User talk:Orangemike

TUSC token fa255ad995d61b015320a1a04245a250

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Nomination of Jill Kenton for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jill Kenton 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/Jill Kenton 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 template from the top of the article.

Bluford Series Deletion

I appreciate hearing criteria for impartiality, but there is a gray area here. These words HAVE been said by "objective" parties such as the ALA (American Library Association) and the Journal for Adolescent and Adult Literacy (JAAL), and the books have sold over 9 million copies, so there is something to the idea that they are popular! Links to these authorities were in the deleted page. I can edit to address your concerns, but what was on that page is what others--not me--have been saying.

Also, the content of those pages took a while to compile and does not exist anywhere else except on Wikipedia. While I certainly can edit to add reference and more objective or third party language, I would like to get back the content as a baseline from which to start editing. Is that possible?

---

Mctator

Shiny thing

Hello, Orangemike. You have new messages at Voceditenore's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Merry Christmas!!

For all you do!! Have a wonderful HOLIDAY!!

Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas5}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Re: blocking of user VHlab

Hello Orangemike, I was disappointed today to learn that you blocked my username VHlab. I understand you believe there is an apparent COI, despite the fact that we are a non-profit, open access group sharing many of the values of Wikipedia (dissemination freely of knowledge and education). How can I access the code/markup of the sandbox of the user VHlab? Would it be possible to have it sent to me somehow? I can no longer access the revision history of the sandbox. Thank you, Ryan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.101.136.10 (talk) 19:17, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

• I can't speak for Mike, but it seems that this is a pretty clear-cut case. First of all, your account was blocked because it violated our username policy: Wikipedia:Username policy. Second, the page you created, The Atlas of Human Cardiac Anatomy, was both promotional and contained a huge amount of copyrighted material which could, in addition, only be described as promotional (and could, conversely, in no way be described as neutral). Third, one wonders what content you wish to access, since most of it was copied from pages such as this one and this one. If it's the coding you wish to preserve, that's unfortunate, but the page as you had created it was in no way acceptable for Wikipedia anyway. I hope this answers your questions. You are welcome to contribute under a new username, as long as you make sure that your edits are neutral and follow our guidelines. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 20:06, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

As Drmies says, just because you are a non-profit does not exempt you from following our rules about corporate role accounts, etc. Wikipedia is not here to promote your cause, however noble you perceive it to be. Our strictures on self-promotion make no exception for non-profits. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:25, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I understand, but would like to access the coding anyway. Is there a way to do this? BTW Drmies, you're extremely rude- would you address me this way if we were talking in person? Simply no need for it. I understand now from Orangemike that I was in violation of the terms and appreciate his respectful and educating responses. I didn't read the hundreds of pages of documentation before creating my first page. I'm sure it's frustrating to you and the community that people do exactly what I did. It is funny though because so many of the corporate/political/individual pages are created by employees obviously...

I apologize, but give me a break Drmies. I was actually pretty pumped about being able to contribute to the community since an expert in varied fields, but this is a quite souring experience. Drmies- what was not neutral about the article that I wrote? It simply explained the utility, process, and content of the website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.101.136.10 (talk) 20:31, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Non-neutral content that doomed the piece included the repeated "generous"-"generous"-"generosity" shout-outs to donors; the repeated use of the ® symbol (forbidden here); and self-lauding phrases like "a wealth of information". That's one reason, frankly, I'm reluctant to send you the prior version, since it strikes me as a poor role model. (That, and the use of copyrighted material.)

"so many of the corporate/political/individual pages are created by employees obviously"? Alas, you are right. That, in fact, is why we are so harsh and precipitate when we spot such conflicts-of-interest.

