished reading your message and here's mine; You may remember me for my views on the JFK assassination and poorly reduced edits. Ever since then, I have now realized how it was stupid of me and that I was not following the rules. I am now ready to provide sources and not write what is most likely or what may have happened but just write both sides of an argument and let readers come up with their own conclusions. Thank you for giving me another chance.

Signed Glen Barker

[to my deviantart website] — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:17, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate your comments and your enthusiasm for Wikipedia. I think everybody who's talked to you has been convinced of your good intentions, and it was with great reluctance that I blocked your access. You have my good wishes, and please feel free to ask if you have any questions or are unsure if something's appropriate. Acroterion (talk) 21:21, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

P.S. I am sorry for not sighing comments. I know very little of writing.


I am changing brown bear to grizzly bear in Alaska-related articles because it is wrong to call any North American subspecies of Ursus arctos, coastal or non-coastal, a "brown bear." Brown bears and grizzlies are considered a single species nowadays and calling coastal subspecies brown bears and inland ones grizzlies in irrelevant and stupid. In Russia and Europe, they're called brown bears, but any North American subspecies is a grizzly bear and that's a fact. I know many people still refer to coastal ones as brown bears, but they're wrong. Please stop changing any edits I make that change "brown bear" to "grizzly bear" in North-America related articles.

From user — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:32, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm aware of the distinction and the generally confused nature of the common-name taxonomy of bears in Alaska: however, you're changing sourced material to your preferred version without citing sources and against common usage. Grizzlies are, of course, a subspecies of brown bears, and the inland populations are commonly called grizzlies,and the coastal populations are usually called Alaskan brown bears. Your opinion that the common naming conventions are "irrelevant and stupid" aren't sufficient justification to go against sources. Please cite sources. People may be wrong, but Wikipedia goes by common usage in most cases: see WP:COMMONNAME. I'd suggest that you discuss this at Brown bear, where it will attract the most attention: while I sympathize with your desire for clear-cut naming, this appears to be based on your opinions about the appropriate common naming convention, rather than on the actual usage of the term. Wikipedia is not a place to mount a campaign to get Alaskans, the Park Service, FWS, etc. to start calling them grizzlies. Acroterion (talk) 18:39, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

You have a new message on the Anderswarr talkpage.Anderswarr (talk) 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Animal welfare[edit]

I'm letting you know that that disruptive IP hopper is back. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:01, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

I've blocked the latest IP and re-protected the article for a longer term. We'll see what follows. Acroterion (talk) 22:10, 13 April 2014 (UTC)


Hello Acroterion,

A message was left on my talk page with your signature. I believe this to be disruption by an IP editor. So this is a heads-up. Take care. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:10, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

I think it was a confused IP who I had previously warned, who copy/pasted the warning. They're not editing now, so it's probably best ignored. Acroterion (talk) 21:05, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Your user page[edit]

I checked it out following your edits here and, just for shits and giggles: 1) the European date form uses no commas except in sentence fragments, so your lead sentence should read "I've been a Wikipedian since 22 July 2006 and an administrator since 19 November 2007."; and 2) "Barnstars and and awards" has an extra "and". xD —ATinySliver/ATalkPage 22:46, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

A copyeditor! I know an encyclopedia that needs your help ... oh, um, yeah. You can tell I've assembled the page over time (hence the and and), and that I'm no European. I'll skip the West Virginia jokes, though and pick a date convention. Acroterion (talk) 01:34, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
FWIW, I'm a life-long Californian who uses the European convention, date and time—for example, my sig shows "01:50, 15 April 2014 (UTC)". As for that encyclopedia that needs help ... well, let's say there are some good reasons why I stick to my own little "tiny sliver". xDDD —ATinySliver/ATalkPage 01:50, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
You are wise, this place has some pretty shady neighborhoods. British Isles, for instance. I've learned a great deal about deep-seated national animosities. Acroterion (talk) 01:53, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Ah, yes, animosities can be deadly. So can indifference. xDDD —ATinySliver/ATalkPage 01:59, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
I know what you mean: Biscayne National Park became an FA only after MONGO made a determined effort to drag in reviewers kicking and screaming for me. If you're patient, I'll give the article a GA whack (I don't have the experience to do an FA review), but it may take a while, and I mean months. I'm in the middle of 10,000 home projects, and a job change that involves travel and a management role at a firm 10x bigger than my former organization, so my participation on WP is down. I'm having trouble putting together more than 15 minutes at a time on WP. Acroterion (talk) 02:12, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

() In that case, I'd say you're doing well at the moment (xDDD). As for the article, my gentle rant should explain why I'm not going through that again. Ever. —ATinySliver/ATalkPage 02:23, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

new user[edit]

There is a page on Devajyoti Ray. He claims to have founded a term pseudorealism for his work type. Any person who has some knowledge in the field of Arts would know that his contributions, even though he has cited references to a few newspapers and magazine articles are of mediocre standard. It is due to the concern for others who greatly depend on wikipedia for knowledge that this page should be deleted. Firstly because, Ray says he has exhibited abroad but there is no references added in his page to prove it. Secondly, he has no right to add his own name with other great painters of contemporary art when he himself is just another mundane and insignificant artist. I personally don't have an idea how to delete the page, could you please help me out here? Thanks for your patience. Ps. Another user has stopped my edit proceedings regarding them as disruptive editing. But i feel it is very important to do the needful changes immediately. And there can seldom be any sources or citations to prove a person's works mediocre so as to make this editing not disruptive; I am at a loss of what should be done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Notredane (talkcontribs) 08:13, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Please use the article's talkpage to discuss your concerns with other editors, remembering that Wikipedia doesn't make judgments concerning quality, value or alleged mediocrity. If there are multiple substantial reports in reliable sources, that's what counts. Acroterion (talk) 00:56, 17 April 2014 (UTC)


Hello there, I am just letting you know that Worldnewstomorrow has created a page European Centre for Information Policy and Security (ECIPS) may be user is part of that organization and he/she tagged his/her own page for (primary sources) I don't know why he/she did so( may be user has conflict of interest). I tagged it under WP:CSD#G11 as the article seems to serve only to promote the idea(in current form). Page only relies on self-promotional sources. It would be better if you just review this page once. Best regards: A.Minkowiski _Lets t@lk 12:40, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

A nice note?[edit]

Might it be possible to unblock User:Khan218 and User:Skypink55 with a nice note? Though their edits appeared vandalism, they were trying (rather naively) to fix this vandalism.

All the best, Rich Farmbrough, 22:02, 17 April 2014 (UTC).

