User talk:Orangemike

COI

I marked the talk page of User:Humber Marketing & Communications as potential COI and his/her only edited article Humber College similarly. Looks a lot more blatant than User:Greenbankliverpool whom you quite rightly took action against a few minutes ago. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   14:59, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

On another page, someone removed a contributing editor tag saying more evidence was needed. Okay. Would you think a contributing editor tag listing you might be appropriate in that instance? --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 00:51, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

I live in Wisconsin; I read books; I'm a library user; I have GLBT friends and family; I'm a First Amendment advocate. On the other hand, I couldn't find West Bend without a map, and never go near it voluntarily. None of these constitutes a "personal connection" in any way I can think of. Do you disagree? --Orange Mike | Talk 01:04, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Nope. Thanks. I see no COI there based on the above. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 01:50, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

FYI

See this (Bill Thomas (writer). Dabomb87 (talk) 23:24, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Arctic2012

I haven't had any luck getting User:Arctic2012 to contact me or discuss anything. Obvious conflict of interest of some sort. Fred Talk 07:19, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Jeffrey Vinokur

You might want to look at this AFD, the author dug up some sources. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 21:21, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Help With Clean Up

hey orange mike, i have written an article "todd white- artist" and was hoping that i could continue getting some feedback from you. you're the only editor who has provided much advice thus far, so thank you for that. my article was tagged as the author having a personal connection or relationship with the subject which i would like removed. i am simply an art enthusiast and free lance writer. i'm not trying to promote anyone on wikipedia i can assure you. i was well aware before i started the article that kind of writing was cause for deletion. i'm merely trying to provide the details of high points in this artist career- details which are facts which i have backed up with what i hope you'll find to be reliable sources at this point. specifically however, the sentence referencing the limited edition US postage stamps, you clearly weren't a fan of. i think it's a really interesting fact about his work and certainly worth mentioning. that truth was covered in several press releases produced by warner bros. and the stamps can still found on several websites for purchase....although i'm guessing using that as a reference won't help my case for "promoting the artist"! :) can you offer an additional idea. i would really like to keep this information as part of the article. i tried to make a few edits this evening i think you'll appreciate. please keep me posted! thanks so much. LindsayCervarich (talk) 06:07, 1 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by LindsayCervarich (talk • contribs) 06:04, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Help move a page from user space

Hello, can you please take a look at my page and let me know what you think about it, and if i can now move it to published articles space? thanks this is my page: User:Sazarian/EVER_TEAM. --Sazarian (talk) 16:05, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Tags

I got your message about signing off on talk pages. Sorry for the error on my part. I also noticed some additional edits to the Todd White- artist page, but there was no response to my request about removing the tags. The original request is below under "help with clean up". Your feedback on the matter would be greatly appreciated. Thanks again- look forward to hearing from you. LindsayCervarich (talk) 18:25, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

1. PLEASE LEAVE YOUR MESSAGE AT THE BOTTOM, NOT THE TOP, OF THE PAGE!!!!

2. Please, please, please: read WP:CITE and WP:RS; both Art News Today and Art Business News sound like iffy sources. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:11, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

User:Amglondon potential spammer

Can you check this users contributions: [1] and see what you think. Thanks. Active Banana ( ^bananaphone 13:34, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mike, my name is Paul Slinger and I work for the PR agency Edelman. I am sending this note on behalf of my client, Rashed who works at Mubadala. His IP address has been blocked from posting. Please kindly see the note below.

Many thanks, Paul

---

Dear Mike,

My name is Rashed Alharmoodi, and I work in the communications department for Mubadala, a large business based in Abu Dhabi which holds interests in companies like GE, Ferrari, and others. Mubadala greatly values Wikipedia and the contributions from editors like you who have created one of the world's most important information sources. We also recognise and appreciate that Wikipedia is a resource shaped by the community, and that there are clear rules against corporate participation, self-interested edits, and conflict-of-interest edits.

As you have noticed, I have been attempting to engage with the Wikipedia community openly and transparently to suggest some purely factual changes to the entry about Mubadala, in the spirit on ensuring that it is as accurate as possible. After several months of attempts, I recently resorted to making some of the most pressing edits myself as it did not appear that anyone from the Wikipedia community was particularly engaged with the entry. We did so only after first posting a request to the entry's discussion page and attempting to directly contact the one editor who had been active in the entry in recent months. (You can see it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:NerdyScienceDude) I realise that you have now reverted the changes that I made, and also blocked my username from making any further edits.

With all of that in mind, I would very much appreciate it if you could suggest the most appropriate means for connecting with someone in the Wikipedia community and asking them to consider the changes that I have suggested. I would be very grateful for your advice.

