User talk:Orangemike

Ukrainian artists - who is notable?

Dear Mike, thank you for your comments on the article "Mickola Vorokhta". Surely he is not Rafael. But there are many people at the Wikipedia pages who never get such achievements in the art as this 62 years old artist. For example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandr_Guristyuk - this person has no artworks in the Ukrainian or other museums, his work never was bought by the Ministry of Culture. He is even not a member of National Art Union. Notable? OR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borys_Buryak - is he notable? OR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mychajlo_Dmytrenko Who it was? In Chicago Museum of Ukrainian Modern Art you could find hundreds of such notable artists. OR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igor_Filippov OR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Garin - of course he's not living person but only Californians remember him OR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruslan_Korostenskij Who is he? OR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Kamennoy OR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sasha_Putrya - many children are died from cancer & leucemia but do you think this small child was/is notable? OR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_Podervyansky - there is very famous Ukrainian man but his original artworks are ... very awesome. He is not a painter. OR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuri_Padal

May be there are some other similar notable painters - I have not checked all them. Could you specify why all listed people are notable and why Mickola Vorokhta - not?

Going on. At the page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ukrainian_composers you can see name of Svitlana Azarova. She is 33 years old composer and her name is in the list together with such great names as Lysenko or Bortniansky. She is famous? Or Mykola Suk? Or Roman_Yakub? Please advise

Your deletion of Lowe Alpine

I wonder if you would consider restoring this article. It's history indicates that the overt spam was recently added, and there are versions that are not blatant spam. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:43, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks! Beeblebrox (talk) 00:39, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Bad Boys Blue

I don't want to start an edit war. I've tried to engage Esoteriqa but didn't have much luck. What would be the next step in a case like this? Rees11 (talk) 20:28, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Semi-resolved now. Thanks for your help. Keep up the good anti-spam work. Rees11 (talk) 20:19, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi

HI —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimb0onwheelz (talk • contribs) 22:16, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

orange.....

Thanks for the delete of my page...it took me months to compile...now to be honest i`m not going to be too hard on you as just looked at your picture and to be honest the beard makes you look like a total geek..the type of person i would expect to be in admin on wiki...i am orange mike cause i like orange... well im steve prick because i cant stand pricks like you who distroy peoples work...without people you are nothing!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Newshomesarchive (talk • contribs) 07:58, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Retirement?

Hi Mike,

Just to avoid any possible offence on your part, I'd like to point out that my rant against admins is directed against a whole bunch of people, and you're not one of them. We've had our disagreements, I'm still not sure I trust the speed of your trigger finger, but on the topic of "bad articles on good subjects" I might even have come round to your point that it's better to delete and start again!

Throughout it though, you've always struck me as an honourable guy who had firm principles and stood by them. You certainly taught me the importance of WP:AGF, both as a principle (which I might guess your Quaker background encourages?), and also as a pragmatic policy that simply does make things work better in the limited communications bandwidth of teh intawebs. Sadly though, I don't have quite your talent at implementing it!

The retirement flag is pretty serious. I might keep it up, I might not. It's not just about this last farce, it's something I've increasingly felt for a while now. I've worked pretty hard on a few articles over the last couple of weeks and although a few people with similar interests (engineering history) did comment appreciatively on them, it's not about appreciation: I'm too selfish for that, I'm just doing it because I find having a direction for studying something more interesting than just reading books in their order on the pile.

What upsets me though is the general lack of respect for content. There's an obsession with policy and politics, and too many people lose sight of the encyclopedia. I'm personally affronted when vandals do something to harm that, but "admins" (as a sheer generalization, sorry!) would rather pick on some easy policy issue from either side that they can latch on to to do something about, than they would look at which is beneficial or harmful. There's the old saw that those who can do, those who can't teach. I think hereabouts too many of them become admins. Then as they are admins, some adminning must be done! No matter whether it's good or bad, if it's a policy they can latch onto, they get to play the big role.