Sure, thanks for pointing that out. Acroterion (talk) 22:23, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Re: "A sniper"[edit]

Yes, they certainly *are*, aren't they... Their emphasis on Lincoln's smile is what caught my eye. Shearonink (talk) 13:47, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

This particular editor also seems to have an occasional habit of inserting bare URLs as refs... Confession time: getting tired of having to come behind them and fix things. Shearonink (talk) 16:12, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

An idea[edit]

Is an article entitled List of Notable Persons convicted of Crimes Related to Paedophila a good one or a bad one? I am very pleased I started the List of Notable Drug-Related Deaths. Paul, in Saudi (talk) 12:08, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations: you've discovered Wikipedia's third rail. It's one of the biggest landmines on WIkipedia. As I recall there was once such and article, an its deletion/reinstatement/deletion was a cause of spectacular wrangling, blocking, wheel-warring and bitter accusations of bad faith. If you want to see how ugly things can get around here, that'd be a quick and efficient way to learn. Anybody who undertakes such a list should be wearing asbestos underwear and have a comprehensive understanding of WP's BLP policy (preferably at the doctoral-dissertation level), a recent, comprehensive and successful history of litigation through the Arbitration Committee, and a detailed understanding of the WMF's paedophilia-accusation policy. Acroterion (talk) 13:20, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. Paul, in Saudi (talk) 02:30, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCVII, April 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 14:28, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Reg Deleted Page Kaleen[edit]

Please don't delete this page. It provides useful information to people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yashbaldawa.4 (talkcontribs) 12:02, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

It was promotional material that does not make a credible case for notability. Please don't use Wikipedia for advertising. Acroterion (talk) 12:12, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Reg kaleen[edit]

Could you enlighten me further on the deletion of the page Kaleen? I have not mentioned about the assets of the company and also you might not find the history of the company elsewhere. Please confirm. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yashbaldawa.4 (talkcontribs) 12:25, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Please see WP:CORP for the notability guidelines relating to companies. There was no credible assertion of notability for the company and it was promotional in nature. Wikipedia is not a business directory. Acroterion (talk) 12:51, 21 April 2014 (UTC)


...for the redlink back. :D Yobol (talk) 01:11, 23 April 2014 (UTC)


I'm really sorry about that. I promise I won't ever do that again--Hacienda Guy (talk) 20:44, 23 April 2014 (UTC)Hacienda Guy

And don't move your userpage and talkpage to another account: if you want to change your name, please ask at WP:CHU. Acroterion (talk) 20:46, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Comet Miniatures[edit]

Hi Acroterion,

I have rewrite the description for Comet Miniatures. It has been a very important model maker for more than 25 years and as such, I think it is pertinent to have it in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pensees2008 (talkcontribs) 12:31, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

You are going to need some references to go along with that, else it will probably be deleted. - NeutralhomerTalk • 12:33, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
To be important enough for inclusion in Wikipedia, it will need multiple references in third-party media. See WP:CORP for notability guidelines for businesses. Simple existence is not enough: it must have received coverage in media outlets or scholarly sources. Acroterion (talk) 12:35, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
I don't have old news coverage but in the recent one, there is that one that cover the essentials: .--Pensees2008 (talk) 16:13, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
That helps a lot, but it would be good if there was coverage beyond the enthusiast press. Any coverage in regular news outlets? Acroterion (talk) 17:01, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

JFK assassination[edit]

Hello and good day,

I believe the addition to the JFK assassination page of the theories featured in my book are appropriate. What I propose is a completely new viewpoint to the assassination, one that should be considered by anyone seeking the truth about what occurred 50 years ago. By posting the text, people may have more of an objective point of view with all perspectives presented.

Thank you for the consideration.

Mark Shaw — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markshaw (talkcontribs) 17:13, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Politeness is nice, but it is no substitute for a persuasive argument. Sorry. Robert O'Rourke (talk) 01:50, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

My book[edit]

Hello again -

I don't quite understand how listing my book as a reference on the JFK Assassination page is in error re promoting the book. Any book that focuses on the assassinations should be included. This permits those interested in the truth to learn of all points of view regarding the JFK assassination.

Thank you, Mark Shaw — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markshaw (talkcontribs) 17:15, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

In general, authors are discouraged from citing their own works on Wikipedia. It's not an ironclad policy, but it helps to keep promotion down. This may be a little tiresome for serious scholars, but it keeps promotion within tolerable limits. Since this is a freely-edited work, people are very sensitive to potential promotion. I'd suggest bringing up your proposed edits and your source on the article talkpage to see if other editors will form a consensus in favor of your edits and source, and whether it represents appropriate emphasis within the context of the article. For more, see WP:COI and WP:SELFCITE. Acroterion (talk) 17:59, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
I think another editor has suggested that it may be better to look to John F. Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories for a place. Acroterion (talk) 18:04, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

I have intentions to improve some architecture articles, including the intention to find the time...ArchibuffArchibuff (talk) 18:06, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Time is always a problem. Just remember that we have no deadlines here, and do what you have the time for. Acroterion (talk) 18:08, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

The sclafani effect[edit]

I have witnessed the sclafani effect, it is a common problem with household 3d printers. It is an important article because it explains the shortfalls of direct printing to 3d printers. It is not named after me, my name is not sclafani. Why was it deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheOstrander (talkcontribs) 01:57, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Because it is a non-notable undocumented neologism that appears to have been made up.Acroterion (talk) 02:26, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Category:Fortifications of Switzerland in the 20th century[edit]

Category:Fortifications of Switzerland in the 20th century, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. The Bushranger One ping only 03:11, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

That assassination/conspiracy editor[edit]

I'll confess...I am really getting fed-up with having to be their own personal Wiki-maid, always having to scrub-up after their edits (see editing history at Lincoln's Ghost.) Either the content is excessively POV and/or poorly-sourced and/or the references are malformed. Is there anything that can be done? (Yeah, I know, one thing I could do is stop keeping an eye on all those persistent vandal-targets like Presidential/assassination/conspiracy theory articles...) Shearonink (talk) 17:36, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

I've left another note at their most recent IP assignment. Acroterion (talk) 20:11, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Jeremy McGovern[edit]

The deletion log say's you deleted a page at Jeremy McGovern. I'm guessing you're also the one that protected it. If so could you please unprotect it to move Jeremy Mcgovern to there to fix the caps. This new article has nothing to do with the previous mass deletion. Thanks. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:16, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

I wasn't the one who protected it (JamesBWatson did it), but having a live article in place of the protected empty article accomplishes the same thing. It's been moved to the correct capitalization. Acroterion (talk) 12:13, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

William Withers, Jr. and his coat[edit]

William Withers, Jr. coat;

Who is speculating now?