Sincerely,

Rashed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.96.71.137 (talk) 17:15, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

User:Adamwantsanuke

Hi Orangemike, could you explain why this user was blocked as result of their username? I don't quite understand how it could be perceived as offensive; perhaps I'm missing something. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 13:30, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm especially confused that you told the user that their username is a vulgarism... GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 13:31, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

"Adam Wants A Nookie" or maybe "Wants-a Nookie"? The editor's only edits had been to create an "I rock, dude!" autobiography of a teenager named Adam Peake with no assertion of any kind of notability whatsoever. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:35, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

It seems more likely that it's simply "Adam wants a nuke", surely? In any case, I don't think this could be called a blatant username policy violation. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 13:36, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I've been reading so much transcribed Japanese recently that I was pronouncing it in my head like a Japanese-American name: Adam Wantsanuke. Block is to be removed. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:42, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Heh, that's definitely the best reason I've heard for blocking a username so far ;) Thanks for taking a second look. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 13:45, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Re: John Madigan

Hey OrgangeMike. Almost as soon as I'd made an edit, you were asking about it! I'm not aware of the official results you refer to; but you can [my reasoning] if you'd like. —Felix the Cassowary 19:33, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I was going by http://www.abc.net.au/elections/federal/2010/guide/svic-results.htm --Orange Mike | Talk 20:13, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

If you have a moment

If you could check out something - there was a PuI listed on August 23 (Possible derivative uploads by User:83d40m) that became very lengthy. I noticed today that the nom had self closed the discussion and re-listed. There is no link from the old discussion to the re-listed discussion, only to a "new" archive of the old discussion as the editor removed the entire discussion - they simply cut and pasted it to the "archive" location. The "archive" discussion also does not include a link to the "re-listed" version. Under today's Pui discussions there is a listing that says Relisted from August 23. See the subpage discussion at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/Florida uploads by User:83d40m. I am not sure why this was re-listed, it may have to with the nominators Rfa and the Oppose opinion voiced by User:83d40m. The process of self-closing/re-listing/cut and pasting the entire Pui discussion seems out of place, so I am here asking you for your opinion on the matter. Soundvisions1 (talk) 16:12, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Travis Bean

Hi Mike, I noticed you've made a couple of reverts and such with the Travis Bean article. Not sure what you know about the page, but the new models that are being added aren't actually Travis Bean guitars, but a knock off from germany basically using the page for advertising. Do you have any advice on how to deal this this? hellboy (talk) 22:29, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Delete 'em, with a full explanation in the edit summary. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:56, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia Sources

Many thanks for providing the authority as to not using other Wikipedia articles as sources. I guess what I must do, in circumstances where I believe there is complementary information in another article that merits reading along with the current article, is a "see also" reference? It seems to me that points in certain Wikipedia articles merit being read together--such as an article on an album by an arist, where there are related details in the article on the particular artist. Does this seem reasonable--referencing another Wikipedia article as complementary or supplementary, rather than as an authoritative source in itself?

Dreadarthur (talk) 14:51, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

That's what wikilinks are for: to lead the reader to another article on a related topic. I see "See also" sections as a confession that prior editors have failed to properly integrate the related information into an article. If there is useful information in another article, that information has to have come from some cited reliable source. Cite the original reliable source, not the Wikipedia article which relied on that source. If the article on Fred Btflspk says he wrote the lyrics for the album Milwaukee Nights while riding a dromedary through the streets of Ulan Bator, don't reference the Wikipedia article on Fred Btflspk in the Wikipedia article about the album, reference the source which the Wikipedia article on Fred Btflspk cites for that assertion. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:15, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

"gratuitous pseudo-logo"

I wonder if you will be removing File:Wikipedia wordmark.svg from Wikipedia as well? –xeno^talk 16:14, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Jefferson Prep

I have seen that you work a lot with new spammy corporate articles and I trust your expertise. Can you take a look at this one and see what you think? Thanks!Active Banana ( ^bananaphone 17:51, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Tang Sou Dao

Hi, you deleted a page I created for the British Martial Art, Tang Sou Dao. Please check out these links and see if you agree if these refernces are sufficient to show it meets the notability requirement: [[2]] [[3]] [[4]] Or just google "Tang Sou Dao". Cheers, The Yowser (talk) 14:06, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

1. I didn't delete it.

2. Nope. You've got a) a commercial website; b) an article (from that well-regarded center of sterling journalism, The Sun) about another subject altogether, in which a guy who teaches TSD says good things about it; and c) another commercial website. No hint of notability. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:14, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

RealBigSwede apoligize

I'm truly sorry I was naeeve and dumb I did not understand how the wiki was working I*t will never happen again.... -- RealBigSwede (talk) 14:08, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Dennis Nackord

• Dennis Nackord · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

Hi, as the Webmaster involved has followed a reasonable process via OTRS of addressing copyright, I suggest the article is userfied for them to resolve and seek advice on the G11 issues. Re-deleting without giving opportunity for improvement appears rather harsh (similar note raised on the undeletions page). Fæ (talk) 11:02, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

As long as the spam is not retained in article space. Frankly, I saw nothing salvageable there. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:29, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Secret pages 2

