User talk:LuK3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
PC | UAA | AIV | RFPP | RFA | ACCG | BLP | New Pages | Filter Log | LOP | Teahouse | CSD Log | Feedback




The Tea Leaf - Issue Seven[edit]

Check out the Teahouse Genie Badge, awarded for solving issues on the Teahouse Wishlist.

Hello again! We have some neat updates about the Teahouse:

  • And...for all of your great work and all of the progress that you've helped the Teahouse make, we hereby award you the Host Badge:


Teahouse Host Badge Teahouse Host Badge
Awarded to hosts at the Wikipedia Teahouse.

Experienced editors with this badge have committed to welcoming guests, helping new editors, and upholding the standards of the Teahouse by giving friendly and patient guidance—at least for a time.

Hosts illuminate the path for new Wikipedians, like Tōrō in a Teahouse garden.

Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges
You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here

Thanks again! Ocaasi 01:55, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

The Tea Leaf - Issue Seven[edit]

Check out the Teahouse Easter Egg Badge, awarded for helpful suggestions about improving the Teahouse.
Check out the Teahouse Genie Badge, awarded for solving issues on the Teahouse Wishlist.

Hello again! We have some neat updates about the Teahouse:

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here

Thanks again! Ocaasi 02:21, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

New Article Feedback version available for testing[edit]

Hey all.

As promised, we've built a set of improvements to the Article Feedback Tool, which can be tested through the links here. Please do take the opportunity to play around with it, let me know of any bugs, and see what you think :).

A final reminder that the Request for Comment on whether AFT5 should be turned on on Wikipedia (and how) is soon to close; for those of you who have not submitted an opinion or !voted, it can be found here.

Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 19:19, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikiproject Articles for creation Needs You![edit]

WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive
AFC-Logo.svg

WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from March 1st, 2013 – March 31st, 2013.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 2000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

Delivered by User:EdwardsBot on behalf of Wikiproject Articles for Creation at 13:48, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

The Tea Leaf - Issue Seven (special Birthday recap)[edit]

A celebratory cupcake from the Teahouse Birthday Badge

It's been a full year since the Teahouse opened, and as we're reflecting on what's been accomplished, we wanted to celebrate with you.

Teahouse guests and hosts are sharing their stories in a new blog post about the project.

1 year statistics for Teahouse visitors compared to invited non-visitors from the pilot:

Metric Control group Teahouse group Contrast
Average retention (weeks with at least 1 edit) 5.02 weeks 8.57 weeks 1.7x retention
Average number of articles edited 58.7 articles 116.9 edits 2.0x articles edited
Average talk page edits 36.5 edits 85.6 edits 2.4x talk page edits
Average article space edits 129.6 edits 360.4 edits 2.8x article edits
Average total edits (all namespaces) 182.1 edits 532.4 edits 2.9x total edits

Over the past year almost 2000 questions have been asked and answered, 669 editors have introduced themselves, 1670 guests have been served, 867 experienced Wikipedians have participated in the project, and 137 have served as hosts. Read more project analysis in our CSCW 2013 paper

Last month January was our most active month so far! 78 profiles were created, 46 active hosts answered 263 questions, and 11 new hosts joined the project.

Come by the Teahouse to share a cup of tea and enjoy a Birthday Cupcake! Happy Birthday to the Teahouse and thank you for a year's worth of interest and support :-)

-- Ocaasi and the rest of the Teahouse Team 20:52, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To add or remove yourself for receiving future newsletters, please update the list here

The Teahouse Turns One![edit]

It's been an exciting year for the Teahouse and you were a part of it. Thanks so much for visiting, asking questions, sharing answers, being friendly and helpful, and just keeping Teahouse an awesome place. You can read more about the impact we're having and the reflections of other guests and hosts like you. Please come by the Teahouse to celebrate with us, and enjoy this sparkly cupcake badge as our way of saying thank you. And, Happy Birthday!


Teahouse First Birthday Badge Teahouse First Birthday Badge
Awarded to everyone who participated in the Wikipedia Teahouse during its first year!

To celebrate the many hosts and guests we've met and the nearly 2000 questions asked and answered during this excellent first year, we're giving out this tasty cupcake badge.

Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges
--Ocaasi and the rest of the Teahouse Team 22:42, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

A cookie for you![edit]

Choco chip cookie.png sorry you have to go through that, have a cookie :) //iXavier <talk/edits/logs> 02:21, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Xavier, I appreciate it :). -- LuK3 (Talk) 03:21, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry but it has gotten to my attention that you are unaware it is April Fool's day. Get a calender or something. Phony Historian (talk) 23:28, 1 April 2013 (UTC) prefix:User talk:LuK3/

You must be unaware of policies and guidelines while editing Wikipedia. Please read them. -- LuK3 (Talk) 23:30, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

I rather not... Phony Historian (talk) 23:33, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain[edit]

Thanks for contacting me on my talk page. The reason for the edit I made at the Metal Gear Solid V article was due to the splitting of the article, into both Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain and Metal Gear Solid: Ground Zeroes. Please see the talk page for further detail. 198.91.223.178 (talk) 14:31, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. In the future, please state what you were doing in the edit summary. -- LuK3 (Talk) 14:33, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Corey Lee[edit]

I received a message on a change you did on Corey Lee, what was it exactly that you did not find constructive? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1remains (talkcontribs) 21:01, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

An IP address changed the subject's name. It had nothing to do with any of your edits. I just rollbacked the edit to your version. -- LuK3 (Talk) 21:04, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw someone changed the data. I added another data to fill out some more, thanks for the inquiring on the change and notifying me.