Believe me: we really are eager to get the help of subject-matter experts here, and I hope your little brush with the buzz saw does not keep you from helping in ways that don't impinge on our COI and copyright policies. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:48, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Orangemike, thank you again for the kind response. If there were a way to get access to the code I would greatly appreciate it. I will not be re-posting this article myself, as I'm sure it would be a waste of time. I would like the code for future reference on formatting. Regarding the copyrighted material I was in the process of filing the documentation needed for free use per CC-BY-SA 3.0 after the page was deleted (When I uploaded the files I listed that I am the copyright owner and didn't realize that this was not sufficient since it is in an option when you upload. I'm still confused by this to be honest.). I was wondering, is there an acceptable way to have a page made by someone neutral- e.g., could I ask a student who is not involved with the project to create the page? This may be getting into technicalities, but hardly think calling organ donors generous is being non-neutral-- I do agree that there is self-lauding that should not have been included and the user can draw their own opinion as to the value of the content. Thank you again for the educating posts! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.101.136.10 (talk) 16:14, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Orangemike, should I take your non-response as a 'no' to be able to get the text/markup from the page/sandbox that was deleted? Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.101.136.10 (talk) 15:31, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Hoplophobia and homophobia

Hi Mike I would love to have a discussion/debate with you how I feel that your removing my editing was in fact disruptive as it shows a possible political agenda. If the two words which came into use at approximately the same time are both not listed as "pejorative neologism" then neither should be. I was not trying to be disruptive, rather I felt that the same standard should be applied to both words.

Thanks in advance for what I hope can be very civil debate/discussion

Jeff-mn (talk) 11:04, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

The histories of the two terms are totally different, and must be addressed separately. Cooper, sole coiner of the word "hoplophobia", openly admitted from the git-go that with he was making up a cute pejorative, a term calculated to imply that his political opponents were neurotic if not insane. If you feel the article on the term "homophobia" needs improvement, discuss it on that term's talk page. For all I know, you might be right about that word (though bluntly I doubt it); make your case in the appropriate forum. I do know that that term has a much more complex history, one I myself am not interested in going into; see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:36, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

OK I have posted to there but also I will post a similar thing here as there is obviusly some very strong emotions from you. You to quote your page are: "... a Wikipedia administrator," they why you didn't follow the guidelines WP even someone as new as me has found? First that was my first edit ever, yet I was told by you that disruptive editing would lead to me being blocked from editing yet I did exactly what WP:Introduction says to do "Don't be afraid to edit – anyone can edit almost every page, and we are encouraged to be bold! Find something that can be improved and make it better—for example, spelling, grammar, rewriting for readability, adding content, or removing non-constructive edits" Also I read on WP:Bite Dont bite newbies - well after getting that from an admin who is in the top 400 editors I do feel that you bit me. Also it seems you assumed that I was not honestly doing this in good faith as it says an admin should do. WP:DSAN. I was. I do admit rather stupidly I missed the talk page (I see it now) and will propose there. If I could figure out who to complain to a council of admins (surely something like that must exist) regarding my greievnce I would. If this is not where I should post this then please point me to where I should. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeff-mn (talk • contribs) 11:13, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

COI template

I have initiated a discussion at Village Pump Proposals regarding applying Template:COI editnotice more broadly, in order to provide advice from WP:COI directly onto the article Talk page. Your comment, support or opposition is invited. Cheers. CorporateM (Talk) 19:46, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to join Wikiproject Conflict Resolution

Wikipedia:WikiProject Conflict Resolution.--Amadscientist (talk) 09:46, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Unblock on Slipperywhistle (formerly known as Honeypowerclive)

Hello Orangemike. This is a notice to inform you that I have unblocked a user that you blocked, named User:Slipperywhistle (formerly known as User:Honeypowerclive), as they have promised not to repeat the behaviour that got them blocked. I have indicated to them that if they go back on their promise, they may be blocked indefinitely again. Thanks. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 17:51, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

COI on white supremacist article

Apparently the subject of Jamie Kelso has returned to "white wash" the article about himself. I reverted their changes (both as an IP and using their named account) for several policy based reasons. Would you mind looking in to it as well? I really don't want to get drawn into a revert war with them and have reverted their changes as much as I plan to. Heiro 02:40, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Turkey

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Turkey. 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. — RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

user cazimir - your note

orangemike - I wasn't using this account but used it for some additions to historic/geographic articles and just through mindlessly continuing, you are right in that a conflict of interest has developed that now looks rather stupid, for which I apologise. I'm afraid that's the process of wanting to be contributive but learning wikipedia, making mistakes, and having two young kids - although none of those excuse. I've done a bit of reading since receiving your user talk note, before replying. A lot of that I should have done when picking up things at the beginning, but life sadly doesn't happen like that.