Ok, no need to be so harsh and angry. I will do as you said. Vernapenny (talk) 15:19, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm not angry, just concerned that you were getting carried away. Just be careful: there are people on the other side of those usernames, and there's no need to slap tags on the accounts. Acroterion (talk) 15:24, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes I already stopped Vernapenny (talk) 15:45, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

No you didn't, you tagged a user without good cause three minutes ago. Acroterion (talk) 15:46, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

I have. Vernapenny (talk) 15:54, 5 May 2014 (UTC) Here: Template:User Washington DC — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vernapenny (talkcontribs) 15:54, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, that's the right way to do that. Don't move templates (really, don't move anything without careful consideration). Acroterion (talk) 15:56, 5 May 2014 (UTC)


Thanks![4] [5], FYI[6] Yogesh Khandke (talk) 03:23, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Biscayne National Park[edit]

You deleted an edit I made to the BNP page about the lack of a concessionaire at Convoy Point. Your comment mentioned that there are "other concessionaires." Who? Where?

The gift shop is boarded up. There are no tour boats; the boat slips look like they haven't been used in months. There are no canoe/kayak/paddleboat rentals. The only food and drink is provided from two vending machines hurriedly installed next to the restrooms.

A park ranger told me yesterday that they're in the middle of the bidding process for a new concessionaire, and at best, park concessions wouldn't resume until sometime next year.

And Convoy Point is the only place where a concessionaire operated as it is ... There are no concessions out on Elliot Key.

Right now, people who go to Convoy Point by car have little to do other than visit the Visitor Center, walk along the boardwalk, or have a picnic (as long as they brought their own food). If they bring their own canoe, windsurfer, etc., they can use it on the bay.

But tourists who show up expecting to enjoy a day's activities -- especially if they've come on the Trolley and don't have their own source of transportation -- will find themselves stuck on that little spit of land with nothing to do and nowhere to go.

BNP's own Web page shows a "Park Alert": "Boat Tours, Paddle-craft Rentals and Select Conveniences Temporarily Unavailable - Glass-bottom, snorkel, diving and island boat tours, and rentals for canoes and other paddle-craft, are temporarily unavailable. The park is working to resolve the issue as soon as possible and regrets the inconvenience. Limited snack items are available." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Celavin (talkcontribs) 17:51, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

I understand, but it's not appropriate to place of-the-moment notes to visitors in an encyclopedia article, much less in a featured article. Wikipedia tries not to be a travel guide. Discussions of defunct concessioners are more appropriate for WikiVoyage, which is a travel guide (and which is linked from the article). The situation is of no lasting importance, though for the next few months it would probably be appropriate to insert "for the 2014 season no concession services are available at Convoy Point" and leave it at that, with the reference. Perhaps some minor rewording to take out "concessioner" for the time being if there are no formal arrangements available anywhere. An analogy would be that the article on Glacier National Park (U.S.) doesn't go into discussions on the long-drawn-out renovations of the Going-to-the-Sun Road, which has resulted in restricted seasons and shutdowns. Acroterion (talk) 18:12, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


Hi Acroterion, I spent a good amount re-doing the copy in the page your deleted a while back that I posted. You can find the updated version in my sandbox. Please take a look and let me know what you think and if this is ready post live again. Appreciate your feedback! Thanks so much!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tbuck2012 (talkcontribs) 20:38, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

It's a lot better, and well referenced. It could be pruned somewhat: unless the individuals on the board of directors are themselves notable, they probably shouldn't be included. External links should also be pruned to the basics: they tend to impart a promotional shee, which still exists to some degree and which might draw objections. Other than that, I think it could live in article space. Acroterion (talk) 21:15, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the feedback!! Best Regards. --Tbuck2012 (talk) 22:13, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Rescue Row[edit]

Microchip08 talked to me about improving Rescue Row, so it wouldn't be deleted. Please see the discussion at the bottom of his/her talkpage and he/she may want the article to be restored. Piguy101 (talk) 22:06, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

They are welcome to a userfied version once the creator registers a username that doesn't represent the SPCA. There's a good chance that there's coverage that could cover notability, but the article's far, far too promotional and indicates that the creator doesn't understand that Wikipedia isn't a free webhost for good causes. Acroterion (talk) 22:08, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
I agree that it was very promotional as I even suggested changing the db to 11. It was a mix up on my part as well. Thanks Piguy101 (talk) 22:12, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Could you un revision delete the message on my talk page?[edit]

I would like a record of every message left on my talk page, unless it is grossly NSFW. 123chess456 (talk) 02:16, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

No. In point of fact, since it was present in every version from that point onward, you can see it in any recent revision, but I will not restore the original disruptive edit to your userpage. Acroterion (talk) 02:25, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

You deleted a page that I was in the process of creating?[edit]

Hi, I saw that some of the other comments were rude so I'll try not to be rude as well. I just noticed that you deleted a page that I had created called Quanta Science Magazine? I was wondering if you could possibly tell me why, because now that it's deleted, I have no access...

Thanks, Imtheangel7283 (talk) 21:45, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

The article was deleted because it didn't indicate that the subject was notable. All Wikipedia articles must pass the notability guidelines, and there is no indication that this student publication is notable enough for inclusion in a global encyclopedia. If the publication has received substantial notice in major media on more than a purely local level, then it would probably satisfy the notability standard. If you think you can develop the article enough to meet the guidelines, I'd be happy to place it in a sandbox in your userspace. Acroterion (talk) 21:51, 11 May 2014 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Acroterion. You have new messages at A delicious pot pie's talk page.
Message added 02:39, 12 May 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

123chess456 (talk) 02:39, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

I've said everything I intended to say there. The editor created two trolling accounts, their first edit was vandalism (whether the edit filter intercepted it or not is immaterial) and they concealed their origins with the new account rather than making an unblock request from the original account as they were advised to do. However, as always, any admin is welcome to unblock without my prior approval if they are satisfied of the user's good faith. I'm on travel to a project site the next two days, and again next week, so I will not be dependably available during those times.Acroterion (talk) 11:46, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Page request[edit]

Hello Sir , if Bibek Bhattarai is real person then can i create the page or not ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbkbhatt (talkcontribs) 02:30, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

No, you need to be notable too. See WP:ENTERTAINER, WP:NOTE and WP:BIO. Acroterion (talk) 02:46, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
And stop promoting yourself. I've deleted the pictures you've uploaded: Wikipedia isn't a free webhost for dozens of images of yourself. Acroterion (talk) 02:51, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

James Harley McCormick page deletion[edit]