U.A.N Entertainment Group[edit]

Thanks for the Feedback, However, I'm not sure what you mean about advertising or promotional talk on the page? What kind of revisions need to be made in order to not make it seem like an ad or promotional? Thanks :) Uanentgroup (talk) 00:54, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello! Wikipedia has policies that prohibits the promoting of an outside organization. If your group or company is notable enough to have a standalone article, another WIkipedia will write it. We also discourage editing article that you have a connection with. Thanks! -- LuK3 (Talk) 00:58, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

This isn't my company, That's the user name I created to make the article. This company is very notable in the Music Industry. You didn't answer my question though. Would removing the Future tour information remove the notion of a promotional or advertising article? Uanentgroup (talk) 01:04, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Eddie Murphy change[edit]

Hi I'm Eddie's personal friends brother Roger Jamison. "Big Daddy" is correct. When I was with him in LA, he asked people to refer to him as Big Daddy and it was a name that seemed to stick. I'm sorry if you thin this is wrong but I have to disagree. He would recognize it and find it amusing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.17.148.236 (talk) 02:11, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia's policies on verifiability, original research, and vandalism before editing. -- LuK3 (Talk) 02:15, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Share the Cookies[edit]

Christmas Cookies Plateful.JPG Here's a plate full of cookies to share!
Hi LuK3, here are some delicious cookies to help brighten your day! However, there are too many cookies here for one person to eat all at once, so please share these cookies with at least two other editors by copying {{subst:Sharethecookies}} to their talk pages. Enjoy! AutomaticStrikeout  ?  22:58, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject AFC needs your help... again[edit]

WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive
AFC-Logo.svg

WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from July 1st, 2013 – July 31st, 2013.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1000 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

A new version of our AfC helper script is released! It includes many bug fixes, new improvements and features, code cleanup, and more page cleanups. If you want to see a full list of changes, go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Helper script/Development page. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks.

Delivered at 12:53, 19 June 2013 (UTC) by EdwardsBot (talk), on behalf of WikiProject AFC

Alan Wake[edit]

hey man someone needs to fix the alan wake page... the whole story is completely wrong, and entirely different from what actually takes place in the game.... I edited it so people would become aware that its false....

its better to NOT have any information, than to have FALSE or FAKED information.. (story)

please fix it.

(24.147.206.10 (talk) 01:24, 29 June 2013 (UTC))

The article is not the place to say the information is wrong, that's what the article's talk page is for. Please post your concern there. -- LuK3 (Talk) 01:28, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Derrick Drop Braxton Page[edit]

You edited the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derrick_Drop_Braxton page, removing information that is correct, and non-opionated, which also cited a reference. This individual is a con artist, and is using his wikipedia page to add legitimacy to his cons. If you look through the history of the wikipedia entry, and see the posts that have been made, then removed, you can see that I'm not the only person who is trying to help other people from conned.

Just because it is information that could potentially make somebody look bad, it doesn't automatically mean that it is false. Would the same edit have been made if I had said that he is proficient on the piano instead of saying that he likes to con innocent people? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.175.5.253 (talk) 00:46, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Your Twitter source that you listed is not a reliable source. All information, especially information about the biographies of living persons, have to adhere to Wikipedia's policies on verifiability, original research, and neutral point of view. The source you put is not reliable, as I cannot find another source that backs up your claim. -- LuK3 (Talk) 00:54, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

iTunes changes[edit]

The bloatware section was basically opinion and the last sentence of the security section had been citationless for months. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.246.214.161 (talk) 01:30, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Jacklabs[edit]

Excuse me Luk3 but I noticed how you keep tagging my page for speedy deletion.If you have any ideas on how I can make it up to status please tell.

Please read this article about creating an article. -- LuK3 (Talk) 20:39, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you![edit]

Export hell seidel steiner.png  :) George wang ping (talk) 01:49, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey dont delete my wiki page plz

Σαμψών[edit]

I revoked his talk page access. I had actually thought of doing that as part of the original block, but a combination of giving him the benefit of the doubt and thinking he'd do it anyway and justify it held me back. I see I was right. Daniel Case (talk) 04:06, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

IRC office hours for wiki-mentors and Snuggle users[edit]

Hi. We're organizing an office hours session with the Teahouse to bring in mentors from across the wiki to try out Snuggle and discuss it's potential to support mentorship broadly. The Snuggle team would appreciate it if you would come and participate in the discussion. We'll be having it in #wikimedia-officeconnect on Wed. July 17th @ 1600 UTC. See the agenda for more info. --EpochFail(talkwork), Technical 13 (talk), TheOriginalSoni (talk) 18:28, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail![edit]

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, LuK3. Please check your email – you've got mail!
Message added 02:19, 13 July 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

AutomaticStrikeout  ?  02:19, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Fascism[edit]

Hi, thanks for the note. I have been trying to correct several aspects of the fascism entry. It's odd to be accused of partisanship because my initial impulse a while back was to correct partisanship. I sensed someone on the political right was trying to make fascism and communism seem the same. Words like "proletarian" were used for fascism when they rightly belong with communism. I'm still not fully comfortable with words like "totalitarian" and "vanguard party" because those words usually go with stalinism and leninism. Fascists NEVER referred to themselves as a "vanguard party." I also am trying to correct the political science perspective on fascism by broadening the definition to include social, cultural, and historical elements of its genesis and physiology. Fascism arose in reaction to socialism, anarchism, and communism in history. The political science perspective tends to be ahistorical and abstract. It says "fascism is anti-liberal and anti-socialist" in the abstract, but it leaves out the narrative or historical story of fascism's birth in antagonism to the leftist movements. You can either say, abstractly, "fascism is x, y and x" or you can say "fascism existed in history and arose in reaction to ..." Both are true and both need to be said. But we historians feel the second historical account is as important as the political scientist's more abstract definition. Later in the entry, some of that history emerges, but at no point was anyone saying what lots of us in history notice, and that is that fascism by definition was a historical reaction to socialism and communism. There were fights on the streets on particular dates. It was not all about abstract concepts and ideas. As for "essayistic," one person's accurate account of facts is another person's essay. I am adding new material to cover aspects of fascism that have so far been left out, and they have been left out by people who tend to write, again, in political science jargon. PS focuses on certain things and leaves out others that are important such as culture and history. They are also essential to include for those trying to understand fascism. And that may appear "essayistic" to someone trained to write in PS style. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mryan1451 (talkcontribs) 15:04, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Original material[edit]

Thanks for drawing that to my attention. I will remove and replace with some of the original sources.