Because you participated in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Some Person/The Real Secret Page and Secret Barnstar, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Secret pages 2. Cunard (talk) 06:27, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

New Clarion pages

I've started the following list pages, on the idea that the various Clarion workshop pages were getting too cluttered with names and should probably be pared down to a prominent few. I'm not sure I'll have the time, or sufficient knowledge of who should be kept on the main pages. Since you've had an interest in the Clarion workshop pages, I thought I'd let you know:

• List of Clarion Writers Workshop Alumni
• List of Clarion Writers Workshop Instructors
• List of Clarion West Writers Workshop Instructors
• List of Clarion West Writers Workshop Alumni
• List of Clarion South Writers Workshop Instructors
• List of Clarion South Writers Workshop Alumni

Artemis-Arethusa (talk) 17:37, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Re: Why would I be "crypto-"?

Oy gevalt. Happy to help. -- Rrburke (talk) 21:44, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Clerk elections

Hi, this is just to inform you that elections for Clerkship at WP:UAA have started on the talk page. You have been sent this message because you were recently active in handling submissions or discussions. Discussion is ongoing and you are encouraged to voice your opinion on the candidates.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Fridae'sDoom (talk) at 06:46, 14 September 2010 (UTC).

SEO 2.0 Resubmission

BrendaBooker (talk) 22:05, 14 September 2010 (UTC)BrendaBooker Please see User:BrendaBooker/SEO 2.0 for recreation of article with no ulterior motives.

User talk:Xxxxxcanmanxxxxx

This is out of hand. The user in question added two inappropriate links, one to Beverage can at 17:51 on 14 September and one to Scooby-Doo at 17:54 on 14 September. Both were reverted and I warned the user at 18:03. (uw-spam1)

With no further edits by the user, warning #2 was given at 21:19 14 September by Orange Mike, warning #3 at 21:19 14 September by Orange Mike and a final warning at 8:04 15 September by TeleComNasSprVen.

I am reverting warnings 2, 3 and 4. If either of you are unhappy with my action, feel free. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:44, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Globus family of brands

You posted a message on My Talk regarding the Globus family of brands article I submitted, confirming (I think) the article's speedy deletion citing a "conflict of interest." Please note that every bit of information in the article was sourced by reputable third-party editorial resources (as indicated by the sourcing throughout the piece). I encourage you to click through on each source to see that all information provided is done so in an unbiased manner.

Given this, I have requested that the article be restored (I'm asking you and I have asked JamesBWatson and Yousou). Please assist with this in any way you deem fit. And, if you have further suggestions for making the article more neutral (again, after clicking through the resources provided), I would be interested to hear your thoughts.

It would also be helpful to get your insight on how this article differs from other travel companies on Wikipedia: Hilton Hotels, The Travel Corporation, Starwood, Carnival Cruise Lines, Uniworld, Etc.)

Thank you for your time, consideration and suggestions. (Melaniegravdal (talk) 15:58, 15 September 2010 (UTC))— Melaniegravdal (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

1. I notice you don't address the question of your blatant conflict of interest, which is all over the internet anyway. Your editing history shows no effort to do anything in Wikipedia but publicize Globus and Avalon.

2. Lines like "setting a new standard in small ship cruising" do not make it easy to pretend that you are not trying to write an advertisement here. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:06, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

RE:COI board Globus

Due to my watchlist, I already saw it. Thanks for the notification anyway.

Many Regards, Yousou (talk) 16:19, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

• Hi OM, can I request a userified copy of that article? I will modify my "user-friendly" explanation and leave it for the COI user, which should explain exactly what the problems are with the Globus articles. Not being able to see the deleted ones, I can't cut/paste some of the more obvious promo language. Thanks! Arakunem^Talk 16:43, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Elevator photography

I am not advertising anything! It is a real hobby that more than 300 people in the US ALONE do. I don't know why you call it advertising. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Airplanegod (talk • contribs) 20:20, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

In other words, approximately one of every million Americans does it. Take a look at the wording, then read WP:UPANDCOMING and WP:CRYSTAL. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:07, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Ok, Fine. So, when is it going to get deleted? Airplanegod (talk) 23:17, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Controversy Section on Jeffrey Hyland's page

Hi there OrangeMike. I'm not really sure how I'm going to start getting this section resolved. There's a part in this article section that I thought does not seem to have a NPOV. The first sentence that says "In April of 2006 Hyland sold a 16-acre estate in Malibu to Teodoro Nguema Obiang Mangue, a highly controversial political leader and the quasi-prince of Equatorial Guinea. There's a reference article but reading through it, I've found some points in contrary to what the section editor tried to put out. There's a part in the article that said ""the malibu city or organization didn't know who was the buyer either", so if the city didn't know about it, then that only means Jeff knew less, or no clue at all. How do I go about this? 'just wanna do it right. I'd truly appreciate your inputs. Thanks very much. Jxc5 (talk) 16:25, 16 September 2010 (UTC)