We've lost good editors: Peter Damian (who deserved better), MickMacNee who writes great stuff, only to have them slated for removal as soon as he publishes them - when he's between blocks of course, because this continual antipathy to his good work would wind anyone up. So some editors go to the Dark Side. Why bother with WP:AGF, when no one assumes it of you yourself? I'd rather not go down that route, hence the retirement.

I'll probably be back. I don't have the strength of will to resist! Far too much of a geek. A break probably would be beneficial though. Either way though, you were one of the good guys. Thankyou. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:32, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Your opinion appreciated

Hi Orangemike; at your convenience, would you have a look at [1]? A vanity piece in need of copyediting at the least, but has some legitimate references. Question is, are they enough to meet notability? JNW (talk) 23:07, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Upper case smith

You're right, of course. It should be E. E. Smith, not e.e.smith (e.e.cummings we had to do at school, but I can't say I've read him since). I doubted anyone would get that reference :) you definitely win the balloon. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:15, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

the lensman blasted
into space
his ship will surely
win the race
              — e e smith               — Sizzle Flambé (☎/✍) 01:23, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Hipstamatic

Here is another article you should look at: Hipstamatic. I do not know if this is a hoax or the real thing. I always thought Wikipedia should have a wall of fame for the best hoaxes and this may be one of them. Hope you are well-RFD (talk) 12:25, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Wisconsin Legislature

I look at the current Wisconsin Legislature and I share your concern. For example there is no article about Michael Huebsch who was speaker of the Wisconsin Assebly when the Republicans were in control in 2007. It sounds like there is some backlog. Also I know the feeling about being bugged about an article that should be written. For example Christopher Sholes who invented the typewriter-he was in both houses of the Wisconsin Legislature. But he also has an older brother Charles Sholes who was also in both houses of the Wisconsin Legislature and served as mayor of Kenosha, Wisconsin. It bugged me that Charles Sholes did not have an article. I finally wrote an article about Charles Sholes. There are some other articles that should be written. For example in the Coon Valley, Wisconsin article there is a redlink for Brian Rude who was in both houses of Wisconsin Legislature and served as President of the Senate. The same can be said about the late Paul Offner who also served in the Wisconsin Legislature both houses and later resigned from the Senate to return to public health. Paul Offner died 4-5 years ago. I will see what I can do-hopefully some wikipedians will come a long to help-Thanks-RFD (talk) 22:50, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Escape Route

This seems to be an advance EP with songs from the upcoming album. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 23:45, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Shawn Mitchell

Hi Mike I was wondering if this complies with Wikipedia procedures.

During an August 31st 2009 hearing of a legislative committee tasked with investigating alleged abuses by the state’s workman’s compensation insurer, Mitchell told a witness at the conclusion of his testimony that if he was nervous he should “relieve that” by “imagining the chairwoman in her underwear.” [Chairwoman: State Senator Morgan Carroll]. [1]

"It certainly looks like Shawn Mitchell singled out the chairwoman of the committee, Sen. Carroll, with his sophomoric, suggestive comment for no other reason than her gender and position of authority. How childish of him to insult not just Sen. Carroll, but women everywhere who daily face the silliness of sexism and trivialization in our culture," said former Lt. Governor Gail Schoettler. "As a former elected official who's been subjected to behavior like Mitchell's in the past, I believe that we have to call this out every time it happens, and we absolutely must hold elected officials who stoop so low accountable." A Colorado state senator has apologized for suggestive remarks he made about the chairwoman of a legislative committee earlier this month.