Please also be specific about what aspects of my corrections to the Fascism entry strike you as non-neutral.

We historians see fascism as a rightwing movement that arose in reaction to socialism, anarchism, and communism. It was anti-liberal, anti-modern, and reactionary.

Nothing I say departs from received wisdom in our profession. It may seem new to the Fascism entry community, because I get the sense the entry so far has been largely overseen and written by Political Scientists.

Time for a bit of historical conceptualization. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mryan1451 (talkcontribs) 15:13, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Leah Remini[edit]

You had asked why I removed some text from the page of Leah Remini. This was because the text I removed was text I added. After I added the text I noticed that someone else had removed similar text because it was referenced from the gossip page of the NY Post and therefore was not reliable. Rather than getting into a fight about the reliability of the NY Post I simply removed the text I added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.179.21.226 (talk) 21:16, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

As you suggest I created an ID. Tgpaul1958 (talk) 21:19, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Fascism 2[edit]

Hi,

I will be rewriting the Fascism entry to make it more historical and more balanced and to take recent scholarship by feminist scholars and cultural historians into account. Now, that material is left out.

You should be aware that the F entry now seems tendentious. It strives to make F seem a movement that is unlocatable politically, but as any historian will tell you, it is a rightwing movement. I'm not sure why the current drafters of the entry want to avoid saying that.

I was first drawn to this entry because it seemed completely off the charts. It seemed written by conservatives determined to sever the historical link between conservatism and Fascism and to make F seem a movement of the left rather than the right--a truly bizarre interpretation at odds with all historiography on the movement. I managed to get the worst of this tendentiousness removed with an earlier revision, but there are elements of this thinking still in the entry.

So if someone says I am being "partisan" by revising the entry to make it more balanced, what they mean is that their tendentiousness is being challenged by someone who wants historical accuracy regarding the movement and a balanced perspective on it.

I will strive to emulate the neutral style, but be aware that in this entry as currently written, the neutral style conceals historical inaccuracies. By correcting them, I am not being "not neutral."

I will let you know when I have the revision ready.

cheers, MR — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mryan1451 (talkcontribs) 05:20, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

You may want to drop a note on the talk page to let editors know. -- LuK3 (Talk) 13:12, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Proposed Fascism revision[edit]

Dear Administrator,

Here is a proposed new version of the Fascism entry.

I have tried to rectify certain shortcomings in the existing version.

Here they are:

1. Absence of organization

Written over time by different people, entries can become disorganized. This one needs an organizing thesis sentence such as the one I propose:

"Fascism is the name assumed by an Italian political movement (1927-1945), a way of characterizing a cluster of similar pre-WW2 political movements in Europe, and a term used to describe certain governments since WW2 that share fascist traits."

Then move into the definition.

2. The problem of definition

The current definition is written by a political scientist. It characterizes fascism as an abstract category ("revolutionary nationalism") and leaves out the historical definition of fascism. To historians, what distinguishes fascism--what gives it its specific identity--is not "nationalism." That is a characteristic, but it is not the defining trait. In the early 20th century, people argued mainly over whether to be socialist, communist, anarchist, liberal, conservative, revolutionary conservative, or fascist. Each had its own characteristics. One of the traits of fascism, true, was nationalism, and it was radical and authoritarian. But what distinguished it and gave it an identity very different from the other political movements of the time was that it was "a rightwing revolutionary political movement." One can then add characteristics such as "nationalist," "chauvinist," "elitist," "authoritarian," etc. If you look at the Wikipedia entry for "Revolutionary Conservatism," you will see an excellent example of a definition that is done properly. I recommend it as a model here.

So here is what I propose:

"Fascism in the early 20th century was a rightwing revolutionary political movement . It was characterized by nationalism, racism, authoritarianism, elitism, and the use of violence to attain political ends. It arose in response to the various leftwing movements of the time such as socialism, anarchism, and communism. It sought to turn back what it perceived to be the tide of democracy, liberalism, egalitarianism, cultural radicalism, and race mixing that characterized European society in the early 20th century. In Germany and Italy it sought to restore a previous era of national glory such as the Reich or the Roman Imperium. Fascists were hostile to cultural modernization and called for a restoration of conservative social values and institutions such as the patriarchal family, the church, and the ideal of motherhood or 'Kinder, Kuche, Kirche'."

Then launch into the other characteristics such as the emphasis on the state and the leader.

This new definition that I am proposing is better because it is historical, yet it preserves the political scientists' categories. It strikes me as a good compromise. It also takes into account more recent work by cultural historians and feminist historians who have drawn attention to the cultural and gender dimension of fascism. We should not assume that fascism was ONLY a political movement.

About the use of the word "rightwing" in my definition. I was first drawn to this entry because I noticed it was written by someone who wished to confuse the difference between communism and fascism. That is to be expected. People on the political right would want to score points against those on the political left by labelling them "fascist" and suggesting there was no difference between the two movements. But it is bad scholarship and worse encyclopedia writing.

I rewrote the entry and deleted the worst of those confusions. Those revisions were accepted although the entry was then rewritten--this time by a competent political scientist. And some of the tendentious attempt to confuse left and right, communism and fascism remains. It is most obvious in the sections that portray fascism as unlocatable politically. Those sections imply, still, that fascism might be a phenomenon of the left rather than the right. Those sections are inaccurate and historically unjustifiable. The most egregious is based on no scholarship and on complete supposition. It should be removed in its entirety. This version below deletes it.