I wanted to check some facts about Jim McCormick, a many time winner of the Washington State Chess Championship, but found that you had deleted the page about him for lack of the subject's importance. I would think that being a many time Washington State Chess Champion would qualify him as important, especially given his intense rivalry with Viktors Pupols (who has a Wikipedia page), the nature of that rivalry (it included a fist fight during a game -- chess, not hockey), a distinctly unusual personality and history for a chess champion (he worked as a welder), and the influence he had on chess culture in the Seattle and the Pacific Northwest (out which came players of national, international, and World Championship caliber (Duncan Suttles, Peter Biyasis, and Yasser Seriwan). Can you give me an idea of your criteria for importance? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:26, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Considering the deleted entry went (in its entirety) "Goes by James McCormic, or J-swagg. He is the hottest man alive," it's possible you're talking about a different James Harley McCormick who might be notable, However, a bald assertion that someone "is the hottest man alive" will not sustain notability. Take a look at WP:BIO for the detailed criteria, which don't, as far as I know, mention hotness. I'm not convinced that a state chess championship is grounds for inclusion, but it's a lot more credible than the original entry. Acroterion (talk) 14:12, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. If there was no previous version that had been vandalized then it seems as though someone trying, not very successfully, to be funny. Looking at the criteria you referenced, I think he would meet those for "Any Biography." 1)The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for one several times. 2)The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field.

I suppose the question then shifts from "importance" to the definition of "well-know" and "widely." I can tell you there are many Wikipedia articles about people far less important in the chess world than than Jim McCormick. Someone should create a page about him, but in the words of the bard, "It ain't me babe." — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:57, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCVIII, May 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:18, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you![edit]

Kitten in a helmet.jpg

Thank you!

♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ Talk ♪ ߷ ♀ Contribs ♀ 03:01, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Revdel request on Joshua Rogers[edit]

Could you take a look at this new revdel request at WP:BLPN? Thanks. Dwpaul Talk 03:15, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Done. Have you asked for oversight? Acroterion (talk) 03:22, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
No, I had not done so. Dwpaul Talk 03:32, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Now oversighted, thanks for bringing it to my attention. Acroterion (talk) 10:39, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Echo Park Dam (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Harold Ickes
Escalante National Monument (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Harold Ickes

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:51, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment[edit]

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)


Hi Acroterion!

I see you've deleted the VSL article. Maybe due to lack of notability. I don't think it was, but I admit the very small, "stubbish" article did not really reflect why. IMOHO, VSL is together with BBR and Freyssinet (amongst others such as former DYWIDAG) one of the most significant players in prestressing, a construction technique that is at the core of modern civil engineering. I think all of them (with over 3,000 workers each and iconic bridges built all over the world) are worth having an article, but of course that is disputable. In the French version both VSL and Freyssinet do have articles, but maybe because they are both subsidiaries of big French construction companies.

Having been a very active anonymous editor in en:Wikipedia during 2004 and 2005, and a simple user ever since, I feel in awe of the progress made so far. Yet, now that I came back with the intent of adding a few articles on PT companies, some of the changes seem strange. Having to register in order to edit was one of them. Seeing work speedily deleted even before being given the chance to improve it and/or defend it was another one. I hope you won't scare potential editors away, but it certainly saddens me.

Best regards,

--Jahecaigut (talk) 14:42, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Things have changed since ten years ago, when one could fill be gaps in the encyclopedia, and when redlinks abounded. Now it's a lot harder to find new content that will stick, and the sourcing requirements have greatly expanded. The standards have changed greatly since I joined in 2006. In general, unsourced stubs get deleted quickly. In the case of VSL, it's hard to sustain a separate article for them since they're a subsidiary of a larger firm. I'd be happy to place the material in a sandbox in your userspace where it can be developed, maybe mentioning individual projects and providing sources. As an architect, I'm sympathetic to articles about the construction industry, but I'm also familiar with the difficulty of sourcing and asserting notability for those organizations, since they don't receive a lot of press. Acroterion (talk) 14:53, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
I actually decided to begin with a red link (otherwise I may have begun by Freyssinet). As you can see [[7]], VSL as a red link appeared in 2011. Anyways, it looks as if the threshold for accepting new articles has grown a lot, dimishing the "common work" gradual improvements of a decade ago. Thanks for your answer above.

--Jahecaigut (talk) 16:33, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

NRHP issue[edit]

I guess the NPS website is down or messed up? I was commencing starting articles on the NHRP listings for North Cascades National Park and the NPS site is down I guess. I was going by this page and the links to the NHRP number...any suggestions?--MONGO 21:37, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Try here [8]. You can search by park. Acroterion (talk) 21:41, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
Thats not working for me...either its user error on my part or the website is now maintained by the same contractors that do the Affordable Care website.--MONGO 21:44, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
Offline for a here is about to go nuts.--MONGO 22:20, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
Seems to be working for me via Firefox. Acroterion (talk) 00:37, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
Okay...I'll try again tomorrow.--MONGO 01:10, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[edit]

FYI, User talk: appears to be hitting your rangeblock of Jackmcbarn (talk) 21:57, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Unblocked for a little while. Acroterion (talk) 00:38, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Category:Naval magazine explosions[edit]

Category:Naval magazine explosions, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 04:53, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of BetterDoctor article[edit]

Hi Acroterion,

I noticed that you deleted the article on BetterDoctor and wanted to further understand this decision. BetterDoctor represents an important player in the United States health technology startup ecosystem, and the author included reputable resources including Wired magazine.

How does the article differ from any of these articles on web-based health technology companies which have been permitted to stay? ZocDoc, Vitals_(website), and HealthGrades to mention just a few.

Thank you, Wiki contrib sf (talk) 16:47, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BetterDoctor, which closed two weeks ago. The re-created version did not differ substantially from the previously deleted version. Acroterion (talk) 16:56, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Nicola Atkinson/NADFLY[edit]

Hi Acroterion,

You deleted the above page due to lack of notability. I have been working on a revised version of the page in my sandbox and think I have demonstrated that she is a notable artist and have included reference and citations. How do I publish this page now that it has been vastly improved? Would be grateful for your feedback and help. Thanks.Thomjack (talk) 20:02, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

I think it's got some distance to go. The references to Nicola Atkinson appear to be self-referenced: do you have any sources in third-party media that substantiate notability of the person and the organization? Also, please remember that Wikipedia can't reference itself. If you want to include wikilinks you should use paired square brackets around the subject you want to internally link, but they don't constitute references. Blogs are not references for the most part, and self-references are valid only for basic statements about the subject, and aren't usable to establish notability. Some external reference links are broken, and others point to generic pages that don't relate to Atkinson. Right now I think the article would still be vulnerable to deletion. Please see if you can find independent media that discuss the subject in some detail. Acroterion (talk) 20:11, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Need help[edit]