Republican Sen. Shawn Mitchell of Broomfield apologized September 18, 2009 and said his remarks about Democratic Sen. Morgan Carroll of Aurora were inappropriate and unprofessional. Mitchell says he was trying to make a witness feel comfortable when he said that when he's nervous about testifying before a committee, "I relieve that by imagining the chairwoman in her underwear." Carroll told Mitchell she accepted the apology. DENVER (AP)

References: [1] Quote by former Lt. Governor Gail Schoettler [2] Denver (AP)

Eyeonyou (talk) 01:46, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

For reverting this. Useight (talk) 13:52, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Common bond, Bond of association

Thank you for fixing the common bond redlink at Prince George's Community Federal Credit Union. I have just created a redirect at Common bond to Bond of association in case anyone else adds the phrase "common bond" to an article about a credit union. -- Eastmain (talk) 02:45, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Reliable Sources

Thank you for clarifying the blacklisting of a site. Although it is still unclear to me how "partisan" character of a site can be determined simply because it is a wordpress site. I can buy a server with a domain name and can still be as or more partisan :-) Is there a way to request for admins to look into the site and then consider for an un-ban?

Thank you! Vinter-light (talk) 03:35, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Improving article Jeffrey Hyland

Hello there Orangemike. This article has the same issue as Lockwood's (advert.). I believe a good deal of rewriting has also been done here, with the help of other editors as well. I hope you'll also have some time to review the material for me? If there are other improvements I need to work on, I'd be glad to know your inputs/advice. Thanks a lot. Jxc5 (talk) 09:21, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Christie's Estates

I think it might make it due to 3rd part coverage of the sales. I gave it the needed trim, or, more exactly, the needed major cutting & rewording. DGG ( talk ) 15:35, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Re: Woodland Fairy Acres

Hi Orangemike,

Thank you for your response. I am currently working with one of your other editors to create a Woodland Fairy Acres article that meets Wikipedia's guidelines. I greatly appreciate the continued help and guidance from all of the editors I've spoken with.

Thanks so much again!

Flwr petal fairy (talk) 16:06, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

I am indeed attempting to help and see if we can find sources and such to establish notability. Would you be willing to restore it so Flowr can userfy it with help? Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:08, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

EKSRTD

Since you deleted EKSRTD per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EKSRTD, would you mind closing the related AFD? Thanks! WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:15, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

User talk:The Idiot Bastard Son

Nice work Mike, how long before User:Titties & Beer turns up I wonder. RMHED 02:22, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Help with The Fellowship

I noticed you weighed in on the content dispute and offered a comprise position. Well as you know, there is a bit of a content dispute in that article especially between myself and a pair of editors (one of which when I checked his talk page showed a history of hostility), User:Goethean and User:Frankpettit. Check the article history page, those two have basically been working as a tag team to work around the 3RR. That aside, would you be willing to informally mediate this dispute on the talk page? I am totally willing to accept your comprise opinion on the dispute. EricLeFevre (talk) 15:29, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I had to edit the last post, I incorrectly accused someone else who is not involved in the dispute, my apologies. EricLeFevre (talk) 15:31, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Tag team :)

Hi, Orangemike! I think we have a bit of a tag-team going on here. I seem to be finding a fair number of role/promotional accounts, and you seem to be the one blocking em. So, I think we're a tag team! Basket of Puppies 19:34, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

As long as neither of us falls into the deadly trap of automatically deleting, without giving fair thought to the realities of the case. I was once praised for the rapidity of my deletions, and this bothered me a great deal (as I think it should). Sure, there are the easy ones (the "my girlfriend is a hot chick" and "buy our Cialis" articles); but there are genuinely difficult cases as well. I take pride as a "deletionist" in the number of articles I've been able to save from unwarranted speedy deletion. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:36, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

OM, yes, I very much agree. So far, my reports of username violations have been pretty obvious. The more complicated ones, such as this I go to the source and try to find out more information. Cheers! Basket of Puppies 21:55, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Foundations of the Spanish kingdoms

Foneio has reinstated the article that was replaced with a redirect. I've replaced the redirect to the History of Spain article. Maybe you could help keep an eye on the article? Is there some kind of warning or action that we could take? ~~ Dr Dec (Talk) ~~ 10:36, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Frank Magana

Sir, Why was the post Frank Magana removed. I would think that you would warn or give some explanation for such an action. I had to search rather rigorously to find out that you had deleted it. He is a significant character in that he was the Artist that Created many of [Frank Lloyd Wright] and [Bruce Goff] Buildings, art and furniture. Its amazing that a man that does the work for the famous artists isn’t mentioned anywhere. We were in the midst of linking him to many well known architects and artists when you deleted him. If you personally do not know the artist is that a reason to delete him? Do you have that expertise? Please replave the article so I may save it off before you delete it permanently.