In reference to the Frink School article, it was reasonable for one of the former students of a small independent school allied to one of the important British sculptors to place it in context, but it now looks a conflict as all the non-notable alumni have disappeared following your edit except a link to what is now me. It would be better with no mentions of prior students at all. I think there is other evidence to support the School's 15 year history, and the alumni are not the reason for its notability in art historic terms, I think.

More importantly, I'm concerned about the objectivity of posts of anything that I've edited that has concerned a link to JE... do you want me to review this myself, or suggest how I liase over this? I think about 80% of my edits are concerning other sculpture or art or heritage related subjects, and just general corrections when I happen to be browsing. On the other items where COI must have existed, I'm fastidious about the objectivity of independent/public domain references...(i.e. some recent additions to the JE page, where the most obvious, blunt conflict exists) but of course even my objectivity will be subjective.

A salutory lesson, but please advise what is best course of action and I'll put some time to it. I'll hopefully be a better editor as a result, if given the chance. You'll have to advise what is best course of action with the user... do I just continue but make well sure I'm not doing anything with close connections, or do I need to end this user account? Please advise...

sorry/kind regards Cazimir (talk) 21:10, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Arthur Alan Wolk

Just wanted to make you aware of a heated battle at Arthur Alan Wolk. See the discussions at BLPN and on the article's talk page. Hopefully, you can intercede. --76.189.111.2 (talk) 01:46, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Anita Sarkeesian

I only removed a part of the header because I thought it was somewhat misleading and irrelevant, but no matter.— Preceding unsigned comment added by GamingWithStatoke (talk • contribs)

I'm genuinely puzzled: in what way did you think it was misleading or irrelevant? Most Kickstarter proposals don't generate death threats and "Beat Up The Project Person" games. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:53, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello, was wondering if you could weigh in on -

Hello! -

I was wondering if you could weigh in on, if you have the time, on inclusion of articles containing critisims as well as accolades of a politician. Your comments on the talk page of Gov Scott Walker were quite good. In this case it is another governor, item 14 Bias on the Talk Page, thanks!Patriot1010 (talk) 18:02, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Ralph Drollinger

Hi Mike, I was wondering if you'd be able to comment on User:AccuracyInPosting's continued use of court documents as sources. This seems like a clear violation of WP:OR especially given the contentious nature of this BLP. AccuracyInPosting's continued editing, all with the purpose of presenting Drollinger in a positive light is troubling to me. I'm considering bringing it up at ANI, but thought I'd drop you a line first. --Daniel(talk) 22:54, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Mike; I would think the Wiki world would be desirous of utilizing objective, accurate information in the construction of a BLP? Please explain why verifiable court documents are not allowed? Plus could you remove the headers on this BLP -- there as been no discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AccuracyInPosting (talk • contribs) 14:34, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

John La Fave

Hi MIke, I'm happy to discuss the article with you on the talk page [[1]]. Cheers! -- — Keithbob • Talk • 00:53, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Vital articles

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Vital articles. 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. — RFC bot (talk) 15:15, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Was wondering if I could get your take on -

Hi Mike - dealing with a weird one here, an interesting neferious sock/meatpuppeteer:

Sorry for the Alt, but I know the Subject is watching my main account. Was looking for a "sanity" check if this type of situation is "normal" or should get outside intervention.

User A opens a RFC, asking to keep, move or edit/change a constentious sentance.

