User talk:Orangemike

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Nomination of Crescent English School for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Crescent English School is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crescent English School until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk)

Sheldon Chumir article[edit]

Thanks for your advice Orange Mike. I tried to nutrealize the article as you suggested. I agree, it was a bit flowerly. This was caused by probably two things. 1)Sheldon Chumir died in early 90's, as such most of his material are point form fragments that people he has worked with remember fondly. (a better source would be the data of his work with the 10 years he was an MLA), 2) He died with lol internet coverage, or no internet coverage. In this day and age of hash tags and tweets politicians can post. Chumir's work was lost to the sands of post internet politics (meaning. I'm going to have to march down to the Glenbow museum and manually scan these and file them over to the UofC, or something). I could barely find anything on him despite his work. I datamine this information and write descriptively with facts as per the scientific method, and let the reader make up his own mind. This was probably the reason why the orginal author of the article wrote a very non-descriptive article, because he had very little facts (only 3 sources), to go with. (because that's all that exists again... until we dive into that mountain of paperwork. The archieves were only since released in 2003. so this is the problem. Most news articles from wayyyy back machine don't exist anymore, and this is a sad fact of archaeology we lose our artifacts and data to the sands of time. Dust in the wind :_C Tears in the rain... As well, Calgary at the time was a small cities, he lived a remarkable life, but it was short. Thus he gets no grand memorial like say Martin Luthur King a fellow civil rights fighter.

So please understand we're trying to do the best we can with what little we have. (again until someone is brave enough to look the data up). But this man was remarkable, as was ANYONE who advocated to make the world a better place. He spoke about AIDs, when it was emerging, he spoke for the homeless, founded the civil liberties, and his foundation provides free care for the mentally ill. He was very active for ALL human rights. Certainly as the archives open up then we can scientifically express how significant he was. But thanks for your and future editors patience with this and other Canadian politican's pages.

Anyhow, can you please take a look at the page and let me know what you think now. Again it's under construction.... more data will flow in, as I make a more detailed search, and eventually soon the neutrality will be neutralized.... Thanks in advance. Sammycat

I don't know if you celebrate Halloween but... Happy Halloween![edit]

Bat icon.svg
Hello Orangemike, Miss Bono has given you an lovely bat, to wish you a Happy Halloween! You see, these things promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a lovely bat! Enjoy!
Spread the goodness of a lovely bat by adding {{subst:User:Miss Bono/Halloween}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

Speedy deletion of File:1930s photo of the foreshore above Jeffrey Street 001 001004.jpg[edit]

hello Orangemike

Apologies if I missed earlier warnings, or if the file was incorrectly tagged however can I check please your speedy deletion of this photograph. The photograph was important to the article. The reference citation in the article on Jeffrey Street was as follows and my recollection is that a similar citation was present on the photo page:

"View to St. Aloysius' College above foreshores of Kirribilli" (photo). 1 copyprint; b&w; 204 x 254 mm, This photograph shows construction on foreshores of Kirribilli above Jeffrey Street. Above the foreshores is St. Aloysius; College incorprating Dr. Cox's home. Whilst barely visible above the trees is the tower of Star of the Sea Church. The homes Greencliffe and Craiglea are also visible on the right hand side above M. Steel boatshed. Jeffrey Street Wharf and Jeffrey Street: North Sydney Council, original publisher unknown. 1930s. Retrieved 27 June 2010. "Image 001\001004" 

The file appears on the Local Government website and the source attributes the photo to "c 1930s". I thought (mistakenly) that all of the correct tags has been used both in the article and also on the photo page. I refer also to the Australian Copyright Council which states that in Australia Copyright has expired in photos taken prior to 1 January 1955. This photograph is therefore approximately 20 years out of copyright. Refer to the copyright regulation here.

<http://www.copyright.org.au/find-an-answer/browse-by-what-you-do/photographers/>

Can I seek your advice please as to how to reverse this or what additional "public domain" style tag you feel was missing which should have been present on this photo to cover any other countries copyright laws etc? This photo has been on this article for almost four (4) years and this is the first time that the PD status / copyright of these very old photos has been raised as an issue.

You've got mail![edit]

Mail-message-new.svg
Hello, Orangemike. Please check your email – you've got mail!
Message added 02:21, 16 July 2014 (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.