I have been trying to change the wording in the quote to the correct source; 10->ten (as it appears in the source material). Also adding more sources for Lincoln's goodbye to Crook. Also changed "a" knife to "the" knife. By having it as "a" knife, it sounds like Booth changed knives or something. It was the same he stabbed Rathbone with. Also need help adding sources(pages, books, ect.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:14, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

The rangeblock necessitated by your disruptive edits to a wide variety of articles from a wide variety of IPs has temporarily been lifted to allow someone else to edit. You, as the reason for the rangeblock, may not edit. I've blocked your present IP and will reinstate the rangeblock. Acroterion (talk) 21:33, 2 June 2014 (UTC)


Blockses - Alison 02:56, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Thankses! Acroterion (talk) 02:59, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Epeefleche reported by User:Citobun (Result: No violation)[edit]

Hi Acroterion. I posted in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring not because of any 3RR violation, but because the head of the page says it's for reporting "confrontational edits to win a content dispute". Secondly, I didn't use the Scotia Square talk page because I posted on his/her user page instead. Citobun (talk) 21:59, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

We're not going to block editors who ask for references: it's hardly an unreasonable request. You might want to take a break for a little while: you seem a little irritated, and your filing at AN3 was far short of the threshold at which we'd take action, particularly since you used most of the report to make personal accusations and included nothing indicating that you'd properly discussed the dispute. Acroterion (talk) 22:08, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
It's so absurd to ask me to "please assume good faith" when the user is obviously acting out of spite. His requests weren't reasonable: he blanked half the page without specifying what he wanted referenced, threatened me with a block on my talk page when I didn't add references for every single statement, and dredged up a similar warning a blocked troll left on my page months ago to somehow suggest to admins that I have a pattern of adding unsourced content. Sure I'm irritated. Citobun (talk) 22:15, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
"Spite" is not obvious at all, and you're wandering into personal attacks, not helped by making similar attacks in a report to AN3. What is obvious is that you're getting on each others' nerves. Acroterion (talk) 23:07, 4 June 2014 (UTC)


Hi. I was just wondering, is it normal at SPI for accounts to be confirmed as socks by a CU but not blocked for three days? They're still not blocked. Case is here. I was just wondering, because you seem to be an active admin; if I'm just being impatient, please let me know. Thanks, Lixxx235Got a complaint? 02:48, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

If you mean "active" is accidentally blocking people, then I guess I'm active. I'm about to go to bed, having blocked Drmies instead of the impersonation acount Drmyes (talk · contribs). I've done enough for one evening, I think. I'll look at it in the morning. Acroterion (talk) 02:57, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Oh, nice ;) Good job to Magister Magistrate as well, when she locked and oversighted The Thing that Should Not Be(on the stocks). Thanks. I just went into the logs, clicked block log, and you were the first person who popped up. I hope you don't mind if I ask another admin. Thanks, Lixxx235Got a complaint? 03:02, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Be my guest, and good night! Acroterion (talk) 03:05, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Yep, good night. When you wake up your desysop will be on your doorstep! :) Drmies (talk) 04:23, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
I've been out to the front porch and see nothing resembling a "desysop." I had sort of pictured it as a basket from someone named "Denise" containing a little gray rabbit with a Brooklyn accent who wants to know "are youse my faddah?" Acroterion (talk) 11:32, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
No admin has looked at this yet, so would you mind taking a look at it? Thanks, Lixxx235Got a complaint? 14:17, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

IP you blocked[edit]

Did you see [9] and Hardcore Metallica Fan (talk · contribs)? Dougweller (talk) 14:10, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Remarkable article[edit]

Should you have the time, please spare a moment for the Fulton County Sheriff's Office (Georgia) article. It is perhaps the most messed-up page I have seen in a while. My first step is to figure out how to alert the various groups who handle sheriff's departments. Paul, in Saudi (talk) 15:05, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Erik Cassel[edit]

Hello, this is Austin3510. I've seen that the page for Erik Cassel has been deleted, and by you. I was wondering if you could have the page undeleted? I think Erik Cassel should have a page, since he was the co-founder of an internet game played by millions of children, ROBLOX. Thank you for reading this message, and please reply soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Austin3510 (talkcontribs) 02:34, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

The deleted article was an unsourced assertion that Cassel was an admin and "one of the cofounders." As a really short and unsourced biography, it would need to be rewritten and sourced. Please feel free to write a new article for Cassel if you can provide appropriate third-party references. There is no prejudice against re-creation of the article. Acroterion (talk) 02:49, 8 June 2014 (UTC)



I'm creating a page for a communications app my company is developing. We started on the page last week and put the project aside for late when we had more time to figure out how to properly format the page and such. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Airepingshow (talkcontribs) 21:06, 9 June 2014 (UTC)



I have recently done some searching through the bowels of Wikipedia out of curiosity, and based on your blocking of User:Dance pop lover as a suspected sockpuppet (as well as their blatant claim to be a sockpuppet) of User:!!, I have opened a Suspected Sockpuppet Investigation (SPI) into these accounts to find out if our famous little ventriloquist has found himself a hobby. If you could let me know if you happen to stumble on to some information that might help me, I would greatly appreciate it.

Thank you! I am Quibilia. (talk) 03:30, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for merging that article into Landon House[edit]

You have no idea how confusing those two articles were before that. When doing research I would find stuff referencing one or the other, but nothing that said they were the same thing. I spent probably an hour one night trying to figure out whether a photo belonged to one house or the other, not realizing they were the same house. It certainly explains the distinct similarity between them... Anyhow, I really appreciate that. If you reply, please ping me in your response so I get notification. Zell Faze (talk) 13:04, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

@Zellfaze: It took me several years to realize that we had parallel articles. There's more work to be done there, and there's a lot of dubious information associated with the place, as I'm sure you know. Glad to help, and I'll take another whack at it when I get a little time. Acroterion (talk) 17:19, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
I know a new Wikipedian who might be able to help. He got registered at my edit-a-thon yesterday and he pulled out a binder with probably 500 pages of research on the Landon House. He might be willing to help. I'll ping him once I am not on mobile and can look up his username. --User:ZellFaze (don't have a tilde on this keyboard)
@Gil72: Is the guy I know who has done an enormous amount of research on Landon House. Zell Faze (talk) 01:46, 19 June 2014 (UTC)