The other scholars who have worked on the entry have persisted in not naming the political character of fascism. But if you ask historians, 100% of them would say right off the bat that fascism is rightwing rather than leftwing. Indeed, their jaws would be on the floor if anyone suggested it was leftwing. So that aspect of the entry still needs to be addressed. The entry needs to state honestly and accurately that fascism was rightwing.

Here is a short section I feel should be deleted because it makes dubious claims unjustified by sources.

"A number of historians have regarded fascism either as a revolutionary centrist doctrine, as a doctrine which mixes philosophies of the left and the right, or as both of those things.[1][2] Fascism was founded during World War I by Italian national syndicalists who combined left-wing and right-wing political views."

The paragraph mentions historians but does not provide references. This is a controversial claim and should be substantiated if it is to be allowed in. It is also redundant and repeats a sentence a few lines up.

I have deleted it in the proposed version below.

3. Details

The entry as it stands has great material, but much is lacking such as an account of fascism in Spain from 1936 to 1976.

I will try to get some history colleagues to address these shortcomings.

In the mean time, here is the proposed revision.

I have strained to be neutral and non-essayistic

My one significant deletion is the short paragraph mentioned above. Otherwise, I have preserved or reworded slightly--mainly near the start of the entry.

My suggested revisions are concentrated on the introduction (trying to organize better and to clarify the definition of fascism) and on those sections that try to muddy the waters by suggesting fascism was leftwing rather than rightwing.

Thanks for taking the time.

MR

Definition of Fascism[edit]

Hello again,

I am the writer who has been trying to get the Fascism entry in line with established scholarship on the political movement.

One of my primary objections to the current entry is that it attempts to avoid naming the political character of the movement by avoiding the word "rightwing."

Here is the definition of fascism one finds on the Oxford English Dictionary:

noun an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.

(in general use) extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.

Here is the definition of fascism one finds using Google:

fascism [ˈfæʃɪzəm] n (sometimes capital) 1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) any ideology or movement inspired by Italian Fascism, such as German National Socialism; any right-wing nationalist ideology or movement with an authoritarian and hierarchical structure that is fundamentally opposed to democracy and liberalism 2. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) any ideology, movement, programme, tendency, etc., that may be characterized as right-wing, chauvinist, authoritarian, etc.

Please note that the word "rightwing" occurs in each of the definitions twice. That also should be the case with the Wikipedia entry. It is inappropriate for the current writer both to avoid the word in the primary definition. That avoidance allows him to suggest that the movement might be leftwing, something that is unacceptable in terms of established scholarship.

If you compare definitions by conservative and liberal writers online, you will see immediately that the current writer of the Wikipedia Fascism entry fits into the conservative category. His avoidance of the word "rightwing" is symptomatic of that perspective. Like the writer of the Wikipedia entry, conservative writers emphasize statism, avoid defining fascism as a rightwing phenomenon, and suggest that fascism is in fact a version of leftist socialism.

Other writers cite fascism's statism, but they add the kind of contextual historical material I have been suggesting is needed.

Here is an example of an historically informed writer on Fascism:

"Fascism - definition

A totalitarian philosophy of government that glorifies the state and nation and assigns to the state control over every aspect of national life. The name was first used by the party started by Benito Mussolini , who ruled Italy from 1922 until the Italian defeat in World War II. However, it has also been applied to similar ideologies in other countries, e.g., to National Socialism in Germany and to the regime of Francisco Franco in Spain.

Origins of Fascism

While socialism (particularly Marxism) came into existence as a clearly formulated theory or program based on a specific interpretation of history, fascism introduced no systematic exposition of its ideology or purpose other than a negative reaction against socialist and democratic egalitarianism. The growth of democratic ideology and popular participation in politics in the 19th cent. was terrifying to some conservative elements in European society, and fascism grew out of the attempt to counter it by forming mass parties based largely on the middle classes and the petty bourgeoisie, exploiting their fear of political domination by the lower classes. Forerunners of fascism, such as Georges Boulanger in France and Adolf Stöker and Karl Lueger in Germany and Austria, in their efforts to gain political power played on people's fears of revolution with its subsequent chaos, anarchy, and general insecurity. They appealed to nationalist sentiments and prejudices, exploited anti-Semitism , and portrayed themselves as champions of law, order, Christian morality, and the sanctity of private property."

When I made these same points in one of my earlier suggestions for revision, you branded them as partisan. Please note that the entry above is one of the first one encounters online if one searches for definitions of Fascism. Such information regarding Fascism only appears partisan in the context of the very tendentious entry we now have on Wikipedia.

I append the example of the conservative version of Fascism after my salutation. If you compare it with our Wikipedia entry on Fascism, you will see a similar tendentiousness in the avoidance of the term rightwing, the emphasis on statism, and the suggestion that Fascism is leftwing socialism.

Please get back to me about all of this at mmcaravaggio@gmail.com.

Thanks.

MR mryan1451

1. Conservative entry on Fascism (from the Library of Economics and Liberty)

"As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer. The word derives from fasces, the Roman symbol of collectivism and power: a tied bundle of rods with a protruding ax. In its day (the 1920s and 1930s), fascism was seen as the happy medium between boom-and-bust-prone liberal capitalism, with its alleged class conflict, wasteful competition, and profit-oriented egoism, and revolutionary Marxism, with its violent and socially divisive persecution of the bourgeoisie. Fascism substituted the particularity of nationalism and racialism—“blood and soil”—for the internationalism of both classical liberalism and Marxism. Where socialism sought totalitarian control of a society’s economic processes through direct state operation of the means of production, fascism sought that control indirectly, through domination of nominally private owners. Where socialism nationalized property explicitly, fascism did so implicitly, by requiring owners to use their property in the “national interest”—that is, as the autocratic authority conceived it. (Nevertheless, a few industries were operated by the state.) Where socialism abolished all market relations outright, fascism left the appearance of market relations while planning all economic activities. Where socialism abolished money and prices, fascism controlled the monetary system and set all prices and wages politically. In doing all this, fascism denatured the marketplace. Entrepreneurship was abolished. State ministries, rather than consumers, determined what was produced and under what conditions.

