Jump to content

User talk:InfoDataMonger

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 22:27, 17 March 2022 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

InfoDataMonger (talk) 23:43, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Barnard Medal for Meritorious Service to Science (May 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!
  • Please remember to link to the submission!
JustBerry (talk) 06:11, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Teahouse logo
Hello! InfoDataMonger, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! JustBerry (talk) 06:11, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Perfect Storm (book), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Albert Johnston (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at AfC Heinrich Mache was accepted

Heinrich Mache, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:22, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For future reference, don't type a "see also" directing folks to the de.wikipedia version of the article. Instead please press the "Languages" button on the far left column of your Wikipedia screen (once the article is complete/published), and it will allow you to choose other Wikipedia language articles to match up to yours. For practice, please try this with Heinrich Mache, to link it to de:Heinrich Mache on the German Wikipedia. Thanks! MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:25, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Draft:Barnard Medal for Meritorious Service to Science (June 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!
  • Please remember to link to the submission!
hewhoamareismyself 07:01, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:Robley D Evans-physicist.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Robley D Evans-physicist.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 17:45, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Harvey-Cushing-stamp.jpg

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Harvey-Cushing-stamp.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. TheLongTone (talk) 18:03, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Albert S. Johnston IV for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Albert S. Johnston IV 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/Albert S. Johnston IV until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. The Banner talk 22:50, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Shields Warren

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Shields Warren requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. --Finngall talk 16:54, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at AfC Barnard Medal for Meritorious Service to Science was accepted

Barnard Medal for Meritorious Service to Science, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Fiddle Faddle 15:49, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

June 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Leonidas D. Marinelli may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • '''Leonidas D. Marinelli''', (28 November 1906 - 13 September 1974, born in [[Argentina]] and died in [[Hinsdale]], [[DuPage

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:53, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to James Douglas (businessman) may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • * [[Association for the Protection of the Adirondacks

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:48, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Roberts Rugh may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • "Can the mammalian embryo be killed by X‐irradiation?." ''Journal of Experimental Zoology''. (151)3): 227-243.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:04, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lauriston S. Taylor

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Lauriston S. Taylor, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://hps.org/aboutthesociety/people/inmemoriam/LauristonTaylor.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 21:59, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello InfoDataMonger, I have drastically reduced Lauriston S. Taylor to remove all the material which you had copied virtually verbatim from this web page (copyright violation). Additionally, you did not credit the source (plagiarism). Please read the notice at Talk:Lauriston S. Taylor and take it on board. If you have created or substantially expanded other articles, please go back to them and ensure that they do not have the same problems. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 10:14, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

InfoDataMonger, I'm finding some real problems with your articles. In addition to Lauriston S. Taylor (above):

  • I have removed material from James Newell Stannard which you had copied verbatim from here, again without attribution.
  • I rewrote sections of Harvey Society where you had pasted material verbatim without attribution from here and here
  • I removed an unencyclopedic sentence from Barnard Medal for Meritorious Service to Science but in fact you had copied that whole lead section without attribution from this. Even though that source had a free license, it is plagiarism to copy others' words verbatim without attribution.
  • Heinrich Mache appears to be an unattributed translation of the German Wikipedia article. I have now added an attribution notice to comply with our licensing requirements.

Below I'm going to put the standard warning and advice about copyright problems and plagiarism for new users. Please read it and all the associated pages, before creating any further articles. Please also go back now to the following articles which you have created or expanded, check them thoroughly for copyright infringement and plagiarism, and repair the damage: Roberts Rugh, National Radium Institute, American Radium Society, Henry Harrington Janeway, Leonidas D. Marinelli, Gioacchino Failla, Robley D. Evans (physicist), James Ewing (pathologist), and John D. Boice, Jr.. Voceditenore (talk) 17:09, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have also removed the material on your user page copied verbatim from here. That source is clearly marked ©2014 Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. You cannot place a copyright infringement anywhere on Wikipedia, including user pages. I'm sorry to have keep banging on about this, but I don't think you realize how seriously copyright infringement is taken on Wikipedia. If you don't slow down, take the advice on board, and repair the damage so far, you stand a very real chance of being blocked, which would be a great pity. Voceditenore (talk) 17:40, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • You also need to do something about the Establishment of the Barnard Medal for Meritorious Service to Science section at Barnard Medal for Meritorious Service to Science. It appears to be a mass of quotation, with very unclear marking of the quotes and very unclear attributions to the exact source or sources from which they come. If any of those sources are online, please add the link in the references. I very much doubt that you typed all that material by hand.Voceditenore (talk) 18:02, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Warning icon Hello InfoDataMonger, and welcome to Wikipedia. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

  • You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and a cited source. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
  • Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
  • Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
  • If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
  • In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
  • Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied without attribution. If you want to copy from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Voceditenore (talk) 17:09, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation - Potential, needs my edits and updating

This is your final warning concerning your repeated insertion of copyright material into Wikipedia. Despite my warnings and explanations above, you have once again added the entire contents of this to your user page. I have removed it. The next time you add copyright material anywhere on Wikipedia, I will request that you be blocked. Voceditenore (talk) 12:22, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I did not add anything NEW to the page you are referring to. I did add a correct Reference to the citation you recently mentioned.

