User talk:Acroterion

1

Beware! This user's talk page is patrolled by talk page stalkers.

Signpost

Notice

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)

Talk:Assassination of John F. Kennedy

Hello Acroterion,

You graciously hatted a section on this talk page a couple of weeks back. The editor who specializes in walls of text is at it again, posting very lengthy and detailed arguments to the effect that neutron analysis proves Oswald innocent. How this is at all likely to lead to improving the article is unclear. In addition, the user's own page has become a treatise on mind control. This all seems disruptive to me, but I seek opinions of uninvolved editors since this person has a grudge against me for calling someone a "buff". Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:01, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks again. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:24, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

sealing of talkpage chapter "NAA"

Hello Acroterion, on sealing the talk page chapter Neutron Activation Analysis (NAA) on Oswald you wrote, "The article talkpage is not an appropriate place to present syntheses of original research. Another unproductive discussion". Would you please explain why it was unproductive and what was missing for it to be considered productive? May I assume that with "syntheses of original research" you meant my response regarding "why some evidence was ignored"? Icarus4 (talk) 12:54, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

No progress is being made toward a consensus in favor of your suggestions. You appear to be advocating an argument from synthesis, which is not admissible on Wikipedia. The talkpage is there to facilitate concise discussion, and not as a soapbox for lengthy dissertations. Please confine your talkpage posts to concise suggestions for referenced improvements, as the very long discursive posts are becoming disruptive to the normal function of the talkpage. Acroterion (talk) 13:00, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

User:Wiki123qws

After your scolding and blocking of this user, he has apparently changed his tactic to uploading blatantly false images such as this version of the Richard and Maurice McDonald page, where he has added an image of Ray Kroc but identified it as Richard McDonald, and one of Maurice Richard that he has identified as Maurice McDonald. One has to wonder, given this user's history, whether he is here to help at all. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:39, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Indeffed for defiance of clear warnings about uploading stuff from the internet, and general not-here-to-improve-the encyclopedia behavior. Thanks for the heads-up. Acroterion (talk) 22:23, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Valley View and Wappocomo

Hey Acroterion! As you know, I've been a big fan of your contributions to Wikipedia for a long time, especially your work regarding the historic architecture of West Virginia's Eastern Panhandle. I recently completed articles for Valley View (Romney, West Virginia) and Wappocomo, and I wanted to humbly ask if you could please take a look at them in your spare time and make any changes you see fit. Wappocomo is currently up for GA review, and I hope to soon nominate Valley View as well. Thank you again for all your phenomenal contributions to Wikipedia! -- Caponer (talk) 16:55, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words - I'll have a look at the articles over the weekend. Acroterion (talk) 23:11, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Acroterion--much appreciated! Also, I hope you don't mind me using one of your images for my DYK hook for List of plantations in West Virginia. -- Caponer (talk) 19:02, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

By all means! It's nice to see you've summarized all of those places in one article. Acroterion (talk) 20:41, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

My page was deleted?

Hello there,

I created a page and it's just been deleted, no real reason given.. Please can you put it back on?

Cheers, Wiggerz09 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiggerz09 (talk • contribs) 00:03, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Then how come you didn't give an explanation of "Adam Beesley"'s significance?--Mr Fink (talk) 01:47, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Please review WP:BIO, the guidelines which are used to determine notability, and therefore eligibility for inclusion in Wikipedia. The articles you submitted did not meet those minimal requirements. Acroterion (talk) 02:47, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

User:Dokestheamazing

Dokestheamazing (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) submitted a request on WP:UTRS that they be unblocked. Since it's around 9 months since you blocked them and their request seems to be in good faith, I'd like to unblock if that's okay with you? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 17:19, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

If they're repentant, sure: I'm in favor of redemption. Acroterion (talk) 18:42, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

page deleeted?