Nikkimaria (talk) 02:21, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Bruce Rauner article question.[edit]

Hey! In the Bruce Rauner article I see a neutrality dispute tag that has no supporting information in the talk page. I am inclined to remove it for that reason. What do you think? BenBurch (talk) 16:28, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Is there a way to completely remove a username?[edit]

Mike, you recently blocked a username for two reasons--a violation of the username policy and an edit that you saw as self-promotion. The block was entirely deserved and the offending edit has been removed. The edit was done by a new user and there was no malicious intent. The violations were entirely unintentional and should have been blocked. Unfortunately, the username is a recognizable organization (which is why you blocked it) and the block could have an adverse affect on the organization's reputation. Is there any existing mechanism to completely remove the username and all of its edits? There was only one, other than on talk pages to understand the block. I am asking on behalf of the organization because they are currently blocked. In addition, I am intentionally omitting the username and organization name because I am only requesting general information and not any special treatment. If you require any additional information, I will be happy to provide it. Thank you. Bazerko (talk) 21:45, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Generally the only reason for "oversighting" (as it is called) is when the material suppressed is grossly offensive or defamatory. This situation does not really fit that description. The fact that the incident occurred is part of Wikipedia history now, albeit not a serious one, and is not subject to censorship.--Orange Mike | Talk 01:49, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
@Bazerko: also try WP:RTV, although some of the requirements there do not fit this circumstance. (Ultimately it would be at the discretion of a WP:BUREAUCRAT, I assume.) --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:35, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:1950–51 Baghdad bombings[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:1950–51 Baghdad bombings. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

User:Southwest Monarch Study[edit]

Hi Mike. I'm inclined to accept this user's unblock appeal, but wanted to run it past you first; do you have any objections? Cheers, Yunshui  10:56, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

On the contrary: having read the appeal, I'd be delighted if you did so. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:09, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
On the log of edit history of the article Monarch buttrfly the following edit was posted: 07:49, July 15, 2014‎ Mdann52 (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (68,291 bytes) (-635)‎ . . (→‎top: rv link to copyvio material (Ticket:2014071510000218))
I would like to maintain that no copyright infringement was done. I referenced a url to a website, a normal and typical practice. No copyrighted material (the raw data itself) was/is used in this section of the article. No word-for-word text was copied from the reference and then pasted to the article.
I would suggest that User:Mdann52 may also be known as User:Southwest Monarch Study. There seems to be some confusion of what constitues a copyright violation. I can only say that this/these users are well-intentioned and are responding in good faith, wishing to enhance and improve the article. I have been privately contacted by a representive of Southwest Monarch Study via email. I would rather resolve this issue with the assistance other editors who have the expertise of determining copyright violations here on wikipedia rather than thru private corespondance.
bpage (talk) 02:23, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Operation Protective Edge[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Operation Protective Edge. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Alex Konanykhin[edit]

Could you keep an eye on the above article? Despite all Wikiexpert employees, contractors, etc. being banned, a SPAnon keeps removing the fact that Wikiexperts is banned from the lede of the article. He/she then shuffles the content, adds a small bit of promotional info, and when I revert quotes Wikipolicy to me. I've now asked whether he/she knows about the new ToU. Smallbones(smalltalk) 12:47, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

The Times Polical Party Support[edit]

Whilst I would agree that the Times is generally thought to be a supporter of the Conservative party and indeed historically have been a regular supporter of that party the facts are that The Times newspaper has declared support for Labour in two of the last three general elections (General election newspaper support). To put it another way they have supported Labour in 66% of the general elections held in the UK this millennium.
Of course we don’t yet know which way they will go at next years election but given their recent record it is not unreasonable to describe them as a Labour supporting newspaper, I would also venture that it would not be unreasonable to describe them as a Conservative supporting newspaper, depending upon how one wishes to bait the hook on any particular day.
In future please check the facts before making asinine comments about other editors contributions. Vanzil (talk) 13:53, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Okay, perhaps you consider Tony Blair to be a Labour politician. I do not, nor do most of my UK friends. Nonetheless, your point is well made. They endorse "Labour" in some general elections, but maintain a reactionary editorial policy the rest of the cycle. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:05, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Galicia (Eastern Europe)[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Galicia (Eastern Europe). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Shuja'iyya Incident (2014)[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Shuja'iyya Incident (2014). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 23 July 2014 (UTC)


Is my deleted article stored in the Wikipedia database?[edit]

I was told my article about Claudia Caporal was deleted because it was biased and I was too "close" to her to be able to write her article. Is there a way to rescue the writing I did for it so that I may then edit it to an appropriate stage for publishing? Thank you. KatieLee92 (talk)