  • Perhaps the learning curve is steeper than realized or noticed by myself.
  • Did not think that 'User page' was open to All;
  • Where is the best place to test pages before going 'Live' ? I have been using my User page to collect and edit info before I post to Wiki!
  • So, anything you see on my User page is as I state: Works in Progress.
  • You assistance is appreciated and your criticism is welcome, IF CONSTRUCTIVE!
Hi InfoDataMonger. Thanks for getting back to me. Yes, the learning curve is steep, and a lot of beginners make the same mistakes you've made. But is absolutely essential that you never paste material from copyright sources onto any page on Wikipedia, including your user pages and sandbox. It is also essential that you explicitly credit your actual sources. Failure to do so is plagiarism, even on the rare occasions when you are using text that is out of copyright. See my comments at Talk:Henry Harrington Janeway, for example. Here are some tips that I give new editors...
How to avoid close paraphrasing and copyright problems.
  • One of the best ways to avoid copyright violations (and to write a better article) is to use several sources rather than relying on a single reference work or web site.
  • If you do find material that you want to use or refer to, copy it into a word processing file (or draft email) completely off-wiki'. Never put it in your sandbox or any other Wikipedia user or draft space.
  • But don't take the material and then start changing a few words in it or moving the phrases around. First of all, this will almost always result in paraphrasing which is so close that it risks being a copyright infringement. Secondly, if you just change a word to a similar word, you risk distorting the meaning.
Do this instead...
  • Read the material. Digest it. Internalize it. Make sure you understand the outline of the subject well enough to explain it out loud to another person without looking at your sources.
  • Then make an outline of the facts only—no adjectives, no phrases, just the facts
  • Now attempt a draft of the topic, just using your outline, preferably after not having looked at the source material for a little while. This will force you to write it in your own words — it's just too easy to be tempted to copy the perfect phrases that are found in professionally written material.
  • Draft your article gradually rather than rushing to get it into Wikipedia. This approach will result in more interesting and coherent content. It also allows you the time to review your work carefully for potential copyright violations.
Hope that helps. Voceditenore (talk) 18:27, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Herbert Mermagen

Hello InfoDataMonger,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Herbert Mermagen for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. AlanS (talk) 02:47, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

July 2014

Please stop removing speedy deletion notices from pages that you have created yourself, as you did with Herbert Mermagen. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. AlanS (talk) 03:02, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Roberts Rugh at microscope.png

A tag has been placed on File:Roberts Rugh at microscope.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only," "non-derivative use" or "used with permission," it has not been shown to comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. [1], and it was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19, or is not used in any articles. If you agree with the deletion, there is no need to do anything. If, however, you believe that this image may be retained on Wikipedia under one of the permitted conditions then:

  • state clearly the source of the image. If it has been copied from elsewhere on the web you should provide links to: the image itself, the page which uses it and the page which contains the license conditions.
  • add the relevant copyright tag.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:03, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The source shows a Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0) license. This license is not a compatible license, since it does not allow commercial use of the image. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:38, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

E.T.S. Appleyard

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of E.T.S. Appleyard, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v144/n3635/abs/144014a0.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 00:14, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (John W. 'Jack' Healy) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating John W. 'Jack' Healy, InfoDataMonger!

Wikipedia editor Animalparty just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Per WP:NCP, you should choose a single name (e.g. John Healy, Jack Healy, Jack W. Healy, etc.) and move the article to that name, rather than the somewhat awkward shoe-horning of a nickname.

To reply, leave a comment on Animalparty's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Dade William Moeller

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Dade William Moeller, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/newbernsj/obituary.aspx?pid=153897282.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 23:58, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:List of scientists whose names are used as non SI units

Category:List of scientists whose names are used as non SI units, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 06:08, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Eleanor J. MacDonald, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from http://www3.mdanderson.org/library/hrc/interviews/macdonald/description.html, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Eleanor J. MacDonald saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:45, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

CCI Notice

Hello, InfoDataMonger. This message is being sent to inform you that a request for a contributor copyright investigation has been filed at Contributor copyright investigations concerning your contributions to Wikipedia in relation to Wikipedia's copyrights policy. The listing can be found here. For some suggestions on responding, please see Responding to a CCI case. Thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:07, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:19, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Dade William Moeller, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/newbernsj/obituary.aspx?pid=153897282, possibly elsewhere, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Dade William Moeller saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:38, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violating copyright policy by copying text or images into Wikipedia from another source without verifying permission. You have been previously warned that this is against policy, but have persisted.

Please take this opportunity to be sure you understand our copyright policy and our policies regarding how to use non-free content. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

InfoDataMonger (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

yes, User recognizes that there has been a prior warning before this action. Declare that several of the warnings were unfounded and generated by Bots. Declare that guidelines and instructions are unclear and confusing. Declare that there is inconsistency between Wiki English and other Wikis especially Wiki Commons especially in regard to image use and Copyright rules. This User's intent is to further the depth, breath and scope of knowledge in this User's areas of expertise and NOT to violate any Copyright rights whatsoever. Further, this User will make future edits and updates and page additions in compliance with Copyright rules if and when UNBLOCKED. This User will review these Copyright rules prior to uploading ANY images and will NOT upload images unless in the public domain, etc. This User again declares that some prior warnings were clearly unwarranted and in ERROR and the result of BOTS. For instance, simply because certain words are repeated in an edited and new page does not mean that material was directly copied. In many fields of knowledge it is necessary to REUSE terms appropriate to the topic. Otherwise to employ different or new Terminology would confuse the reader and detract from the topic. This User has good and honorable intentions to benefit the world of knowledge that Wiki strives to attain. This User commits to make all future edits and uploads in accordance with Wiki rules and guidelines. This User again requests additional and further guidance in an effort to become a better Wiki Editor and Contributor. Note that this User does not always have the opportunity to check the private email accounts (not professional email) that are generated by Wiki and Wiki Bots and has not intentionally ignored any prior messages. This User is not familiar with any timeliness requirement for responding to Wiki massages. Again, this User strives to increase and correct the present body of knowledge and add depth to those topics this User is expert in and familiar with. This User respectfully requests to be UNBLOCKED. InfoDataMonger (talk) 15:22, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You have previously been advised that your editing is problematic from a copyright standpoint, and requested to clean up the articles that had issues. You did not, and continued creating problematic articles. At the moment it is not at all clear that unblocking you would not result in further issues, especially as from the above you don't seem to understand that the onus is on you to understand English Wikipedia's copyright policies, regardless of what any other Wikis may or may not have as policy. Nothing is unclear about "don't violate copyright". The Bushranger One ping only 05:33, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