I don't think you handled my contested deletion of PandacoinPND very nicely. I may have had many links or positive information about the topic to help others, but nothing spam per say. I am not a proficient Wikipedia pro and don't have the time to become one, just wanted to help others because I know about the topic. I like to use Wikipedia but not sure it is easy enough to help out :P So leave the page blank if nothing will meet your criteria or just delete what is found offensive. I can see getting my first article up it is not really very open to individual's freely sharing useful information like I thought :( — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:26, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry you feel that way. Please remember that Wikipedia does not accept advertising, and that it does not permit copy/paste from other websites except in very narrowly defined circumstances. Since you did both, copying advertising into Wikipedia, it was eligible for immediate deletion on either grounds. Please remember that Wikipedia is not a social media website, and that content like "So join us on #PandacoinPND at to try out the Lotto-Faucet commands !lotto !panda !gimme, have a chance of winning up to 10 million Pandacoins (PND) and chat with the other Pandas from this awesome community!" has no business being in an encyclopedia article, and that your account can be blocked for spamming and copyright violations. Acroterion (talk) 17:15, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for replying I doubted you would bother, and I could understand there may some parts of the page that seem to be overly promotional to you. You probably know little about even what PandacoinPND is but it is not a product really it would be better to just block the parts you don't like so we could have something to start with. Your copyright concern is on your end too, you jump to conclusions as nothing but freely available text was being re-used and I am a contributor where you flagged the text as being copyrighted, fortunately the info is still there at least. :P — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:6:4880:2DB:8555:1150:D162:45B0 (talk) 16:56, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm happy to reply to any and all polite inquiries, as yours is. Please remember that Wikipedia can accept only compatibly-licensed content, and in the absence of a clear declaration of public domain or CC-by-SA licensing, you can't copy external text into Wikipedia. In this case, the page that was copied clearly says "Copyright MassivePixelCreation 2013," so it has to be deleted by policy. In general, it's not a good idea to copy in from external websites regardless of copyright status, because most sites quite reasonably are trying to sell a product or a service, and are therefore not usable in an encyclopedia. There's no prejudice against re-creating a neutrally-worded policy compliant article based on third party media sources, suitably referenced and demonstrating compliance with notability requirements. Acroterion (talk) 17:35, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

IP User:[edit]

Hello Acroterion, I was somewhat distressed by the comments made by IP User regarding my reversion on United Airlines Flight 93. I hardly think that two web addresses qualify as "linkrot" and their comments hardly conform to Wikipedia standards that we all adhere to. Whilst I would never engage in a edit war, I still believe that my edit was correctly made - and without any insulting comments. I would be grateful for your comments and some positive action to stop these unnecessary statements. Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 19:38, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

That's why I warned them, the snark level is excessively high with this user, especially considering they're making no attempt to repair the bare urls that they're tagging so prolifically. Acroterion (talk) 02:13, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Many thanks for all your help. Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 20:58, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Unfortunately, this IP "editor" has learned nothing from the temporary block and is again using the "linkrot" and insults to anyone who reverts their "edits". I really think that the time has come for a much longer block to stop this disruption to the normal operation of Wikipedia. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 21:48, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCIX, June 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:09, 21 June 2014 (UTC)


Would you mind checking into User:DLindsley? The guy created several problematic pages (I'm asking you because you deleted one of them), all of which have since been deleted, and in apparent revenge has been causing problems at other articles. For example, because his article on a nonnotable Catholic church in Dayton OH was deleted, he speedy tagged an article about an NR-listed church across town, and when I reverted him, he put back some problems that I'd removed. He's made other problems at other articles, including unsourced problematic additions to another Dayton church and broken-code additions to List of Catholic churches in the United States, but when I removed them along with a pile of Doncram-added messes, he reverted the whole thing.

In short, this new editor needs help from someone who knows a little about him but hasn't yet had any negative interactions with him. Nyttend (talk) 01:09, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

I've left a fairly neutral discussion of a few issues I noticed, we'll see how they respond. Acroterion (talk) 01:44, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks; this is what I meant. I figured anything from you would probably be taken better than anything from me, even if the content were identical. Nyttend (talk) 01:55, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Thomas_J._Haynes vandalism[edit]

Thank you for clearing up the problem promptly. I had the page shared to my facebook page by somebody who appeared to be the vandal, and I decided to come over to clear up the page. Originally I thought the page was a total fabrication, and then realised that it was merely edited from its original format and discussed a real individual. As per your advice, I decided to remake an account. Most of my work in the past has centred around correcting vandalism rather than contributing content of my own - hopefully I can do more of this in the future. If we do get unregistered IPs returning to damage the page, would it be appropriate to prevent them accounts from changing the page? I was also unsure what the rules were when faced with an edit or revert war. Are there any Wikipedia guidelines out there for how to respond when a user continuously implements an unacceptable change to a page? Maswimelleu (talk) 22:03, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

There are two ways to deal with vandals: blocking and protection. Often if a series of IPs vandalize an article we'll "semi-protect" it, meaning that IPs and newly-registered accounts can't edit the article. As for edit wars and revert wars, you should read WP:3RR: after three reverts, (or less depending on behavior), one can be subject to summary blocking, usually for 24 or 48 hours. Reverts of clear vandalism, advertising and biographical issues are exempt from 3RR. It's easy to get drawn into a revert war with someone who may be pushing a POV without actually being a vandal, so be careful. I'll drop some links on your talkpage so you have them for reference. Acroterion (talk) 00:11, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Metropolitan Law Enforcement Council[edit]

This agency was in the Washington Post the other day, so I created an article. (Not too bad, for such a secretive group.) There have been no edits, and no comments. Is there a way to see how many reader I may have attracted? Paul, in Saudi (talk) 15:35, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

This edit counter will tell you [10], but it updates only at the end of each day at 00:00 UT. There's always a spike the first couple of days, then it settles down. Acroterion (talk) 16:38, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. Paul, in Saudi (talk) 17:49, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
About fifty. Oh well.Paul, in Saudi (talk) 03:15, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Notice Comment Suggestion[edit]

Hi Acroterion. Just leaving you a notice that you forgot to notify user Jake Remington NCV Regala that he's been blocked indefinitely. Thanks and happy editing. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:13, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

It's a profoundly banned user who's been harassing Antandrus and others (including Jimmy Wales) for years with gross vandalism. They can figure it out for themselves, they know the drill. Acroterion (talk) 13:30, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Wolfgang Pissors[edit]

I'm in the process of creating an english page Wolfgang Pissors however it has just been deleted. Why ? Thank You


Replied on your talkpage. Acroterion (talk) 21:31, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Chemtrail Conspiracy Theory[edit]

Earlier today you objected to a post that I made regarding the reality of what some term as Chemtrails. As far as I know I referenced credible authorities that state the authenticity of a problematic aerial spraying of toxic substances that are polluting our environment. I also stated that if it is true that the persistent trails left behind high flying aircraft are simply vapor trails who might object to open disclosure and "open house" of the suspected aircraft?