solo advertisement

Shouldnt be deleeted. I never put an outside link and tyred to talk neutrally. I dont know why it looks like an ad to you when it really is NOT! Do you guys tend to somehow have a chip on your shoulder with me. I know, EVERYONE does with me. No different. Jmintuck (talk) 03:03, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't a free webhost for advice, nor does it accept advertising. The article was simply a repost of promotional material previously deleted with the link removed. If you keep doing things like this [1], [2], [3], you can expect objections. Acroterion (talk) 03:18, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi it's me I just wanted to apologize for the non constructive edit I made to T-26, I got the wrong info. I promise not to do it again. Have a nice day! Fresh C. Sullivan (talk) 20:32, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	For adding the HABS / HAER links to Virginia NRHP entries! Pubdog (talk) 10:48, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for creating all of those articles! It's like the state's infested with NRHP properties, something historical must have happened there at some point. It's interesting to note that Mount Vernon, after Monticello, is the Grade-A historical monument, yet its HABS coverage is paltry. The ladies that run the place keep an iron grip on information. You won't see any Sally Hemings stories from Mount Vernon. Acroterion (talk) 15:00, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Block reasons

Is there any possibility that you could put a block reason everytime you block someone, or is it expected that people will dig up other logs? This block looked really weird and random at a first glance, especially as the user had not made any edits. Sleepliving (talk) 18:57, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

The user did edit: it was a spambot and I deleted the spambot's userpage, which was an external link in standard spambot format. I clicked (just this once) the block button before I could write "spambot." I promise to do better next time, as I usually do. Acroterion (talk) 21:29, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

And now I'm totally not shocked to see that this was a sockpuppet account of a blocked user. Acroterion (talk) 04:12, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

brown posts

I spent about 3 days researching and posting responsible, relevant articles to this profile for the reason that his leadership style has caused a great stir and I wanted to give the website the opportunity to be a leader in providing researched data for people to use as that will drive more viewers to your website. Since you chose to delete 99% of my research from my 2 to 3 days of work - when I had personal responsibilities in real life as well - I have deleted all 100% of my materials. I do not want any of my research to be shown. I don't have time to waste, as I clearly have by trying to make this profile a draw for your website and a source of reporting research. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Importantposts137 (talk • contribs) 15:21, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry you feel that way, you have an interesting biographical subject, but that doesn't mean that copying copyrighted material into Wikipedia is allowable. I encourage you to use the sources you've found to rewrite the content appropriately, without leaning on pre-written material, and in accordance with Wikipedia policy. Acroterion (talk) 18:48, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

knowledgekid87

Acroterion, just to give you the heads up one of the editors knowledgekid87 might be taking an anti-gay stance. Can you check it out. I could be wrong and if so I apologize but it just seems that he is. Thank you, Tom991

(talk page stalker) Tom991, If you're talking about edits to and discussion about this template, I see absolutely nothing anti-gay with Knowledgekid87's edits. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:13, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Like NeilN, I see nothing problematic about Knowledgekid87's edits. Gay marriage is in legal limbo in Utah, and our templates may not be well-suited to reflect ambiguous status, so reasonable people may differ on how that is to be expressed. Acroterion (talk) 16:20, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

I am actually for same-sex marriage, but we have to go by the facts here even if it is something that you might disagree with. Even if I were against Same-sex marriage though I wouldn't make it into a big deal per WP:COI. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:32, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) NeilN, Please DO NOT call me a talk page stalker! I simply brought about a concern that I had! But it seems that your one because you responded to Acroterion's message before he did! tom991

NeilN didn't call you a talkpage stalker: he was referring to himself, and he is entitled to comment here, as is any user in good standing. Acroterion (talk) 23:27, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

I've seen this misunderstanding before. The problem is that what NeilN said is exactly and grammatically

"tps tom, if you are talking about etc etc"

It reads like an adjective (namely tps) being applied to a noun (namely tom). Now, of course, *I* know that tps is inherently self-referential, and an in-joke. But in the real-o-verse, being called a 'stalker' is a serious insult. And Tom991 did not know what it meant, that is clear: they were insulted. They were especially insulted that Neil would answer a question that Tom was intending to ask Acroterion, and said exactly as much, not realizing that tps is a heads-up of exactly that (i.e. NeilN != Acroterion). I personally don't use the tps-template at all, instead I type

"talkstalk sez... hello tom, if you are talking about etc etc"

or something along those lines. That is grammatically unambiguous. Maybe we can change {{tps}} to say "(talk page stalker says...)" so that the self-referentiality is crystal clear? Look at tps|v which is the worst, it would just say this.