User A: Remove

User B: Remove (And was WP:Hounded with revert by User D on another article Talk page, corrected by a 3rd party)

User C: Remove

User D: Retain

User E: Retain

User F: Reword to make less contentious - provides an example sentence.

User G: Reword to make less contentious

User B tweaks User F Sentence.

User E: Agrees with re-word edit.

User A: Agrees with re-word edit.

User B: Agrees with re-word edit.

User F: Agrees with re-word edit and asks why User A "Made a new account to just fight this one issue.".

User G: Agrees with re-word edit.

User D: Makes no attempt at compromise.

Per WP:EDITCONCENSUS - the process appears to be an edit is made since we found a compromise.

User B makes the compromised edit to the article. User D reverts stating consensus has not occurred, use talk - but does not make any contributions, says what is wrong etc....

User A, the one who initiated the RFC suddenly turns red (No longer exists) - possible hack - user had no history of abuse/etc..(Is there any way to check for banned/blocked users quickly?)

User B gets a DNS Poison attack, with google redirecting what looks like the Wikipedia page - but its the foundation page. (Unknown to all) Cleans DNS issue and still "kickin"

User E ....suddenly request formal closure, since there is no consensus....which is weird, that user agreed with the tweaked sentence a day before.

So looking for your take - is this situation weird or is it just me? What actions (if any) would you recommend?MrSmith90210 (talk) 05:46, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Unblocked Havenhurstbooks

Hi Mike. I've unblocked User:Havenhurstbooks to allow a change of name - there's nothing whatsoever in their history to suggest that they're actually representing the company "Havenhurst Books", so I'm inclined to believe their explanation that they're a bibliophile who live on Havenhurst. I'm guessing you'll be okay with that; if not, feel free to reblock and excoriate me on my talkpage. All the best, Yunshui 雲‍水 09:23, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Scott Atran COI

The subject has apparently been editing his own article as an IP (64.131.188.170). See this BLP/N thread he started and his edit history. --76.189.111.2 (talk) 14:50, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years. 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. — RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

You made it!

You made my funny stuff page. --I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 17:40, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Yes that is an OM classic - made me laugh too.--ukexpat (talk) 17:59, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

How to look for the history of edits of deleted articles.

a) What places are there to check for the history of edits to a deleted article?...

b) For example, ? Where can be found the history of the edits to the deleted article Recovery Is Possible Recovery Is Possible

> Only those with Admins rights are able to access deleted pages. You can email an admin, and request for them to retrieve the information for you. There is no way a non-admin can access these pages. : (talk) 14:05, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Please retrieve deleted Recovery Is Possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Don warner saklad (talk • contribs) Thank you !

Please retrieve the revisions "history" of deleted http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recovery_Is_Possible

Bill Luckett

I'd be more inclined to restore the pre-gutted version. Carrite (talk) 02:11, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Fascism

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Fascism. 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. — RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

BLP Help!

Hey there! You look like just the guy I was looking for! S0 I am new and my first post has recieved some BLP criticism. I believed I made it about as nuetral, fact based and relevant as possible but still recieved a tag today. Any advice is greatly appreciated! I just want to make sure that unbiased, factual pictures are painted of the topics I wish to help build. Topic concerning John Dewey Academy. Troutbum898 (talk) 01:27, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Hey again. I must say I had asked many others to read and review my post. They had all given a thumbs up and much pain has once again been felt by many at the deletion of it once again. We had some victims all rejoicing last night at the many nods of approval we had received. It is the small victories we take pride in as fighting against victim-blaming (especially amongst minors) and rape/abuse cover up (especially in schools/churches). This is an uphill battle to say the least. We need to come to an agreement on this topic. 1.) How the model of therapy used at a therapeutic school is wrong to even delineate I have a hard time understanding. I said nothing positive or negative about it and cited the published books written by the faculty of JDA promoting these methods. Some people promote Attack/Confrontation Therapy (though never has a single study been done to say it works though many have proven its damaging impact on peoples lives, I could also lead you to sources from the APA citing these facts) some people do not promote or accept it and in the industry it remains very. very controversial. This is why I think it is important for it to be delineated and part of the picture regarding an unbiased encyclopedic portrait of JDA. Either way, I left it up to the reader to decide. Each book I cited even refers to case examples in JDA. This to me seems like an exceptional source. I even had the link open up to the pages that directly reference Attack/Confrontation Therapy. 2.) How rape and abuse at a school for vulnerable teens perpetrated by faculty in an incredible power position can not be included in the full, unbiased story is also hard for me to understand. I only stated that it had happened and even gave the Perp his own voice in defending himself. 100% neutral. Again, I gave a link to an article that refers to the crimes committed. I only stated that these horrific crimes had happened, quoted the Perp in defending himself, gave factual links so readers could investigate on their own and come to their own opinion as to whether it is good, bad or however they choose to interpret the crimes. So where do we go from here? I think a conversation regarding this topic is incredibly important and for every victim past present and future a answer regarding rape/abuse cover-up should be delineated. Troutbum898 (talk) 15:00, 22 March 2013 (UTC)— Troutbum898 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