You are also blocked due to your lack of communication with other editors. To continue editing, you must demonstrate understanding of the copyright policy and undertake to clean up your edits and respond to concerns raised on this page. MER-C 06:42, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

InfoDataMonger (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

User has reviewed English Wiki copyright policies and will not violate same. The block is no longer necessary because this User understands what this User was blocked for, this User will not do it again, and this User will continue to make productive contributions instead and NOT contribute any material that violates English Wiki copyright policies. This User knows and realizes that errors were made in the past. This User wishes to move forward and contribute to English Wiki when UNBLOCKED. InfoDataMonger (talk) 17:37, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your unblock request is a little weird. Why can't you use the first person? Otherwise, you haven't addressed the comment by MER-C above. PhilKnight (talk) 07:03, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

{{unblock|Yes, and this User would sincerely like to thank you for these comments. I request to be UNBLOCKED. The block is no longer necessary because I understand why I was blocked for, I will not do it again, and I will make productive contributions in the future. I understand that I did not properly add the details of images I uploaded in the past and have learned the proper English Wiki policy to credite image sources. I will not make these mistakes again. I have REREAD the English Wiki Copyright policies and commit to not add any material to English Wiki that is in noncompliance with said policies of English Wiki. MerC comments have been taken into consideration and consultation to further increase MY knowledge of Copyright policies for English Wiki. This User, ME, uses the term 'this User' to be professional and remove the personal attribution. This is the professional way to communicate and more formal than the less formal first person pronoun common and unacceptable usage in the non-professional communications and literature. I hereby commit, both formally and in writing: to 'undertake to clean up your edits and respond to concerns raised on this page' (page?). I will clean up My edits (that have not been blocked, deleted or removed). I will demonstrate compliance and understanding of English Wiki copyright policies through my, this User, actions. I commit, both formally and in writing to maintain compliance with current English Wiki policies. I declare that I wish to further the Body of Knowledge that English Wiki is aiming for online. I commit to increase and maintain communication with other Wiki editors as necessary and upon request and inquiries, etc. Thank You for consideration of these comments, and requests to be UNBLOCKED. InfoDataMonger (talk) 00:27, 18 September 2014 (UTC)}}[reply]

Talk page access revoked

I've revoked talk page access as we don't seem to be getting anywhere. You can make a fresh unblock request by email. I suggest you carefully phrase your unblock request, and avoid using all caps, which can be misinterpreted as shouting. PhilKnight (talk) 14:07, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked indefinitely

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.  PhilKnight (talk) 14:07, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2nd chance

This request for unblocking has been declined due to your history of vandalism and/or disruption to this encyclopedia. However, we are willing to give you another chance provided that you can earn back the trust of the Wikipedia community. To be unblocked you need to demonstrate that you are willing and able to contribute positively to Wikipedia. You can do this by:

  • Familiarizing yourself with our basic rules.
  • Read our guide to improving articles
  • Pick any pre-existing article you wish to improve.
  • Click the Edit tab at the top of that article and scroll down past the message informing you of your block.
  • Copy the source of that article and paste it to the bottom of your talk page under a new top-level heading (like this: = [[Article title]] =) and save the page before you improve it.
  • Propose some significant and well researched improvements to your article by editing your personal copy of the article. Please note that we are not looking for basic typo corrections, or small unreferenced additions; your edits should be substantial, and reflect relevant policies.
  • When you are done with your work, re-request unblocking and an administrator will review your proposed edits.
    • If we (including the original blocking admin) are convinced that your proposed edits will improve Wikipedia as an encyclopedia, you will be unblocked.

If you need help while working with your proposed edits, you may add "{{Help me|your question here ~~~~}}" to your talk page. Thank you. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:14, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Shields Warren

Shields Warren, M.D., Sc.D. LL.D. (26 February 1898 – 1 July 1980) pioneer pathologist and expert in medical radiation known for his contributions to the pathology of endocrine diseases and the study of the biological effects of ionizing radiation.

Shields Warren
American
File:Shields Warren 1955.jpg
Shields Warren, American pioneer pathologist and expert in medical radiation
American pioneer pathologist and expert in medical radiation
Born(1898-02-26)February 26, 1898
Cambridge, Massachusetts
DiedJuly 1, 1980(1980-07-01) (aged 82)
Mashpee, Massachusetts
Cause of deathOld age
NationalityAmerican
Other namesShields Warren
CitizenshipUnited States
Alma materBoston University
Harvard Medical School, M.D., 1923
Known forThe Buchenwald touch
AwardsWard Burdick Award for Distinguished Service to Clinical Pathology,
American Society of Clinical Pathology, 1949

Banting Medal
for Scientific Achievement Award,
American Diabetes Association, 1953
Pathologist of the Year, Meritorious Service Award,
College of American Pathologists, 1955
James Ewing Lecture,
Society of Surgical Oncology, 1962
American Cancer Society
National Award, 1968
Enrico Fermi Award, US DOE, 1971
Albert Einstein Medal and Award
Holmes Lecture, New England Roentgen Ray Society, 1972
Distinguished Scientific Achievement Award,
Health Physics Society, 1974
Gold Headed Cane Award,
Association of Clinical Scientists, 1980
Founders Award,
Health Physics Society, 1985

National Academy of Sciences
Scientific career
FieldsHealth physics
Pathology
Biological effects of ionizing radiation
InstitutionsU.S. Navy