Now I am wondering how you can assess that I am only offering my own opinions on the matter? My position is and always has been a procedural matter of seeking the facts, a fact finding project, not the opinions of those who may be hiding covert operations that are harming all life on the planet. May I ask where you find fault with a project destined to protect the environment and or possibly disclose sinister activities? --Inspector In the Truth (talk) 21:11, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't an internet forum: it's an encyclopedia. Please do not abuse the encyclopedia to post opinions, advocacy or soapboxing. Acroterion (talk) 02:07, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Skilled Group[edit]

Is there a reason you went with deletion-and-partial-restore rather than sticking only with revision-deletion? It's my understanding that the whole purpose of revision-deletion (with or without WP:OVERSIGHT) was to avoid using deletion-and-restore except for history mergers and history splits. The only remotely valid reason I can think of to use deletion is WP:IAR + WP:DENY, or perhaps some use of WP:IAR that I haven't thought of yet. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:14, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Deletion and restore is still valid where there is a broad chunk of disruption (defamation in this case), particularly on a talkpage where the history isn't as important. DENY is the primary reason: I started through plain revdel and it became clear that entire swaths of the history were infested with hundreds of disruptive sockpuppet edits, far beyond the normal scope of revdel. Close to 90% of the history was going to be struck through. Revdel is best used for individual episodes of disruption, where delete/restore was cumbersome and confusing (we were all relieved when revdel was instituted), but delete/restore still has a use, and is used now and then in such circumstances, and I know of no policy that forbids its use. This certainly falls under "occasional other cases where it is needed." Acroterion (talk) 23:25, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
That bad? Sigh. Oh, could you email me the wiki-text of the vandalism that you revdeleted from my user page earlier today? (Oh, and thanks for removing it - if it was that bad the fewer people who saw it the better). davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 23:36, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
208 revisions bad, mostly the same thing over and over and ... The thing I deleted was standard abuse, not creative enough to be interesting. If you really want to know I'll email it. Acroterion (talk) 00:15, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Send it along. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 00:22, 7 July 2014 (UTC)


Ok, sorry about that. That guy was being pompous though. But I understand, I'll try to tone it down in the future.Zombiesturm (talk) 16:36, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

That's no apology, and you've been keeping it up using slightly cleaner language. If it happens again you'll be blocked. Acroterion (talk) 21:02, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

immediate block requested[edit] has been vandalizing non-stop for more than an hour and there is no response from AIV. Thanks. Meters (talk) 03:09, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Never mind. Finally blocked. Meters (talk) 03:13, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
<ec>I stepped away from the computer for a few minutes to walk the dog: I see Reaper got the IP, appropriately enough. Acroterion (talk) 03:14, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
And now Reaper's blocking CU socks. Cases like this make me sorry I'm not an admin! Meters (talk) 03:48, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
It comes in handy for great justice when dealing with trolls and vandals, you can just fix what you see, though I occasionally have to track down a CU for some things. You've been around long enough to give it a try, you know, and RFA has been less of an ordeal in recent times. Acroterion (talk) 03:53, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, it's time for a change. I need to either take a break, try to become an admin, or switch from vandalism fighting to writing articles for a while. Meters (talk) 04:00, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Then write some articles, get some GA or FA content, then see about RFA. You'll be expected to show some quality content, which wasn't the case when I had my RFA in 2007. I did my writing later on, but I lack the time nowadays due to professional and personal commitments. Acroterion (talk) 11:29, 8 July 2014 (UTC)


could you do the page "List of Turkic dynasties and countries" semi-protected, those who are not logged destroys only. Mehmeett21                    User talk:Mehmeett21  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mehmeett21 (talkcontribs) 16:34, 9 July 2014 (UTC) 

Pesky little vandal[edit]

Hey there. Thanks for the reverting of that one's changes to my userpage. The first of their two accounts seems to persist in changing my name on the warning template I left them to "Silly Dutch Woman". Not really in the mood to feed a troll of a blocked user on their talk-page, so I figured I might as well ask you if there is any chance you could revoke their talkpage access? AddWittyNameHere (talk) 22:01, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Already done for both accounts, and if any new accounts appear they'll lose talkpage access when blocked, given their history. Acroterion (talk) 22:02, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, noticed you did so while I was typing up the message. XD Then you edit-conflicted me as I was going to say "nevermind, you're faster than I am". Well, that's doubly-proven now, eh? AddWittyNameHere (talk) 22:04, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Anita Sarkeesian page[edit]

May I ask how my addition to the "Reception" segment of Anita Sarkeesian's page was inappropriately sourced and disparaging? Is there a way to address the criticism of her in a way which conforms to Wikipedia's standards? I think it's important to do so, as this site is meant to be an unbiased information resource. --JackHeslop91 (talk) 23:41, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

You need to read Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living persons. When you've done that you'll understand that you can't insert disparagement into a biography sourced only to a couple of bare YouTube urls. The article and talkpage have recently been targets for direct attacks on Sarkeesian based on Internet innuendo. While there is probably a neutral way to discuss the often misogynistic way Sarkeesian has been attacked on the Internet, it must be approached in accordance with Wikipedia policy. Your edit plainly violated BLP policy and was reverted accordingly. Acroterion (talk) 00:41, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

I really don't feel as though I was being disparaging. I wasn't personally accusing Sarkeesian of anything, I was simply pointing out how some people perceive her, which has already been done in that section. It's important to present both sides of an issue. This isn't a problem in other articles. On my page for James Herbert's novel Shrine, for instance, someone added a negative comment made about the book by a critic to the "Reception" section, and linked to a footnate indicating a page of a critical work. If the problem is that my footnotes weren't detailed, I'll be happy to remedy that. Whether or not Sarkeesian has been the victim of crude and misogynistic online abuse is irrelevant; my addition was simply a presentation of how some people have negatively received her work. I point out again and again that this is how she's perceived by them, not how she actually is, or how I feel about her. Where you see plain violations, all I see is honest reporting of different viewpoints. --JackHeslop91 (talk) 02:26, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

You wrote opinion in Wikipedia's voice with profoundly unacceptable sourcing in a biography that has seen extensive trolling and outright defamation. Please read and understand WP:BLP: your comment above doesn't indicate an understanding of that policy. BLP doesn't preclude the inclusion of criticism, but it does clearly state that editors are entitled to insist on scrupulous adherence to policy: it was indeed a plain violation of BLP. For sourcing you need chapter and verse from specific coverage in major publications, not links to YouTube. The first two paragraphs of BLP contain the essence of the policy, which I don't see respected in the edit you made. Acroterion (talk) 02:32, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
For some context, see last night's [[WP:ANI#Nosepea68 and disruptive editing at Anita Sarkeesian-related topics]]. Note that I make no comparison of your good-faith edit to that user's behavior, but it's what's been going on, and the article gets close attention nowadays. If you're going to edit Sarkeesian's bio, you need to be scrupulous about sourcing, attribution of views, and preferably discuss it on the talkpae first. Acroterion (talk) 12:50, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Ah, okay. I understand. Sorry if I was defensive, and thank you for your time. --JackHeslop91 (talk) 05:52, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Continued promotional edits by Lepro2 despite your final warning[edit]