We need information from reliable sources, not blogs and attack websites. Where is the press coverage?

This should be discussed on the article's talk page. Did you not notice that I raised these issues on the article, to be discussed at talk?

Please read this guideline and this essay. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:02, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

You seem to be confused. I only cited a newspaper and two published books never a blog or attack website. Are you confusing this with another case? We have moved the convo also to the Teahouse and seem to have an agreement between many people except you. I hope we can all agree one day! Troutbum898 (talk) 20:38, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

You need coffee (or sleep)

on the (non)-block of User:Melicband. -- Alexf^(talk) 13:03, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Sleep? My wife just broke her leg; I'm not getting a lot of sleep. (Probably should have had another Mountain Dew, though.) --Orange Mike | Talk 15:02, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Why did you delete the crest (rap group) page, can it be restored?

Sorry to ask as it's going back more than a few years, I'm hoping you remember why you deleted the entire page though as now I can't find anything on the group here and information is scarce elsewhere. Can the page please be restored as I'd love to actually know how many albums they've released (if it's mentioned?) and I'd also love an explanation as to why you deleted the page in the first place. Thanks

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Crest_%28rap_group%29 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.107.170.244 (talk) 14:18, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

It was an article about a band with no credible assertion of notability, consisting of a list of their self-published albums copied off their MySpace page. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:55, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Question about reverting

I would like to revert this users edit see this diff back to the user User:VIAFBot but the user that made the vandalism edit was an IP address as shown in the history logs, the thing is that also since that edit the User:Addbot did the migration removal of the Wikidata Projects interwikilinks for that page witch is a legitimate edit. So I can't revert it as under vandalism. How should I go about reverting it to before the Vandalism but without wiping the history of the Addbot edit? I know this is confusing but if you need some help in maybe explaining things better let me know. And I will try to explain better. --Clarkcj12 (talk) 04:04, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

You can't do a simple revert. What you'll have to do is restore the lost content by re-editing the current version to the clean version. Then, do an edit summary saying something like, "restoring content removed by IP vandal on date X". --Orange Mike | Talk 12:35, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Karl Marx

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Karl Marx. 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. — RFC bot (talk) 08:15, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Discussion Spam

Can you look at this [[2]] and give a comment? Hell In A Bucket (talk) 08:37, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Ponka-We Victors

Many thanks for your comment. The Kansas State Library has a database of the Kansas Legislators Past and Present-you might want to check that out. On a personal note-how is your wife doing? You mention she broke her leg. Please tell her to get well along with my greetings.RFD (talk) 15:20, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

She slipped and fell on the ice at UW-M, where she works. She'll be out of work for 6-8 weeks minimum (fractured tibia up by the knee). Even Scott Walker can't keep her from getting worker's comp on this one (she works for Parking & Transit, ironically enough). --Orange Mike | Talk 16:32, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Oversight Needed?

Greetings.