Fascism is to be distinguished from interventionism, or the mixed economy. Interventionism seeks to guide the market process, not eliminate it, as fascism did. Minimum-wage and antitrust laws, though they regulate the free market, are a far cry from multiyear plans from the Ministry of Economics.

Under fascism, the state, through official cartels, controlled all aspects of manufacturing, commerce, finance, and agriculture. Planning boards set product lines, production levels, prices, wages, working conditions, and the size of firms. Licensing was ubiquitous; no economic activity could be undertaken without government permission. Levels of consumption were dictated by the state, and “excess” incomes had to be surrendered as taxes or “loans.” The consequent burdening of manufacturers gave advantages to foreign firms wishing to export. But since government policy aimed at autarky, or national self-sufficiency, protectionism was necessary: imports were barred or strictly controlled, leaving foreign conquest as the only avenue for access to resources unavailable domestically. Fascism was thus incompatible with peace and the international division of labor—hallmarks of liberalism.

Fascism embodied corporatism, in which political representation was based on trade and industry rather than on geography. In this, fascism revealed its roots in syndicalism, a form of socialism originating on the left. The government cartelized firms of the same industry, with representatives of labor and management serving on myriad local, regional, and national boards—subject always to the final authority of the dictator’s economic plan. Corporatism was intended to avert unsettling divisions within the nation, such as lockouts and union strikes. The price of such forced “harmony” was the loss of the ability to bargain and move about freely.

To maintain high employment and minimize popular discontent, fascist governments also undertook massive public-works projects financed by steep taxes, borrowing, and fiat money creation. While many of these projects were domestic—roads, buildings, stadiums—the largest project of all was militarism, with huge armies and arms production.

The fascist leaders’ antagonism to communism has been misinterpreted as an affinity for capitalism. In fact, fascists’ anticommunism was motivated by a belief that in the collectivist milieu of early-twentieth-century Europe, communism was its closest rival for people’s allegiance. As with communism, under fascism, every citizen was regarded as an employee and tenant of the totalitarian, party-dominated state. Consequently, it was the state’s prerogative to use force, or the threat of it, to suppress even peaceful opposition.

If a formal architect of fascism can be identified, it is Benito Mussolini, the onetime Marxist editor who, caught up in nationalist fervor, broke with the left as World War I approached and became Italy’s leader in 1922. Mussolini distinguished fascism from liberal capitalism in his 1928 autobiography:

The citizen in the Fascist State is no longer a selfish individual who has the anti-social right of rebelling against any law of the Collectivity. The Fascist State with its corporative conception puts men and their possibilities into productive work and interprets for them the duties they have to fulfill. (p. 280)

Before his foray into imperialism in 1935, Mussolini was often praised by prominent Americans and Britons, including Winston Churchill, for his economic program.

Similarly, Adolf Hitler, whose National Socialist (Nazi) Party adapted fascism to Germany beginning in 1933, said:

The state should retain supervision and each property owner should consider himself appointed by the state. It is his duty not to use his property against the interests of others among his own people. This is the crucial matter. The Third Reich will always retain its right to control the owners of property. (Barkai 1990, pp. 26–27)

Both nations exhibited elaborate planning schemes for their economies in order to carry out the state’s objectives." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mryan1451 (talkcontribs) 07:13, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Fascism entry revision[edit]

Dear Administrator,

In reviewing different online definitions of Fascism last night, I came to see that the writer of the Wikipedia Fascism entry is clearly within the libertarian vein of discourse on the topic. This makes the entry inaccurate and skewed in some respects, especially at the beginning.

Once again, I was first drawn to this entry because I noticed it was being used for propaganda. Two years ago, the writer was almost explicitly claiming "fascism is communism; they are the same thing." I protested then and succeeded in getting him to back down.

But I see now, having done more research on how libertarians write about fascism online, that he persists in misrepresenting the topic for propaganda ends in more subtle ways.

I summarize those propagandistic misrepresentations here:

1. He leaves out the word "rightwing" in his definition of fascism even though most scholars see it as rightwing.

2. He makes fascism appear to be a case of Big Statism. Other writers define fascism in different terms. They emphasize nationalism, race theory, economic corporatism, etc.

3. He uses words like "vanguard party" that belong with Leninism.

4. He characterizes fascism as possibly interchangeable with leftwing socialism.

5. He ignores its historical roots in 19th century rightist thought and says it emerges from socialism.

With these new insights in mind, I propose a second revision below. This takes the place of the one sent you yesterday. I request you read this for neutrality of tone and other criteria. I suggest that you then post it on the Fascism site and see how the community responds. For now, I will leave out references that would require me to go to the university library. If you indicate you feel the revised entry is okay, then I will fill in the references. But for now I'd rather not put in that time till I hear back from you.

What I have done in this revision:

1. Diminished the emphasis on statism. Fascism was dictatorial and engaged in state terror, but the writer overemphasizes this aspect of it seemingly for propaganda ends.

2. Eliminated words like "vanguard party" that are not usually used for fascism but are usually used for leninism. This diminishes the propaganda element of the current entry.

3. Removed the attempt to confuse leftwing socialism and rightwing fascism. Same reason as above.

4. Emphasized recent scholarship that is more historical in character regarding the origins of fascism.

Once again, my revisions are almost entirely in the introductory section of the entry.

Thanks for taking the time.

mryan1451 mmcaravaggio@gmail.com

Here is the proposed revision:

Notice[edit]

Information icon Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Inactive account creators. Thank you. Dusti*Let's talk!* 07:43, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail![edit]

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, LuK3. Please check your email – you've got mail!
Message added 19:38, 14 August 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.