Lepro2 (talk · contribs) has continued to edit articles in a promotional manner even after you gave him or her a final warning (which itself came after two other editor gave warnings). Time to block for a bit? ElKevbo (talk) 07:00, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Rasta Rita[edit]

As I tried to edit the page concerning content related to Rasta Rita, It ws deleted. Should i create a new article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Youngwelsh (talkcontribs) 00:45, 16 July 2014 (UTC) No. You need to review the notability guidelines, as there was no indication that the subject was notable. Acroterion (talk) 00:56, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Talk:808s & Heartbreak[edit]

I think it's obvious sock between Special:Contributions/Postcodez and Special:Contributions/, both are doing on '‎Proposal to change the Genre' section non-stop. (talk) 12:16, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

I'll take a look at it when I get a chance. Acroterion (talk) 12:21, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Could be, but I don't see a sufficiently strong correlation right now to take action. However, do you see a possibility that these are related to MariaJaydHicky? Acroterion (talk) 14:36, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Edit filter change?[edit]

I saw your note on WP:ANI asking if an edit filter can be written to stop the India prostitution spammers. I've seen a couple of those accounts, too. I can add a few of the most used keywords into edit filter 466 so that at least the account will be flagged by Mr.Z-bot onto WP:AIV/TB2. Outright blocking is difficult with the format of the spam changing, but at least the bot will flag them and make it easier for everybody to deal with. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:28, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

I was having trouble too with figuring out a possible set of keywords: possibly a string of numbers of a given length plus "girls"? Acroterion (talk) 11:49, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
I made the change. It should flag a few of the accounts. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 03:20, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, I lack the skills to do that myself - I'd explode the wiki for certain. Acroterion (talk) 03:37, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
It has not flagged anything yet, but at least I didn't break the filter! -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:47, 21 July 2014 (UTC)


A bit late, but thank you for catching this and this. It's appreciated! Erebus Morgaine (Talk) 18:32, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

User talk:Siggasonswein[edit]

Assuming he doesn't remove my latest comment, I see no real sign that this user is ever going to contribute anything worthwhile to the project. For a supposed researcher, he doesn't even write well. At the same time, I hesitate to act unilaterally. Your approach has been much kinder than mine, which doesn't suprise me as my natural inclination with editors like him is blunt. If we could agree on a course of action, I'd feel more comfortable. I was tempted to remove his edits from the Wentbridge article, but that would eliminate any possiblity of administrative action on my part, so I'm hoping he will. I would see that as a small positive step. Your thoughts, as always, are welcome.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:10, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

I feel much the same way and was holding back from acting in the article for the same reasons. I was hoping he'd self-revert. Given the fact that he's abandoned the direct promotion I wanted to give him as much leeway as possible, and I figure we don't have to be in a hurry. I'm going to be spending the rest of the day doing house maintenance/improvement stuff, so I'll look in this evening to see if there's been any movement and if not will remove the material or heavily edit it, which will disqualify me from further administrative action. Acroterion (talk) 17:52, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
House maintenance stuff? That sounds worse than dealing with the user, but then I hate that kind of work. Some like it. I had some water damage to my house a few years ago, and it took me that long to fix the damage. I did fix the source of the problem immediately but then the repairs languished as I didn't want to deal with it. After a couple of weeks of chaos, though, the house looks much better. Still have to buy new carpeting, though. Hopefully, that won't take three years.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:59, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
Yard work and the continuing attic renovation, which I hope to complete by the end of summer. It's looking great, but there's a lot of trim to do, and no right angles, being under the roof. I'm always amused by movies that cast an architect as the protagonist so they have an excuse for a fabulous house. Most architects' house are permanently unfinished, or they've tried too many things out in one place, which they wouldn't do if they were under the discipline of working for a client. My house is the former case. Acroterion (talk) 18:12, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
I've reverted the entire Robin Hood digression, there's no good way to disentangle it. This [11] is an interesting development. Acroterion (talk) 02:24, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue C, July 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:47, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Speed record?[edit]

How did you delete Suck a salty hot fart out of my ass so quickly? I was tagging it for deletion, but the page was gone before I could save. Keep it up! Piguy101 (talk) 00:58, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

I happened to check the new pages queue, and there it was. Charming subject, creator blocked as not here to improve the encyclopedia. Acroterion (talk) 01:08, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you![edit]

Red Kitten 01.jpg

Here's a kitten for having to deal with that appalling streak of RD2/RD3-worthy edits on your talkpage.

AddWittyNameHere (talk) 01:18, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[edit]

Darkness Shines tells me this is likely a sock of Aldota. Usually edits from the 109 range. - is this related to the vandalism on this page? Dougweller (talk) 06:46, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

To the extent that both are using Venezuelan open proxy ranges, yes. However, 109/Aldota and 109/JarlaxlArtemis are on opposite sides of the fence in every other way. Acroterion (talk) 11:42, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I was about to leave (to do a Segway rough ground course) and didn't get a chance to investigate. If my 109 is Aldota then a longer block will be needed, I'll look into it - I'm not famliar with Aldota. Dougweller (talk) 13:23, 22 July 2014 (UTC)


Both accounts are the same edits like Rihanna and Imagine Dragons. Can you block both of them? (talk) 02:50, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

It's possible they're related, but not obvious, and I don't see cause to block either one at this time. If it becomes obvious that they are sockpuppet accounts one or both might be blocked. I should note also that most administrators don't like to be asked to block people unless there is blatant abuse: if you want to make a case for less obvious cases, you need to present clear evidence, not just a suspicion. Acroterion (talk) 02:58, 25 July 2014 (UTC)


Hello Acroterion, Have sent you a private email. Regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 08:32, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Move request[edit]

Hi, Acroterion. Per the rationale briefly discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Athletics#Minor question, would you be comfortable moving Belayneh Densamo to Belayneh Dinsamo? Thanks! Location (talk) 23:47, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Done, and I tidied the article spellings and added "Densamo" as an alternate spelling in the persondata. Acroterion (talk) 03:31, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! I'll try to get around to cleaning up the redirects, too. Cheers! Location (talk) 05:26, 1 August 2014 (UTC)