Thank you.

(Mark.crabtree (talk) 07:48, 20 October 2009 (UTC))

Hi Mike

Orange Mike my name is Darnell Clark I've been trying to create a page for the Dukes of DaVille and it has been deleted. I am not doing the page for a shameless advertisement plow. I want to make sure when people are researching this group they can find their information and it can be located and archived on this particular encyclopedia. I feel that the Dukes of Daville have enough credits and enough relevant contant to have a page on Wikipedia. Please let me know what we are either lacking or what we need to take out to allow this page to exist. Thanks for your time and consideration. <redacted e-mail> —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrdarnelclark (talk • contribs) 17:00, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

We're talking about the same article, right? The one that starts, "The Dukes of DaVille offer audiences a balanced blend of excitement, enlightenment, and entertainment with a live show that's guaranteed to keep them begging for more. Their high-energy performance displays a chemistry that has been cultivated throughout the course of their childhood bond. With the Dukes infectious hooks and dope tracks they create fans instantly. Their lyrical delivery and rhyme scheme gains much respect from most skilled writers and seasoned vets."? That is a totally shameless advertising plug, and has no place in this encyclopedia. I assume you have some connection with them, and am doing you the courtesy of accepting that you actually believe them to be notable. If this is the case, I suggest you make a request for the creation of an article at Wikipedia:Requested articles/music/Performers and bands, providing solid reliable sources (not blogs, Facebook, etc.) and disclosing your conflict of interest in the matter, if any. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:23, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't Delete Peoples Work, help Them

Mike, don't be rude and delete my pages, please give me back the info on Jeffrey Chase that you deleted. I am willing to learn and get the page up, but deleting it is a waste of my time. Contact me and lets work through this for a positive solution. Thank you! PeopleWriter (talk) 22:41, 20 October 2009 (UTC)PeopleWriter

Mike, help me with the Jeffrey Chase bio. I want your help on this one, he meets the criteria you referenced too, I will build it in the User page first then present it for publishing. Thank you! PeopleWriter (talk) 00:02, 21 October 2009 (UTC)PeopleWriter

There is nothing there to create an article with. This was spam, along with 21 Magazine. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:50, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Mike, help me build this house. I don't have any bricks, but I have all this straw, and a truckload of dandelion fluff to hold it together.... — Sizzle Flambé (☎/✍) 03:04, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree please help people with their wiki's rather than deleting work.

User/talk page redirects

Encountered a redlink "User:OrangeMike" (with capital M), so followed it and created userpage & talkpage redirects to you, to catch such miscapitalisations. If for any reason this is not desirable or helpful, please accept my apologies and delete at will. — Sizzle Flambé (☎/✍) 04:36, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

List of Roman Catholic United States Supreme Court justices

You summarily deleted this, even though there had been a protest. I would have liked to put the new content in the redirect, but it's gone now. There was a discussion on categories that I am aware of, but not on this article or the subject matter as far as I know. Your arbitrary, and unilateral action will not stand. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 15:18, 21 October 2009 (UTC) Stan

7&6=thirteen needs to calm down, but I do believe that your (Orangemike's) interpretation of the article as an effort to circumvent the CfD is incorrect. The article was actually created by the nominator of the CfD and used as justification for deletion of the category as the information would not be lost. An argument could be made for merger into Demographics of the Supreme Court of the United States, but I'd not like to see the table and time-line graph lost. -- ToE^T 15:34, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I was not aware of "the prior decision." There was certainly no intent to circumvent anything. I know only of the prior decision (which I strenuously opposed) regarding Categories.