ΛΧΣ21 19:38, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Replied. -- LuK3 (Talk) 20:02, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

did you watch the game buddy? having favoured Aston Villa throughout the whole game, including a penalty that was not even controversial as it was clear that Koscielny made blatant contact with the ball before contact with the player, leading to an Aston Villa penalty which put Arsenal behind, not only was the penalty given, but a red card was also given to the player who made the fair tackle, thus bringing Arsenal down to 10 men, which, most definitely, allowed Aston Villa to score their 3rd goal. As for the rest of the game, Taylor consistently made biased decisions that favoured Aston Villa, and if you dont like the term 'biased', then it only really points to Taylor's being completely out-of-touch and lack of decision making, the amount of tackles Aston Villa made from behind was shocking, in fact I do believe the only time a yellow card was given to an Aston Villa player, Jack Wilshere was also given a yellow card for his reaction to the initial tackle made by the Aston Villa player. may I also point out the seemingly biased decisions made in a previous game in which he reffed, which is stated in your article of Taylor. cheers.

           Heres are those squiggly things.

Epicfail4u (talk) 16:50, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

No I did not watch the game. I did read, however, Wikipedia's policy on vandalism and the biographies of living people. I think you should take a glance at that. -- LuK3 (Talk) 17:30, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Million Award[edit]

Million award logo.svg The Million Award
For your contributions to bring The Walking Dead (TV series) (estimated annual readership: 7,093,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers. -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:38, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Wikipedia:Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox:

Million award logo.svg This user won the Million Award for bringing The Walking Dead (TV series) to Good Article status.


If I've made any error in this listing, please don't hesitate to correct it; if for any reason you don't feel you deserve it, please don't hesitate to remove it; if you know of any other editor who merits one of these awards, please don't hesitate to give it; if you yourself deserve another award from any of the three tiers, please don't hesitate to take it! Cheers and all best, -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:38, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Jackass Presents: Bad Grandpa[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 08:04, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

October 2013 AFC Backlog elimination drive[edit]

WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive
AFC-Logo.svg

WikiProject AFC is holding a one month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from October 1st, 2013 – October 31st, 2013.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1500 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

A new version of our AfC helper script is released! It includes many bug fixes, new improvements and features, code enhancements, and more. If you want to see a full list of changes, visit the changelog. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks. --Mdann52talk to me!

This newsletter was delivered on behalf of WPAFC by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:17, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Personal attack from anonymous editor[edit]

Hello LuK3. I just wanted to inform you that anonymous editor 113.197.9.146 made an attack towards you on their talk page. I've reverted this and reported the editor to AIV. Best regards to you! ChaseAm (talk) 01:28, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Much appreciated, ChaseAm! I've seen many personal attacks, but nothing like that before. -- LuK3 (Talk) 01:44, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Erstwhile Records[edit]

Did you mean to revert me on Erstwhile Records? Jackmcbarn (talk) 23:31, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

My mistake, I meant to revert the editor who kept undoing your edits. -- LuK3 (Talk) 23:32, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 28[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Typhoon Haiyan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Madonna (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) 09:00, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

RfA[edit]

Hi LuK. I hope you haven't forgotten me! I told you a while ago that I would be willing to nominate you when you felt that the concerns of your first RfA were solved. Is that time here? :) — ΛΧΣ21 21:53, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Hey Hahc, I didn't forget you. Unfortunately, the next few weeks will be very busy for me with finals, papers, etc. Perhaps over my long winter break, I'll consider it. Thanks. -- LuK3 (Talk) 22:01, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply, noted. Good luck in the finals :) — ΛΧΣ21 22:05, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

AFC Backlog Drive[edit]

WikiProject Articles for creation Backlog Elimination Drive[edit]

AFC-Logo.svg

Hello, LuK3:

WikiProject AFC is holding a two month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from December 1st, 2013 – January 31st, 2014.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1500 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

A new version of our AfC helper script has been released! It includes many bug fixes, new improvements and features, code enhancements, and more. If you want to see a full list of changes, visit the changelog. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks. EdwardsBot (talk) 09:10, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) at 09:10, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Attempted vandalism by 131.111.224.170[edit]

Dear LuK3, I'm impressed how fast you caught the anonymous attempt to sneak in a non-legit bio to replace an existing one with same 1st & surname, but diff middle initials. This is below-the-belt. Just a couple questions of curiosity for me, an infrequent editor -- 1. How did you catch them so fast? Is there some kind of alert function on that page? If so, all pages should have such alert. 2. I tried to see this IP's contribution list to see if there may be other vandalism, but apparently there is no such list for anonymous user. Much obliged, --QES girl (talk) 17:16, 4 December 2013 (UTC)QES_girl

Hey QES girl, I'll be happy to answer your questions. I usually watch the edit filter log to see if any edits trip any edit filters. I sort through them and revert obvious vandalism and other issues, like BLP violations and alike. You can see that IP's contributions here: Special:Contributions/131.111.224.170. If you want to see other user's contributions, just replace that IP with another IP or a username, like Special:Contributions/QES_girl. I hope this helps, if you have other questions, feel free to ask. -- LuK3 (Talk) 17:50, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanx for education. Much obliged. --172.250.72.85 (talk) 04:29, 5 December 2013 (UTC)QES_girl
PS. I found out more about that misdeed, which was probably not as sinister as I thought. There is a namesake on the Cambridge page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_of_Architecture,_University_of_Cambridge#Distinguished_Alumni, that people tried to create a profile for, because it's catch22 that he is supposed to have a profile to qualify for the notable list. Pls see if there is some way to help those students or alumni, otherwise some naive student will try to do it again for their proud alma mater.--QES girl (talk) 17:20, 19 December 2013 (UTC)QES_girl

A barnstar for you![edit]

Writers Barnstar Hires.png The Writer's Barnstar
Thank you for the three important GAs you helped to promote. Great work! Երևանցի talk 01:07, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Much appreciated Yerevantsi, thank you! -- LuK3 (Talk) 01:16, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Hunter Moore Protection[edit]

I was going to ask for protection for Hunter Moore, but looks like you beat me by a couple minutes! Thanks, man! SirkablaamTalk 02:44, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Sorry about that, and thank you! :) -- LuK3 (Talk) 02:45, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you![edit]

Kitten in a helmet.jpg

You beat me to the punch on a few csd tags keep up the good work!