Harvard Medical School
New England Deaconess Hospital

U.S. Atomic Energy Commission
Notable studentsEleanor Josephine MacDonald
I don't know how second chances work, and don't want to prejudice anybody's hopes of becoming a productive editor. But to choose one of your own copyright violations as the page for improvement seems to show a certain disregard for our copyright policy. The opening sentence here is copied almost word-for-word from the same source you took the rest of the article from, Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society. I'm going to ask King of Hearts, PhilKnight and MER-C (with my apologies to all three) if they would take a look at this. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 01:56, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging MER-C again, messed it up first time round. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 01:58, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please allow me the chance to fix these errors. I did not realize that I needed to correct what you mentioned in the response to my request. I read the second chance information and did submit what I thought was expected of me. I can go back and rewrite what was found to be in violation. Let me make this right. InfoDataMonger (talk) 13:50, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Jack Healy (health physicist)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Jack Healy (health physicist) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from https://www.orau.org/ptp/Library/oralhistories/healy.pdf. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:16, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Harvey-Cushing-stamp.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Harvey-Cushing-stamp.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 16:00, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Shields Warren], second chance x2

Shields Warren (1898 – July 1980) was an American pathologist. He was among the first to study the pathology of radioactive fallout.[1][2][3]


Warren had an early career in the Army that ended when he succumbed to the 1918 flu pandemic. After the stint in the Army warren attended Harvard then on to Boston City College where he studied diabetes. During residency he became interested in Hodgkin’s disease and the effects from radiation used to treat the disease. After Pearl Harbor, Frank Lahey (physician) asked Warren to look into the pathology of burn treatment. Ross T. McIntyre[4], White House physician, Surgeon General of the Navy; asked Warren to assist with the establishment of blood banks for the Navy. After the Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Warren assisted Japanese physicians with treating Japanese atomic bomb survivors and his team performed the first fallout surveys. For Operation Crossroads Warren organized the animal studies that involved mice, rats, pigs and goats. He helped to influence the Atomic Energy Commission to establish five research centers and provide funding and encouragement from other AEC laboratories. Warren worked in diabetes research, and wrote the first of his nine text books, before he turned his attention to cancer research. Dr. Shields Warren died in his sleep at his summer home in Mashpee, Massachusetts on 1 July 1980. InfoDataMonger (talk) 17:01, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Shields Warren

Awards and honors

Endowed professorship

  • Shields Warren Mallinckrodt Professorship of Clinical Research, Deaconess Hospital and Harvard Medical School
  • Shields Warren Award, Boston University

Health Physics Society

  • Distinguished Scientific Achievement Award, 1974
  • Founders Award, 1985

Professional service

Warren Shields, MD 1898-1980

Publications

  • Exposure Rates and Protective Measures against Radiation. Warren, Shields. (15 February 1963). Exposure Rates and Protective Measures against Radiation. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. Vol. 107, No. 1: 18-20.

Textbooks

  • Collected Reprints. Shields Warren. (1921). Pathology.
  • Sanitary Survey of Rochester, New Hampshire, 1922. Shields Warren. Harvard University Press, (1922). 114 pages.
  • The Sanitary Survey as an Instrument of Instruction in Medical Schools. Milton Joseph Rosenau, Shields Warren. (1924). 11 pages.
  • Medical Science for Everyday Use. Shields Warren. Lea & Febiger. (1927). 178 pages.
  • Synopsis of the Practice of Preventive Medicine: As Applied in the Basic Medical Sciences and Clinical Instruction at the Harvard Medical School. Shields Warren, editor. Harvard University Press, (1929). ISBN 9780674365308. 396 pages.
  • Salivary Gland Tumors. Neil W. Swinton, Shields Warren. (1938).
  • Tumors of Dermal Appendages. Harvard University. Cancer Commission, Shields Warren, Olive Gates, Wesley N. Warvi. (1943). 79 pages.
  • A Handbook for the Diagnosis of Cancer of the Uterus: By Use of Vaginal Smears. Olive Gates, Dr. Shields Warren, George N. Papanicolaou. Harvard University Press. (1947). 182 pages.
  • Introduction to Neuropathology. Samuel Pendleton Hicks, Shields Warren. McGraw-Hill. (1950). 494 pages.
  • Atomic Bomb Injury—Radiation, Charles Little Dunham, Eugene P. Cronkite, George Veach Le Roy, Shields Warren. Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission. (1951). 13 pages.
  • The Cancer Problem. Volume 1 of Series on the early recognition of cancer. Shields Warren. American Cancer Society. (1954). 27 pages.
  • National Nuclear Energy Series. Manhattan Project Technical Section. Division 8 - Vol. 8: Medical Effects of the Atomic Bomb in Japan. Ashley W. Oughterson, Shields Warren. McGraw-Hill (1956). 477 pages.
  • The Pathology of Ionizing Radiation, 1961. Monograph in the Carl Vernon Weller lecture series. Shields Warren. The University of Michigan. (1961). 42 pages.
  • The Pathology of Diabetes Mellitus. Shields Warren, Philip Medford LeCompte, Merle A. Legg. The University of Michigan. (1966). 528 pages.
  • Tumors of the Thyroid Gland. Volume 4 of Atlas of tumor pathology: Second series. William A. Meissner, Shields Warren. Armed Forces Institute of Pathology. (1982). 135 pages.

References

  1. ^ Shields Warren. Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society. Accessed January 2015.
  2. ^ Tedeschi, Luke G. "Shields Warren: The legend and the man." The American journal of forensic medicine and pathology 1.4 (1980): 297-302.
  3. ^ Brues, A.M. (1981). Shields Warren: (1898-1980). Radiation Research: November 1981, Vol. 88, No. 2, pp. 430-435.
  4. ^ http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/52678
  5. ^ Shields Warren Festschrift: This Issue is Dedicated to Dr. Shield Warren in Honor of His 60th Birthday ; it is Made Up of Contributions from His Many Colleagues and Students. Volume 64; Volume 66 of A.M.A. Archives of Pathology. Shields Warren. American Medical Association. (1958). 246 pages.
  6. ^ http://www.ascp.org/Pathologists/Awards-and-Recognition#tabs-2
  7. ^ ”Harvard Prof to get 1962 Einstein Award”. The Bridgeport Post. (20 March 1962). p.35. Bridgeport, CT.