"stalking tom, if you are talking about etc etc"

Not Good.™ When I saw this misunderstanding the first time about a month ago, I thought it was a weird goof, but now that I've seen it again, I think this exact misunderstanding is prolly more common than one might otherwise expect. p.s. Alternatively, of course, if you want to keep the "traditional" tps-wording, the trick is to Nevah.Evah make the *first* thing after tps be the other editor's username/addr/realname. Hope this helps. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 14:35, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

See Template talk:Talk page stalker where I have proposed your change. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:47, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Tha Real Indo

Hello, This is my first time on wikipedia posting an ad and I recieved an automatic deletion of some sort. Please tell me why this is happening.

Thank You Indo Indo2006 (talk) 04:57, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't accept advertising. By "posting an ad" you've violated Wikipedia's rules, although in this particular case the material was deleted because it didn't make a credible assertion of notability: see WP:MUSICIAN. Promotion is deleted on sight. Acroterion (talk) 11:54, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

The Plaid Jackets page you deleted

I am with the band's management, and was instructed to create an informational page on the duo from Arkansas called The Plaid Jackets. I have not committed copyright infringement. Please contact me to resolve this matter immediately. Liz Moore <email redacted> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.178.26.243 (talk) 21:29, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

It was a word-for-word copy from page 34 of The Idle Class, Winter 2014, written by Kody Ford. Since it was published elsewhere under copyright, it can't be copied into Wikipedia, which is a free-content publication that cannot republish copyrighted material. It was also promotional in nature and inappropriate for an encyclopedia: feature articles tend to be that way, which is another reason why copying such articles is inappropriate. Additionally, you have a conflict of interest: while that doesn't prevent you from editing, it should be openly acknowledged and you should follow the practices outlined at WP:COI. See also WP:MUSICIAN, which covers the notability guidelines for musical artists. It appears that having been covered previously by at least one publication, the band may meet the general notability guidelines. Discussions should take place on-wiki if at all possible for maximum transparency, so I've redacted your email from your note above so it doesn't get scraped. Acroterion (talk) 21:43, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Fullerton Police Department

Due to recent events, this page is attracting a bit of vandalism. Could you take a look at the page history and do whatever you think best? Paul, in Saudi (talk) 03:37, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Cute. Semi-protected for two weeks. FYI, it's snowing outside right now. Check your email. Acroterion (talk) 03:40, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCIV, January 2014

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D, Zawed and Hawkeye7 look at recent releases

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) 13:22, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Duke City Rockers

WOW! That was FAST. Did you even read my attempt to contest the deletion? Redspeare (talk) 04:19, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

I did. You should review the general notability guidelines and the notability guidelines for organizations. There was no assertion of notability for the club. Acroterion (talk) 04:30, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Superpower article

How am I meant to proceeded at the Superpower article if certain IPs feel they can just walk-in and revert the article back the the version that contains 'Russian nationalistic POV'? A recent edit war between 2 IPs has resulted in the page being protected once again, this is after only a few days since the protection you placed on the article expired. Once the current protection expires another edit war will follow, and another and another...

In the end I shall most-likely retire from trying to make improvements to the article, as there is no end to these POV pushing IPs. They don't want to accept that POV material is unacceptable. Also, when they re-insert their nationalistic POV they undo all my edits to the article in the process, which is rather frustrating. I have opened a new thread at the superpowers talk-page called "Article revision, no POV" so as to get a constructive discussion going. I would appreciate it if you could express your opinions there. Thank you. Antiochus the Great (talk) 19:22, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

You can start another dicussion but you appear to be in the mess of the edit war Antiochus the Great. Acroterion I sent Antiochus the Great on his talk page to appear of using another ip and engaged in an edit war using the ip 109.76.220.159 and Antiochus the Great of POV pushing but he quickly removes my comments[4]. I looked at the history of the Superpowers[5] and Superpowers talk[6] but the result has been under edit war since Dec 28[7] and the discussion has been minor on there part. If you start with an edit, then talk first but the action Antiochus the Great has taken has been too much and no real discussion for such. There are disagreements but that is not stoping edit push. I think there is no resolution if this continues like what I see here[8][9][10][11] as this matter was never discussed, it just appeared without any talk, this is a problem.--103.1.153.206 (talk) 19:50, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Pushing your Russian nationalistic POV wont get you anywhere. Why don't you accept Wikipedia's policy on maintaining a NPOV? Antiochus the Great (talk) 19:57, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Where did you get Russian national POV? I'm born and live in America. I have read Wikipedia's policy on maintaining POV and appeared to be using as required.--103.1.153.206 (talk) 20:02, 17 January 2014 (UTC)