Jguard18 Critique Me 01:38, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! Keep up the good work as well. -- LuK3 (Talk) 01:40, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

KLM[edit]

Hi! I have been editing the entire article, I have been restructuring everything accordingly. Just been forgetting to include it in the summary. Everything else was present on the page just editing the structure according the Air France article as it is much more cleaner than the KLM article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GreenPanther1234 (talkcontribs) 03:42, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello Luk3. Can you please tell me what I did wrong when creating the Akron Digital Academy wiki. I was in no way meaning to advertise the school. I was only stating the facts of the school and it's model. Any help would be appreciated. Also, can I continue to edit this page and create this page from scratch? (Nooch1682 (talk) 18:26, 13 February 2014 (UTC))

Hello Nooch, I reinstated the speedy deletion tag for a couple of reasons. First, the userpage and username is a violation of WP:UP#PROMO and WP:ORGNAME, respectively. Usernames and userpages are not used for promotional purposes. Second, users should generally not remove speedy deletion templates. If you feel that the deletion was unjust, please go to Wikipedia:Deletion review, however I highly doubt an administrator will reinstate the userpage. I hope this helps. -- LuK3 (Talk) 18:37, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, it does! I appreciate you teaching me the ways as I am new! :) (Nooch1682 (talk) 19:18, 13 February 2014 (UTC))

No problem, if you have any other questions, feel free to ask! -- LuK3 (Talk) 19:19, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on changes to the AfC mailing list[edit]

Hello LuK3! There is a discussion that your input is requested on! I look forward to your comments, thoughts, opinions, criticisms, and questions!

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page.

This message was composed and sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of {{U|Technical 13}} (tec) 18:18, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

I THOUGHT IT WOULD HAVE NOT DELETED BUT THANKS FOR PUTTING IT BACK LUK — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.33.132.13 (talk) 03:27, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Jets23615 (talk) 09:50, 28 April 2014 (UTC)== Stevie "Keys" Roseman ==

Hi LuK3, thank you for noticing and removing the vandalism on Stevie" Keys" Roseman's page back on 8/15/13. That kind of behavior is very strange and glad that you guys know it when you see it. In the past I have tried to help provide some content for his page as well as other musicians that have been involved with the band Journey.

Is his Wiki page able to be expanded with a current picture of the artist? There is a link however nothing shows up on the page when you click. Also I noticed that he has written and recorded several additional projects in the past several years with very well known artists as well as his own band live which are not listed. If a given project needs verification with a link, how does that work?

Since I have no clue how you guys do this, how does one go about adding important information to keep the page relevant? Is this something that you can accomplish or if someone else reads this post and knows how would they possibly take it on? I noticed that there have been numerous Wiki editors involved over the past four or five years however the protocol is not something I understand as I'm not an editor.

Thank you so much in advance,

jJets23615 (talk) 06:59, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Hey Jets. I also thought the edit was very odd and concerning. The edit was a blatant violation of Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living people. Thank you for expanding articles related to Journey. Your contributions are greatly appreciated. I added the {{update}} template to alert any editor to added relevant up-to-date information. As for a picture of Roseman, as long as a picture is either in the public domain or released under a free license, you can add it to the article. If you have any more questions, feel free to ask. -- LuK3 (Talk) 13:05, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
I will try sometime this week. I'll let you know when I make some changes. -- LuK3 (Talk) 00:30, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi LuK3, I attempted to add a modern public domain picture of Stevie however it's not showing up. I really don't know what I'm doing and don't want to screw anything up. I really would like to contribute to Wiki as I am good at doing the research, thanks for your nice comment. . Is there anyway I could provide some content to you (or someone else) who might be able to help? It probably wouldn't take very long. Let me know, thank you. Jets23615 (talk) 11:37, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

That will be no problem. Just provide me a link to the image and I'll verify the copyright information for you. -- LuK3 (Talk) 13:34, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks LuK3, enclosed (hopefully) is a page with a modern image. The Hammond B-3 organ is his specialty amongst other talents. Also enclosed are a couple of more links to help expand. I don't know what's usable or what's not so I'm pleased that someone knows what they're doing.

https://myspace.com/steviekeysroseman http://www.nonationmusic.com/stevie.htm http://www.last.fm/music/Ross+Valory,+George+Tickner,+Stevie+Roseman/VTR http://www.musicstreetjournal.com/index_cdreviews_display.cfm?id=103727

Thanks so much.Jets23615 (talk) 11:13, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately it looks like those photos are copyrighted. -- LuK3 (Talk) 16:11, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

If the owner of the copyrighted photo is amenable to having it used how does that process work? Also - can the previous links be used to expand the article? Thanks. Jets23615 (talk) 03:55, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

You can direct the copyright holder to [1] and they can contact the OTRS team and they'll handle the licensing of the image. -- LuK3 (Talk) 11:24, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello LuK3, have contacted who we believe to be the copyright holder of that image and gave him the above link you provided. Hopefully we'll hear from him in a timely fashion. Are you willing to help expand the page a bit? Let me know if you can, what type of content is acceptable for verification, etc. We could sure use some help from you. Thanks much. (Jets23615 (talk) 18:21, 14 April 2014 (UTC))

I'll try to help a bit, the next few weeks will be very busy for me. -- LuK3 (Talk) 20:46, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