{{Persondata | NAME = Warren, Shields | ALTERNATIVE NAMES = | SHORT DESCRIPTION = American pathologist | DATE OF BIRTH = 26 February 1898 | PLACE OF BIRTH = | DATE OF DEATH = 1 July 1980 | PLACE OF DEATH = }}

Category:1898 births Category:1980 deaths Category:American pathologists Category:Pathologists Category:Endocrinologists Category:American endocrinologists Category:Boston University alumni Category:Harvard Medical School alumni Category:Radiation health effects researchers Category:Health physicists Category:Health Physics Society

Unblock request

  • Per Wiki guidelines and with guidance from Wiki editors and after considerable time to familiarize myself with Wiki policies and copyright requirements (and time to really think about all this) I request to be unblocked.
  • I do understand that material cannot be copied from a source and pasted on to the Wiki page for an article. Any material posted on Wiki must be in the editor’s own words and not merely rephrased. Any images posted on Wiki must be free of copyright restrictions, or used with permission or used giving proper credit for the source of the image. Images used on Wiki must meet the requirements of acceptable use. Content used must meet the rationale and policy requirements of Wikipedia.
  • I will choose to apply a simple rule of: “when in doubt, leave it out”. Failing this test, prior to posting material on wiki I will seek the advice of Wiki administrators for guidance and suggestions.
  • Please take a look at my Areas of Interest on my User Page. These are the subjects that I wish to contribute to Wiki. I see a great void in these subject areas and wish to make meaningful contributions to Wiki and to the knowledge base that Wikipedia strives for today. I do realize that in my effort to accomplish this quickly, I did not have sufficient knowledge or familiarity with Wiki policies and rules and guidelines to do this successfully. Now I know what is expected and most importantly, what is required.
  • Please consider my request to be unblocked. Thank you.

InfoDataMonger (talk) 19:20, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

InfoDataMonger (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

  • Per Wiki guidelines and with guidance from Wiki editors and after considerable time to familiarize myself with Wiki policies and copyright requirements (and time to really think about all this) I request to be unblocked. *I do understand that material cannot be copied from a source and pasted on to the Wiki page for an article. Any material posted on Wiki must be in the editor’s own words and not merely rephrased. Any images posted on Wiki must be free of copyright restrictions, or used with permission or used giving proper credit for the source of the image. Images used on Wiki must meet the requirements of acceptable use. Content used must meet the rationale and policy requirements of Wikipedia. *I will choose to apply a simple rule of: “when in doubt, leave it out”. Failing this test, prior to posting material on wiki I will seek the advice of Wiki administrators for guidance and suggestions. *Please take a look at my Areas of Interest on my User Page. These are the subjects that I wish to contribute to Wiki. I see a great void in these subject areas and wish to make meaningful contributions to Wiki and to the knowledge base that Wikipedia strives for today. I do realize that in my effort to accomplish this quickly, I did not have sufficient knowledge or familiarity with Wiki policies and rules and guidelines to do this successfully. Now I know what is expected and most importantly, what is required. *Please consider my request to be unblocked. Thank you.

Accept reason:

I did a sweep of the above article on your talk page and found no obvious matches via a quick search. Based on this, I am unblocking you on the following conditions.

  1. You agree to use the Article wizard to create drafts that will be reviewed via the Articles for creation process, and that you can be reblocked if you create articles in mainspace via any other means.
  2. You agree that any other tagging of your creations as a copyright violation will result in an immediate reblock. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:27, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Eleanor Josephine MacDonald (May 24)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by L235 was:
This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
--L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 20:48, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:William Edward Nolan, Jr. has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:William Edward Nolan, Jr.. Thanks! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 01:26, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: James Ralston Kennedy Paterson has been accepted

James Ralston Kennedy Paterson, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:41, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Eleanor Josephine MacDonald has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Eleanor Josephine MacDonald. Thanks! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 01:38, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Eleanor Josephine MacDonald has been accepted

Eleanor Josephine MacDonald, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:58, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: William Edward Nolan, Jr. (June 28)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by LaMona was:
This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
LaMona (talk) 18:32, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ebb Cade has been accepted

Ebb Cade, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

MatthewVanitas (talk) 16:45, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Francis J. Bradley (July 6)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sulfurboy was:
The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Sulfurboy (talk) 19:10, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: William Edward Nolan, Jr. (July 10)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sulfurboy was:
This submission provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject matter. Please see the guide to writing better articles for information on how to better format your submission.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Sulfurboy (talk) 01:48, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copy and pasting

We run "copy and paste" detection software on new edits. One of your edits appear to be infringing on someone else's copyright. See also Wikipedia:Copy-paste. We at Wikipedia usually require paraphrasing. If you own the copyright to this material please follow the directions at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials to grant license.

This edit [2] looks like a copy and paste from [3].--Lucas559 (talk) 02:55, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am not trying to be mean, just doing what I think is best for Wiki and these articles. I think that amount of detail about the first board of directors is misplaced or superfluous. This edit appears on 3 other articles.--Lucas559 (talk) 03:03, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Francis J. Bradley (July 23)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sulfurboy was:
The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Sulfurboy (talk) 04:30, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Francis J. Bradley has been accepted

Francis J. Bradley, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Sulfurboy (talk) 10:48, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unsorced category additions