Would you say that this diff is worth oversighting? I'm asking you because you were the one that blocked user:Zantessadvancetelecommunications for some kind of attack campaign or something. MIVP - (Can I Help?) (Maybe a bit of tea for thought?) 23:33, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Yep, it's a hater/crusader account. I'd say the edit deserves oversighting; but I can't do anything today (complications as mentioned in item one header above this one). --Orange Mike | Talk 14:56, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Wholeheartedly agree; I've revdel'd the edit and contacted oversight to request full supression. Yunshui 雲‍水 15:06, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bill Biggart

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Bill Biggart. 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. — RFC bot (talk) 06:15, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Templating without blocking

Hi! You put a block notice on User:Britto Group's talk page, but forgot to block them: I've blocked them now. Just thought you might want to know. -- The Anome (talk) 15:22, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Block of Ctb500

I mentioned you in an SPI case which discusses User:Ctb500 and your action to block him. Feel free to comment at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Goldenbearpress. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 02:00, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Tennessee - Milwaukee

You moved away from "Southern Politics" to the land of McCarthyism!!! Brilliant! lolololo!!!2001:558:6007:27:7992:7DA3:D702:EE6A (talk) 22:23, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Milwaukee is also the home of the Sewer Socialists, including my dear brother in Christ the late Frank Zeidler; and Wisconsin was also the home of Wisconsin Progressive Party. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:42, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Someone rapidly deleting my creation

Medu321 (talk) 22:47, 26 March 2013 (UTC)) I (medu321)have some problem, someone again and agin deleting and changin my articles. I ahve a graphically created image, indicating all my problems those I am facing for 2 month. please, let me email ID at [redacted]

Please, I need administrative assistance (moved from the User page)

This is an Open Challenge regarding the Wikipedia article reference as entitled: Aminul Haque Wasel Maizbhanderi which we have written but someone send an objection to the authority of the Wikipedia; not to accept any article named: Aminul Haque Wasel Maizbhanderi. Moreover, they are rapidly changing the list of Khalifa’s of the Universal Sufi Saint Ahmed Ullah Maizbhanderi. Their act of changing without submitting any reference is totally contrary to the Wikipedia terms and conditions. Note: Delowar Hossain Maizbhandari was an evidently initiated Sufi Disciple and mostly younger nephew of Aminul Haque Wasel Maizbhanderi. This is a published documentation as we remarked indicating the historically famous published Sufi Book, 'Alakar Renesar Joogeer Akti dik' which was written by Delwar Hossain Maizbhanderi himself. Moreover, within a day or two, we shall upload the book cover and original page by scanning which was published under the superintendence of the author’s sons as well as the authority of Maizbhander Dorbar Sharif More than 25 years before. If there any one belonging even a single contrary document, please, let you write, denote or come in a web conference at any time from all around the world (Contact through: wwww.rahebhander.org). Please, don't repeat changing without submitting any document/ reference. Please, I need administrative assistance of the Wikipedia at [redacted]. I have a graphically created image, indicating all my problems. so, please, provide me email ID.

I have moved this comment from the user page to the talk page (and redacted personal content info) -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:02, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Medu, you appear to be attempting to publicize this upcoming book; what else precisely you are trying to do I am unable to comprehend due to your confusing and promotional language. I will point out, however, that the subject of an article is not regarded as a reliable source of information about himself.

Please comment on Talk:Rape and pregnancy controversies in United States elections, 2012

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Rape and pregnancy controversies in United States elections, 2012. 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. — RFC bot (talk) 03:15, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Steubenville High School

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Steubenville High School. 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. — RFC bot (talk) 00:16, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

White noise online is real!

Not to be rude but there is a game called white noise a tale of horror, you can find this game on the xbox360 in the indie game channel with a price of only 80 microsoft points which is equivalent to $1.00 it's still a work in progress and I kindly ask you to not use prejudgment before you place a deletion template on it. If you do not know what the game is then research it then--Indienews (talk) 15:22, 29 March 2013 (UTC)