This was all referenced and was not "original research." Your ironic suggestion that I could use it would be more sincerely appreciated if I could access it. Indeed, I think this belongs in the article where there is the new redirect.

I would also note that the warning of he impending deletion said that it would not happen if there was an objection,. Evidently those rules (and promises) don't apply to you.

I have no idea where to access the deleted article. Cann you send me a link?

I apologize for any misunderstanding. But I do not like being steamrolled, and that is what happened here7&6=thirteen (talk) 15:41, 21 October 2009 (UTC) Stan

I would also add that I was content with it being a "list." All of my edits TODAY were in direct response to the ultimatum to improve the article or have it be deleted. Well, I improved it; and you deleted it. No quid pro quo there. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 15:45, 21 October 2009 (UTC) Stan

Moved the old version to User:7&6=thirteen/OldListArticle for your convenience. Hope this helps. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:52, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 15:54, 21 October 2009 (UTC) Stan

Formal Complaint About To Be Filed Against You

You have deleted my work that I had been working on. Please "Respect" my time as I will respect yours. I didn't want to use the heading above to be viewed as a threat in anyway, I am using it to get your attention to help me. I asked the other "admin" people who like to "delete' pages rather than create them to help during this process, I have spent numerous hours trying to work with "admin" with little success. If I don't get a positive solution in 24 hours, I will be filing a formal complaint with Wikipedia. I didn't create the page two years ago, I am merely adding information and solid references along with authorized images only to have them deleted. You want to set up a conference call with me, I will gladly give you my number. Please don't hide behind the internet by being introverted. I realize a lot of you are overweight, unhealthy, and/or not happy with your lives in general (I can help you turn your life around, just ask).

I agree the 21 Magazine page needs to be worked on, but to be fully deleted? I am not looking for any rebuttals from you, I am looking for a solution. If you have the time to delete and make negative comments, you have the time to also help me and make a difference. The point is, please don't burn a bridge with me, help me and we can move forward. Modelmanager (talk) 20:06, 21 October 2009 (UTC)Modelmanager

If you were actually interested in pursuing this matter, you should have participated in the discussion of it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/21 Magazine, as you were invited to do. Ad hominem attacks upon editors do not accomplish anything substantial. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:18, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Mike, I did participate in the discussion with only help from one guy! (Footnote: I noticed you like to shoot from the hip on Wiki via my research, So I will "KEEP MY COOL" on my end and hopefully you will change your ways on your end). Kevin was the only Admin guy to help on my page, I got taken out from 4 to 5 admin people going "delete" crazy like a bunch of Commandos including yourself. One Admin guy even has a Stat Graph on his User page bragging about how many pages he has deleted with no stats on pages he has built or help edit. Why is this appear to be a game for some Admin people? Quick to shoot you down to put another notch on the belt, but not quick to help! I am looking for help here, not to waste my time or your time. I am relentlessly looking for help! I am not on the right or on the left, I am in the center moving forward!

...."Words without Actions are the Assassins of Idealism"" POINT BLANK QUESTION MIKE! Are you going to help me with my page? Modelmanager (talk) 20:55, 21 October 2009 (UTC)Modelmanager

I am trying to help you.

1. According to the revision history of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/21 Magazine, you never participated in that discussion at any time.

2. The article as deleted was an advertisement for the magazine, with no assertion of any kind of notability. I would not have speedily deleted it, as it just barely (in my opinion) fell short of being irredeemably spammy. You would have to take that up with the editor who did speedily delete it, which would be User: Athaenara.

3. If you wish to appeal the speedy deletion, you would need to file such an appeal at Wikipedia:Deletion review. If you want to oppose the original AfD nomination, you would have to participate in that discussion at the link provided to you repeatedly.