I notice you have been adding "Category:Phi Kappa Phi" to a number of articles. I looked at three of those articles, and in two of them, Harry Reid and George Andrew Olah, Phi Kappa Phi isn't even mentioned in the article. Why are you adding the category then? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:54, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Because you are an experienced editor I did not report this as vandalism yet. Please respond before making additional edits. Thank you again. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:47, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your response on my talk page. You are correct that the additions I mentioned above have been removed, but that is because I removed them. There are still other articles you added this category to, and many of those may be incorrect, as there is no sourced mention of "Phi Kappa Phi" in the article, such as Loren Legarda. Do you plan to remove the category from each of the articles you added it to, in which there is no sourced mention in the article of Phi Kappa Phi? Thank you again. Magnolia677 (talk) 00:12, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:V-12 Navy College Training Program

Category:V-12 Navy College Training Program, which you created, has been nominated for possible splitting and other issues. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. --Jahaza (talk) 15:41, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sigma Alpha Iota

I see that you have created a Category:Sigma Alpha Iota that is, well, uncategorised. Quite ironic, I thought. You might want to integrate it into the category tree. Schwede66 18:11, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution

Information icon Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Street light into Joseph William Sutton. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:51, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Frank Styant Browne

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Frank Styant Browne requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. —teb728 t c 03:38, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Few things

do you know how to archive your talk page - when people rather than messages arrive, it can be hard to negotiate long talk pages

you may or not be interested in "ROYAL SOCIETY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA". The West Australian (Perth, WA : 1879 - 1954). Perth, WA: National Library of Australia. 15 May 1924. p. 14. Retrieved 2 February 2016. and "THE ROYAL SOCIETY". The West Australian (Perth, WA : 1879 - 1954). Perth, WA: National Library of Australia. 16 March 1933. p. 14. Retrieved 2 February 2016.

as live references to an aggregated engine of trove, compared to grey refs.

also Perth Public Hospital is now known as Royal_Perth_Hospital cheers JarrahTree 00:38, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Worshipful Company of Spectacle Makers

Hello InfoDataMonger, I have reverted a few of your recent categorizations into that new category. Articles are usually only placed into a category, when the category is a defining characteristic of the article, or in other words, when the article is part of a distinct group defined by the category (but not the other way around). Some of the added articles didn't meet that requirement. Please see WP:Categorization#Articles for more information. Best regards. GermanJoe (talk) 17:28, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Preview

Hey, thanks for editing Charles Thurstan Holland's article to add all those publications and citations. But please! Don't do this to the page history. Instead, use the Preview button and only save when you are satisfied with the results. Kind regards, —capmo (talk) 04:56, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:William Edward Nolan, Jr. concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:William Edward Nolan, Jr., a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Copying from sources

Hi! I've reverted your addition to Royal Variety Performance, as it included content copied from the website of the Royal Variety Charity. For example:

Your edit The source
In 1912, His Majesty King George V and Her Majesty Queen Mary agreed to attend a Royal Command Performance at the Palace Theatre at Cambridge Circus His Majesty King George V and Her Majesty Queen Mary agreed to attend a 'Royal Command Performance' at the Palace Theatre in London's Cambridge Circus

As it happens, the content of that webpage is freely licenced (I don't know if if you knew this?), so the copying is technically WP:PLAGIARISM rather than outright copyright violation. However, given your chequered history in this area, may I ask you to take much more care not to copy from sources? I see that Ritchie333 imposed strict conditions when unblocking you, so I think it would be wise to err well on the side of caution. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:53, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:William Edward Nolan, Jr.

Hello, InfoDataMonger. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "William Edward Nolan".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Puffin Let's talk! 11:06, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Information icon Hello, InfoDataMonger. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

  • avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
  • instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
  • when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
  • avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
  • exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. Bilby (talk) 13:04, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. It seems that you are still doing paid work with Goldfish (short film). I need to reiterate that Wikipedia accepts paid editing, but only if you disclose your client and that you are engaging in editing for pay. You can do that on the talk page of the article, in your edit summaries, or on your user page, but it is a requirement under the Terms of Use that you make that disclosure. - Bilby (talk) 02:04, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Todd Huston, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page North Face. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:13, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Shawn Kent Hayashi-1.jpg. However, it is currently missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:29, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Shawn Kent Hayashi-1.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Shawn Kent Hayashi-1.jpg, which you've attributed to Elaine Zelker. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Majora (talk) 02:42, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Joe Wein, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page East Coast. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:52, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:686-red-logo-small.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:686-red-logo-small.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:23, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Caia Koopman for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Caia Koopman 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/Caia Koopman until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 14:51, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 686 (company), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Boys & Girls Club. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:07, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

September 2016

Information icon Hello! Thank you for your recent contributions to Caia Koopman. I did have one note for you. I am working on a maintenance project to clean up Category:Pages using infoboxes with thumbnail images. In the future, please do not use thumbnails when adding images to an infobox (see WP:INFOBOXIMAGE). What does this mean? Well in the infobox, when you specify the image you wish to use, instead of doing it like this:

|image=[[File:SomeImage.jpg|thumb|Some image caption]]

Instead just supply the name of the image. So in this case you can simply do:

|image=SomeImage.jpg.

There will then be a separate parameter for the image caption such as |caption=Some image caption. Please note that this is a generic form message I am leaving on your page because you recently added a thumbnail to an infobox. The specific parameters for the image and caption may be different for the infobox you are using! Please consult the Template page for the infobox being used to see better documentation. Thanks!! Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 16:14, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Goldfish (Short film) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Goldfish (Short film) 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/Goldfish (Short film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 16:20, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Todd Huston for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Todd Huston 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/Todd Huston until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 16:21, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Shawn Kent Hayashi

The article Shawn Kent Hayashi has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of reaching notability per WP:GNG, WP:NAUTHOR or WP:PROF. Extensive WP:REFBOMBing is largely trivial, passing or primary.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. David Gerard (talk) 12:04, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Joe Wein