Quick question[edit]

I just reverted some vandalism to a BLP (here). However, this particular vandalism was filling in the date of death field with a date a few days from now. Can/should I simply treat this as vandalism (in other words, is my revert-and-warn sufficient) or is there anything else I need to do, such as request revdel? Mainly asking because while I personally feel it's just vandalism to a BLP, it could be seen as a death-threat, I suppose. Asking you because you're the most recently active admin I could find and if more needs to be done than just this reversion/warn, it's probably best not to attract unnecessary attention to it by linking from one of the large places like helpdesk. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 02:47, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

I'd say "don't feed the trolls". That's too subtle to be an actionable death threat. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:50, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Good, that's what I figured, but it never hurts to make sure (if done in a non-troll-feeding way, of course). Thank you for your quick response. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 02:52, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Page Got Deleted[edit]

Hello,

My page did not get deleted because a conflict of interest, it got deleted because the CorenSearchBot told me I plagiarized a spam website. My questions and concerns have still not been answered. Does this bot check for the authenticity of the websites they say people plagiarize off of. I was not writing my article biasedly and I was merely using the facts about the show, just as any other show.

I really wish someone could actually HELP me instead of linking me to more and more irrelevant talks. I just want to know in real words not in syntax or links, how to prove the website I am accused of plagiarizing is an illegitimate website. Most likely a spam website. Due to the fact I intern with the people who own the rights to the show, it is disturbing to them that Wiki requests I cite a source that is very obviously a spam site, when we own the rights to all the content of said show.

I never knew how difficult it would be to gain help on this situation and I am really just trying to achieve the task at hand. If the page was deleted for conflict of interest, thats when I would do everything in my power to fix it because I have extensively read Wikis user guidelines. Since that was not my problem, I have no interest or need in looking into all of the links the editors have sent to me, because they are unhelpful to my problem.

I have always known Wiki was user generated content and extensively checked to make sure bogus articles are not published, but its disheartening to be called out for plagiarizing a spam site by the very website that extensively checks all articles. This wikipedia page is important to us because we understand how many users look to Wiki for information, including myself.

If you could help in any way solve this problem, I would be utterly grateful.

Lissheff (talk) 09:23, 24 July 2014 (UTC)Lisa

(talk page stalker) There are 2 separate issues: 1) when you signed up to this private website, you agreed not to write articles about topics where you`re related, especially if you`re getting paid to do so. 2) Copy/pasting from ANY source is unacceptable due to WP:COPYRIGHT. the panda ₯’ 10:13, 24 July 2014 (UTC)


I am not getting paid to do so, and I did not copy and paste from ANY source. Thats why this is an issue. It is my internship requirements to help create content such as wikipedia articles for the show, which I have not been affiliated with for more than a month. Also, why in the world does wiki accept articles from people who ARENT directly affliated with the shows or things they are speaking about? I'm so confused as to WHO can write such articles, because anyone writing a factual article has to be affiliated with what they are writing about somehow? Maybe that is what I need explained to me further, and polietly please. I don't understand how anyone who edits content for wiki could make such rude remarks to someone who is merely asking for help...because of actual confusion and misunderstanding?

REGARDLESS, none of this answers my original question as to how to combat the plagiarism?

Lissheff (talk) 13:04, 24 July 2014 (UTC)Lisa

As I said on your talk page, the people for whom you are interning have assigned you to do something you are not supposed to be doing here. I'm sorry, but I don't know any more polite way to say that. If these shows are genuinely notable, then somebody without a conflict of interest can compile articles about them from reliable, impartial third-party sources such as newspapers and magazines which have reported about the shows. The plagiarism issue is way, way below this in importance, which is why folks have not been addressing it. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:58, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Username block[edit]

Hi. I note that you placed a username block on User:Art at Madsqpark. Would it be possible to do the same for User:Madsqpark, who, in fact, preceded the other? BMK (talk) 23:26, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. BMK (talk) 01:11, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Article One of the United States Bill of Rights[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Article One of the United States Bill of Rights. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Ghost Stories (Coldplay album)[edit]

User:FilBenLeafBoy added alternative rock without source, two times. 183.171.164.243 (talk) 17:58, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Shaughnessy[edit]

Hey Orangemike, given the concerns raised at the DYK nom, could you please make sure going forward that anything copied or closely paraphrased from a public domain source includes an appropriate template, and that material from non-PD sources is either quoted or paraphrased? This article and a couple of others seem to have some issues in that regard. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:52, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Arranged marriage[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Arranged marriage. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Traduksciigo: Wikidata:News[edit]

Saluton Orangemike,

vi ricevas tiun ĉi mesaĝon, ĉar vi registriĝis kiel tradukisto de la lingvo Orangemike ĉe Wikidata. La paĝo Wikidata:News estas tradukpreta. Vi povas traduki ĝin ĉe:

La prioritato de tiu ĉi paĝo estas meza.