4. I would, of course, help to insure that an article on this or any such magazine, if it were created and sustained, continued to meet all our standards of formatting, grammar and style, as well as neutral point of view, verifiability, and reliable sourcing; such is my duty, such is my idealism. I would not help create an article on such a magazine, as I consider them abominable, decadent and generally despicable, catering to the lowest and most vile aspects of American popular culture today. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:12, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Frank Magana

Hello Mike,

Is there a place for this type of article? We would like to list all of his contibutions to many artists and community projects. I think I remember a Biography wiki or something. What kind of documentation do you need? Blue prints of the houses he built and pictures of the Wright furninture he made for the Price tower?

Any advice would be appreciated.

Thank you.

(Mark.crabtree (talk) 20:19, 21 October 2009 (UTC))

I believe Biographicon is still running. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:22, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of list vs. category

Hi Orangemike,

Re: this. The CfD discussion, which I closed, was to delete the category. That decision has no bearing on whether the list should have been speedily deleted or not. In fact, the list pre-dated the category and one argument in the discussion was that the category could be deleted because the list existed. Thanks, Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 20:57, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I just noted that there was a discussion above about this. I'm not otherwise "complaining" about your action, just saw the notice on WAS's page and was giving you a heads up, but I see your head is probably already up over it. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 20:59, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Vocera Communications

Hi, this article is being heavily edited by IPs originating from the PR firm: Fleishman-Hillard who appear to be the PR firm for Vocera Communications (example). We're currently edit warring so I'm going to take a step back, if you could take a look it would be appreciated. Thanks Smartse (talk) 20:13, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Dear mike

You have marked my page "the necronomicon" as vandalism and an obvious hoax? In doing so, you have discredited my beliefs, and the belief of an ancient culture. I would appreciate if you would have an open mind to other religions besides your own. You are very insulting, and close minded. My page was completly seperate from other "necronomicon" posts because every post I see marks them as fiction and or false.

I as a person believe in the Necronomicon, I practice the rituals of the book, and had proof of it's existance clearly from nazi archives. Seriously why are you trying to hide the powers of this book. H.P. lovecraft had to much information on this book to create it himself. He obviously came across one of the originals, and practiced the rituals.

Which is where he got his info. once the gates are opened the watchers can answer any question you seek. I find it offensive that on "christianity" posts, it does not say fictional characters are involved. Because there is no lagitamate proof to thier existance, besides a book. You are claiming that a book(the necronomicon) doesnt exist. You would be insulted if I were to say that "christianity was a hoax and further more a plot to turn people to a false profit."

Please unblock my page so that the truth can be told, it is also my right to have freedom of speech.

And further more "Orange" is the most obnoxious and hidious color in the spectrum. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Punktothec (talk • contribs) 20:52, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

• Now, an actual article on the history of the Necronomicon would be fascinating. The husband of a friend of mine alleges that he and a friend created an artefact which they claimed was the original Necronomicon, which they attempted to get into the archive at the Library of Congress, and I'd love to know whether they succeeded or not. Given that the Rennes-le-Château papers resided for over 30 years in the Bibliotheque Nationale before being exposed as a forgery, and given that (according to the h of f) the person they were passing it off to had as I recall no idea what the Necronomicon was, they might have succeeded. Don't think they made any false profits though. Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:02, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

• befor my article was deleted i had numerous pictures of SS soldiers holding the necronomicon.

which they took from the Bibliotheque Nationale durring raids. As we all know Hitler was a member of the thrule society, and a beleiver in the occult. There is just no way that a white man from brooklyn hieghts create this book. The Sumerians created the necronomicon. end of story call it a hoax... what ever. the truth is in the rituals. christ is the false profit —Preceding unsigned comment added by Punktothec (talk • contribs) 00:37, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

The depths of your "knowledge" may be displayed by your impression that Howard Phillips Lovecraft, Gent. of Providence, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, was "a whte man from brooklyn hieghts"!!!! --Orange Mike | Talk 15:01, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