LuK3, that would be great as I know you are busy. Appreciate the previous assistance above and if we can start with a few simple corrections let me know what you suggest. Hypertext references within the article should already be verifiable. There are other verifiable references within the article that for some reason are not in hypertext? Would like you to make a couple of changes immediately so other editors know where this is going if that's ok with you, thanks so much. Jets23615 (talk) 00:27, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

LuK3, Jets has my full permission to use my image of He and his Hammond on his Wiki page. Thanks, WM — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.210.131.2 (talk) 22:06, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi LuK3, per above permission has been granted for the before mentioned image. Please let me know if you have time to update and help expand this page. I realize you are in school and busy, thanks much. (Jets23615 (talk) 23:41, 23 April 2014 (UTC))

I probably won't be able to update the page in the next two weeks due to finals and such. You can try updating it yourself and I'll try to take a look at it for you. -- LuK3 (Talk) 23:59, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

I do not know how to update or add a photo. As already mentioned it is much appreciated that you noticed the previous vandalism and eliminated it. Now the page needs attention with expansion - additional discography references, photo and the outdated tag removed. If you are too busy after two weeks, that's ok - just say so. (Jets23615 (talk) 09:50, 28 April 2014 (UTC))

I'll be done by next Thursday, so I'll try to get to it then. -- LuK3 (Talk) 11:34, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

That's great , thanks so much. If you can further expand the page with additional discography that would be terrific. We would like to see whatever is customary for a page such as this and there are numerous veritable references. I can gather good information however since I'm not familiar with much of the editing process I probably get flagged right away. (Jets23615 (talk) 07:37, 1 May 2014 (UTC))

What's the filename for the photo? -- LuK3 (Talk) 14:30, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

The filename for the photo is _10V8695. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.199.129.176 (talk) 05:22, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi LuK3, can you find time to update this article? That would be terrific. Per above - we have contacted the owner of the photograph and he has given you the file name. Please let us know what your schedule's like so we can add picture, expand the discography and generally bring current as it's been flagged as outdated which it is. Thanks so much in advance, (Jets23615 (talk) 04:55, 28 May 2014 (UTC))

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Hi. Thanks for telling me about editing on Wikipedia. Could you please teach me how to post a message on someones talk page. Also the info on the Louisiana Creole page is wrong. That's Haitian Creole...I'm Louisiana Creole and our French is Acadian. Can you also show me how to reach the contributor to that page so I can help them correct their mistakes? . Dieudonne3573 (talk) 22:26, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello, if you want to discuss the information on a certain article, please refer to the article's talk page, which is located at Talk:Louisiana Creole French. This will allow any other users to discuss your changes. -- LuK3 (Talk) 22:29, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello[edit]

hello,

What have i done worng — Preceding unsigned comment added by Buttsmcgee101 (talkcontribs) 00:37, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Your edits constitute vandalism, which is outlined in Wikipedia's policy on vandalism. -- LuK3 (Talk) 00:39, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Phone Cracked[edit]

Phone.png I bought you a phone!
Phone!
NintendoAdministrator (talk) 12:29, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedian award[edit]

Wikipedia Rollback.png The Puzzled World
Everyone was a nominee of the Wikipedia awards 2014,Your a winner! Here's your Wikipedia ball! NintendoAdministrator (talk) 12:33, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

RKSV for deletion not correct :([edit]

Please untag on RKSV for deletion — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dharmarathna627 (talkcontribs) 13:37, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry about bad posts![edit]

Hi LuK3, thanks for getting in touch about some bad edits, I had been changing the page discussed back for some of the evening after seeing it on chat and had a lot of conflicting edit messages and it is clear that I did not pass that screen as I should have. I hope you can see I was definitely on your side for making the right sort of edits from some of the others I posted and sad that these ones now have my name attached to them forever! Hope to do better wiki work in the future. Uk2700 (talk) 00:51, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Uk2700, it seems like that article was bombarded with vandalism. I apologize if I gave you a warning if you didn't vandalize, I just warned everybody who edited that article in the past hour or two. -- LuK3 (Talk) 00:54, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello, How Are You ,Please Kindly To Not Edit The Page Relating To Tim Hamilton, His IMDB Profile States All The Information Of Actor Etc — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.56.88.101 (talk) 01:49, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

how do u suggest i reference that information? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DONTSUPPORTABUSE (talkcontribs) 22:15, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

The information you added has to be adhere to WP:BLP and find reliable sources that back up your edit. -- LuK3 (Talk) 22:18, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

---

The previous was created by a resident of Lehigh Acres. Who appearently has some kind of hostility against the LCSD. I had previously edited this out, but felt it best to undo my edit so those involved can see his blatant disregard for both the victims family and the  Law Enforcment agency  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.204.193.11 (talk) 01:56, 26 April 2014 (UTC) 

Reliable Source[edit]

Dear Luk3, for Jessica Jung's page, I did commented that according to her online birth record (which can be found at references 2 & 3 on her page), that was the actual spelling of her birth name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.136.42.19 (talk) 03:06, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Since the online birth record comes from a government website, I suggest that it would have the most accurate information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.136.42.19 (talk) 03:11, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

SPI[edit]

Thank you for the SPI case you recently filed, but I have deleted it per WP:DENY. We know who those accounts belong to and are blocking them on sight. Best ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:15, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Okay thanks DoRD. -- LuK3 (Talk) 14:18, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Notification of a June AfC BackLog Drive[edit]

AFC-Logo.svg

Hello LuK3:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from June 1, 2014 to June 30, 2014.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1500 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

The AfC helper script can assist you in tallying your edits automatically. To view a full list of changes, visit the changelog. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks. Sent on behalf of (tJosve05a (c) by {{U|Technical 13}} (tec) using the MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:45, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Need some help?[edit]

Hey,

Please go to the talk page of Iran (Talk:Iran) and read the two last sections. If you agree with me about them, just write it down and say you agree.

Thank you so much. Arvid Qasemy (talk) 08:57, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference sr3 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ Cite error: The named reference er71 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).