Ni tre aprezos vian helpon. Tradukistoj kiel vi helpas al Wikidata funkcii kiel vere multlingva komunumo.

Dankon!

traduk-kunordigantoj de Wikidata‎, 07:02, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of aircraft accidents and incidents resulting in at least 50 fatalities[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of aircraft accidents and incidents resulting in at least 50 fatalities. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Cleon Skousen[edit]

Greetings Orangemike!

The problem that is developing on the Cleon Skousen page is that a New Yorker article on Skousen is being cited for a great deal of material that describes the man as a "nut case" and "off" on the facts. It loses its credibility by not informing on the opposing viewpoint. Those agreeing with the "nut case" position will support the inclusion of that material. Those opposed will just be angry, wondering why other facts are not addressed. While you cite the materials removed as well sourced, sourcing a biased article does not advance truth, only a personal point of view. The tone is not neutral. Controversies, if they must be addressed, should have both positions represented, or leave it off until opposing viewpoints can be prepared. I am in personal contact with the family, and have been given access to opposing viewpoints that they said I may put on-line. Until that point, I will be anxious to see that personal agendas on this page don't turn what should be a neutral presentation into a forum for character assassination.

A few things that I've learned so far:

Fired from Chief of Police: The mayor's charges against Skousen were all dropped and never proven in subsequent audits and investigations. He called Skousen names. This too unravels because of a letter from all the police officers and staff that thanked him for his leadership and acknowledged that personal agenda politics was the driving force in his being fired, not personal character.

FBI: Ernie Lazar has a personal problem with Skousen, for unknown reasons. The FBI files assertions do not present the full facts, and as presented give a biased viewpoint. The official memos connecting Skousen to extremist right-wing groups was initially quoted in a memo as a personal opinion of one individual who was later dismissed from the FBI. That opinion became circulated in follow-up memos without the clarification that it was a personal opinion, thereby giving the appearance that the conclusion was the official FBI position.

I am told by the family that much of this is being included in a new introduction to The Naked Communist.

There is more, but it will take me time to dig through the material. In the meantime, please contact me if needed. I don't want to see Wikipedia credibility tarnished by POV issues clouding the facts, and the New Yorker article and the Salon.com article have many factual errors that I am laboring to bring to light. Corrections2014 (talk) 20:03, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

You're going to have to provide reliable sources, not claims by his family and personal anecdotes from folks who used to know him. The New Yorker is famous for the quality of its fact-checking, and Salon.com is pretty darned reputable. The talk page of the Skousen article seems to be littered with challenges from people who think that FDR loved Reds and the SPLC is a bunch of liberal commie Jewboys, and consider that a valid critique of our sources. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:57, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:War of the Pacific[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:War of the Pacific. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

July 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Arthur J. Balzer may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • former Republican Assemblyman [[Louis Hicks]]. He was assigned to the committee on [[labor]]<ref>{http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1711.dl/WI.WIBlueBk1956 Toepel, M. G.; Kuehn, Hazel L., ed. ''The
  • Hazel L., ed. ''The Wisconsin blue book, 1956'' Madison: State of Wisconsin, 1956; pp. 57, 753]</ref>. Balzer was unseated in the 1956 Democratic [[primary election]] by [[Richard J. Lynch]],

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:04, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Markit[edit]

Hi Orange Mike,

I noticed that you are an active Wikipedia Editor and was wondering if you might be able to help me. I have recently posted on Markit's talk page suggesting some updates and changes to the article. I have disclosed that Markit is a client of mine, therefore I am very keen to follow the correct procedures in terms of suggesting any edits via the talk page in order for other Editors to discuss. I was wondering if you could have a look at my posts and see if you thing that the changes would benefit the article and are something you might be able to help me with.

Thanks

SarahLouiseRoberts (talk) 14:36, 31 July 2014 (UTC)