HPL did live in Brooklyn — Red Hook, not the Heights — in 1924-1926 after marrying Sonia, though he wasn't happy there. It inspired his story "The Horror at Red Hook." — Sizzle Flambé (☎/✍) 17:41, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I knew that; but he was not from Brooklyn; one of those "just 'cause the cat had her kittens in the oven, don't make 'em biscuits!" kind of situations. HPL was from and of Providence and Providence only, to an extent most of us can merely imagine. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:44, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

To the extent that he wrote in one of his letters, "I am Providence" — and that's engraved on his headstone. — Sizzle Flambé (☎/✍) 17:57, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

• and to reply to you mike. Calling me ignorant is also insulting.

i have known of Robert Bloch and the whole lovecraft circle i onw H.p. lovecraft books. I could go on and on about everything he and his friends done. but the point is there is no proof to say he just made it up. when his story also goes along with sumerian beleif structures —Preceding unsigned comment added by Punktothec (talk • contribs) 00:42, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Mike: I see The Necronomicon is protected as deleted; may I suggest protecting it as "#REDIRECT Necronomicon" instead? — Sizzle Flambé (☎/✍) 03:35, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Incidentally, I'd think it non-controversial that HPL's Necronomicon was a (fictional) grimoire; cf. "Owen Davies's Top 10 Grimoires". — Sizzle Flambé (☎/✍) 01:54, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Ditto that. If I recall, there's even one instance where Lovecraft has a character recount a list of fabled grimoires including the Necronomican Necronomicin that wierd book. Elen of the Roads (talk) 19:03, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Trypophobia

I was quite excited this evening to discover that I wasn't the only person in the world to have a peculiar aversion to certain images and objects containing small holes or crevices. My daughter had run across the word trypophobia somewhere or other and described the condition to me. I was astonished that this is a phenomenon experienced by others. I first noticed it when I was 9 or 10--it was more or less confined to the clustered dots on the surface of artichoke hearts. I get a similar reaction to cracked, dry desert beds, trabeculated bone, and porous rocks. I'm a physician, and natural skeptic--but you missed the boat here. Understandably, I guess--it's a peculiar thing, for which there's no literature, but surely not the only odd syndrome out there for which the internet is the perfect tool for uncovering.

206.248.167.220 (talk) 02:37, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trypophobia. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:37, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Your comment to User:Handws

Hi Orange Mike - regarding this post of yours, I just wanted to let you know that the account has been abandoned by the user, so they will probably not receive your message. (I advised them in IRC that their username was a violation of policy, and they have registered a new one. Regrettably, they left the channel before I could ask what the new name was.) However, I did also inform them of the same issues you have raised and, as far as I could tell, they seemed to understand. Regards, AJCham 19:48, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

StrongLifts

I put the {hangon} tag plus i was willing to clean it up, why was it deleted without a consensus? Portillo (talk) 03:44, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Unblock

I thought this user's request for unblock seemed pretty legit, but I thought I would get your opinion first as the blocking admin. Cheers! TNXMan 14:17, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Question

I'm curious as to what personal assertions I made to the Dragons article. Since I mentioned very clearly that the article is biased, and directed in an atheistic/non-neutral viewpoint, its curious why you redirect that claim to me. Also, you reassert my opinion by adding, "we're trying to be serious". If you wanted to be serious you shouldn't add "millions of years" fairytales as if its fact. If "dragons aren't real because dinosaurs lived 65 millions years ago based on unreliable datings of rocks, and assuming rocks assign fossils dates" isn't baised towards atheism and secular opinion rather than real science, then what is? I'm not concenred with a reply or if what I wrote was deleted. I wanted to make it very clear how biased wikipedia is. If people are personally biased towards atheism themself, then thats there life. But adding everything in wikipedia from that viewpoint is nonsense. Next time you'd like to be serious, consider not calling yourself Orangemike and wasting time on the internet writing meaningless articles. Mwarriorjsj7 (talk) 09:43, 26 October 2009 (UTC)