The article Joe Wein has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Promotional article that is heavily WP:REFBOMBed, but the references are mostly to the fact that things Wein is claimed to have worked on exist - almost none of the checkable refs even actually mention his name. Many are gratuitously unlinked (even when present online) to avoid checkability. There is a lot of attempting to show his association with notable projects, but notability is not inherited. This is WP:PUFFERY.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. David Gerard (talk) 12:20, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

your e-mail regarding image credits

Dear InfoDataMonger. Please follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. Thank you. --Krd 11:06, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of America W. Robinson for deletion

Hello. A discussion is taking place as to whether the article America W. Robinson 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/America W. Robinson 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, please do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:33, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited America W. Robinson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Principal. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:01, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Goldfish movie poster.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Goldfish movie poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:53, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

November 2016

Information icon Hello, I'm NOTNOTABLE. I noticed that you recently removed some content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. NOTNOTABLE (talk) 21:15, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Alaska Sports Hall of Fame has been nominated for discussion

Category:Alaska Sports Hall of Fame, which you created, has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 00:37, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of 686 (company)

Hello InfoDataMonger,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged 686 (company) for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. – Joe (talk) 23:49, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:686-red-logo-small.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:686-red-logo-small.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:22, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

January 2017

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for undisclosed paid editing. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 17:15, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • You were warned last year about disclosing a conflict of interest. I do not see where you've ever disclosed this fact and as far as I can tell, you are still doing this. I was initially going to just give you a short block, but from what I can see you've been making a large amount of edits that could be seen as promotional edits (like this one) - including a large amount of deleted pages that had issues with promotional language. Your sandbox has several prospective articles that have WP:PUFFERY in them and I also note that you have problems with sourcing - in one article you use a book that was self-published through Lulu and in an article in your userspace you try to use a press release as a source - I noticed this last one because you tried to have it restored at REFUND, where you said that there was enough sourcing to establish notability. Normally I'd just assume that this was just there to back up a basic piece of info, except that you credited it to an author rather than as a press release. Given that concerns over a COI were already expressed last year, this makes you look quite bad - it means that you are either unaware of proper sourcing (COI editors must be aware of RS guidelines) or you are aware and were willing to manipulate the sourcing to meet your needs. This makes all of your edits suspect, even for the edits and articles that would have otherwise not raised any concern. This is why you absolutely MUST disclose your conflict of interest when asked and post it on the articles that you are editing. You cannot ignore this guideline as it is required by Wikipedia that all COI editors must disclose this status. Now it's possible that you could be unblocked, but one of the requirements is that you must disclose any and all COI edits that you have or will make with this account or with any other account that you may have. (You should also not have any alternate accounts unless they are openly stated and have a valid reason for use.) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 17:25, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

InfoDataMonger (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I will promptly add the appropriate COI statement to the pages I edit

Decline reason:

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

[User:InfoDataMonger|InfoDataMonger]] (talk) 17:31, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

  • You were also blocked for copyright issues and were given a second chance, but it looks like you did the same behavior, but with paid articles. Now even if these weren't paid edits the edits still had a LOT of issues with promotional language and bad sourcing. Per your comments in this area you acknowledged that the speedy warnings and other posts were warning enough that you were doing something wrong, yet you seem to have ignored these same issues when it came to the issues with the articles that were brought to AfD, otherwise deleted, and/or had other issues. With this in mind I am recommending against any unblock, as you continue to break guidelines despite a very, very clear warning here that you were expected to learn Wikipedia's guidelines. You just seem to be either unwilling or unable to follow guidelines, either of which is bad enough on its own. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 17:38, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • This was posted just after they posted the above comment and again, I recommend against any unblock. They've already been indeff'd before for repeatedly violating copyright guidelines despite many, many warnings and there's absolutely no good reason why they shouldn't have been aware of the guidelines for paid editing, especially as they already received one warning and are already well, WELL aware that they need to follow guidelines to a T. They deliberately ignored the COI guidelines in order to benefit themselves and their clients, something that violates several of Wikipedia's core guidelines and principles. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 17:41, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • In other words, you knew well enough, didn't care, and then continued on your editing path because you stood to financially gain from it. There's no reason why we should believe that you will follow guidelines now, given ample history that shows that you will almost certainly violate other guidelines and continue with the same behaviors that resulted in your prior blocks. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 17:42, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I will declare COI. The copyright issues were some time ago. InfoDataMonger (talk) 17:52, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The problem here is that you have a habit of ignoring guidelines whenever they do not suit your needs. The only time you responded to the repeated warnings and concerns over the copyvio was after you were indefinitely blocked for repeatedly ignoring very obvious warnings and cautions. You were unblocked with a very explicit warning that you need to follow guidelines and heed warnings.
Now years later you are again receiving warnings and indications over other, equally serious concerns. Concerns that you have blatantly ignored despite already receiving a block over ignoring warnings in the past. You were warned about editing with a COI and there is no good reason why you should not be fully aware of and complying with these guidelines, given that you were already blocked in the past for ignoring warnings and knew full well that blocking will happen if you repeated these behaviors. You chose to ignore these guidelines over your paid editing and have put out promotional, problematic work.
There is no reason for you ignoring these warnings and given that you have repeatedly shown that you will ignore warnings until you are made to stop by blocking you, I can only assume that you will only continue in this behavior with any other issues that arise. You had your second chance and you blew it in order to receive a paycheck. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 18:00, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • To put it in shorter terms, you are already aware of what happens when you ignore warnings over violations of major guidelines. Although this is COI issues and not copyvio concerns, this is still a serious matter and you've shown a clear pattern of behavior where you ignore major, serious guidelines. You were given a second chance and you repeated the same actions in a new arena, so I can only assume that you will repeat the same actions in a different area if you are unblocked. You've given us no reason to believe that you will behave otherwise and to be quite frank, your word is no good in this situation because you already gave your word and you have shown that you are unwilling to follow policy when placed in a similar situation. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 18:28, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

InfoDataMonger (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

1. I admit that I have edited articles and have COI with some articles. On a few occasions there has been compensation or promise for compensation. 2. I promise to declare all future COI, as appropriate. I will not do this again. I propose that I will work on improvements to articles listed here. In the future, all edits with COI or the potential for COI will be declared on my user talk page and on the article's talk page, as appropriate. 3. There will not be any undeclared COI in the future from this user. I have thoroughly reviewed the guidelines about COI. More so than I have in the past. I was not as familiar as I should be with COI guidelines. When I am uncertain on ANY matter regarding COI, I will seek the guidance from admins that know the subject best. I ask that this admin let me know who to best contact regarding clarification of COI. When in doubt, I will declare COI. 4. I became involved with Wikipedia as an effort to contribute to the body of knowledge for the online encyclopedia. I am still learning about ways to contribute. I really enjoy writing about people from the past, people that until I learned about them and wrote about them, were largely forgotten. That is, until I wrote a wikipedia article about that person or event or company from the past. I do not think any of these edits have any COI. I enjoy writing about women, especially women in science, medicine, engineering, art, literature, music, etc. I have 3 daughters and also enjoy sharing the discovery and writing process with them. Sometimes I come across a photograph. The photo may have limited information about the image, often only the name. After a quick cursory search, when I am not presented with any significant details about the person, I am thrust into the desire to write about that person. After all, if the National Library of Medicine, the National Archives, or the Library of Congress decided to preserve the image then that person (in my opinion) is significant enough to write a biographical article for Wikipedia. In my own small way I hope to reduce that number of unheralded women. Along the way I have had the opportunity to uncover some amazing life stories and events from history. I hope to continue these efforts and writings and discoveries and contribute to the body of knowledge called Wikipedia.

Decline reason:

You chose to ignore warnings until you were actually blocked. PhilKnight (talk) 00:10, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

InfoDataMonger (talk) 21:50, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Allow me to declare appropriate COI. What paycheck? Since I have been asked to write for Wikipedia on occasion, I am not compensated as you may infer. There was an earlier article that the subject provided minor compensation and the article was deleted for lack of perceived notability. I could not declare COI on a deleted article, at least I do not think. You are familiar with COI, more than I am, as I see you also write for your employer. May I ask how is the best way to achieve this? I do not write for my employer. I ask for constructive advice from you, as you are an admin, I suppose. I have subjects I am interested in to write about and earnestly wish to continue with this privilege. I have COIs to declare and wish to continue to contribute to Wikipedia in a positive manner and following all guidelines. If someone gives me a book to write about, is this a COI that should be declared? This has not happened, but merely a hypothetical inquiry? Thank you for your assistance and helpful guidance. What is the best source to learn more about correcting, repairing, and avoiding this moving forward? InfoDataMonger (talk) 20:39, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm moving this below for an easier flow of conversation. Now here's the situation:
You were given a link to the COI guidelines last year, which you ignored, and I linked to it above. You have a shown history of repeatedly ignoring warnings whenever it would pose an inconvenience for you. This resulted in you getting indefinitely blocked over copyright violations, during which time it was made very, very clear that you need to pay attention to warnings and you need to learn guidelines. You acknowledged that you need to do both of these things and this was made a condition of your unblock. Now fast forwards to now, where you have been blocked for undisclosed paid editing despite receiving a warning about this and having several articles deleted where people complained of poor sourcing and promotional writing.
In both situations you only stopped because you were forced to stop. The first time you said you'd pay attention and not pull this stuff again. However now here we are years later and you're pulling the same stuff. In this case it's undisclosed paid editing and not copyright issues, but the basic problem is the same. Heck, even your argument is the same. We could put in the words "copyvio" for most of this and it'd be the same exact situation. Ignorance is not an excuse in this situation and is a poor argument, as again - your prior unblock made it very, very clear that you need to pay attention to issues and the admin in that situation even correctly stated that they felt that you would just end up in the same boat again.
So here we have someone who is doing the same problem but in different areas. They were given some slack the first time, but then turned around and did the same exact thing. To put it bluntly, there is no reason why we should trust your promises as your habits have shown that you do as you please until you are stopped. You claim that you want to improve Wikipedia but put absolutely no effort into heeding warnings, especially as you already know that you need to follow warnings, which frankly makes me question how much you follow all guidelines. Then on top of all of this I've made it very, very clear why you should already be aware of all of this and already be toeing the line, yet you are trying to feign ignorance of COI guidelines. There is no excuse for ignorance in this situation and I'll be very honest, I think that your promises here are empty. You made major mistakes not once, but twice - and in the second case you had every reason to be aware of what you were doing and you ignored those guidelines anyway because they interfered with what you wanted to do. You wrote "what paycheck" yet above you stated that you made edits in exchange for compensation or promise of compensation. You have blatantly contradicted yourself in a situation where blatant honesty would have been far better, as that there might have been a slim chance of an unblock.
At this point I have to assume that any promise of following guidelines from this point on are lies you are telling in order to get what you want - an unblock so you can make more paid edits and likely break other guidelines. Whether or not those guidelines would be major or minor is moot. The problem is that you will almost certainly behave in the exact same manner until you receive another unblock. There is no reason for us to believe anything you have written.
I'm revoking talk page access, as your responses have essentially been "but I will do better, I didn't know", despite you having good reason to already know better and prior actions. You've even contradicted yourself. I highly recommend against any unblock, as I think it would be an extremely foolish manner. You were given the benefit of the doubt in the past and you've thrown it in the garbage and walked all over it. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 22:28, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for undisclosed paid editing. Your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.  Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 22:29, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

InfoDataMonger (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #17463 was submitted on Feb 05, 2017 20:18:03. This review is now closed.


--UTRSBot (talk) 20:18, 5 February 2017 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

InfoDataMonger (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #17564 was submitted on Feb 18, 2017 16:14:30. This review is now closed.


--UTRSBot (talk) 16:14, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:InfoDataMonger/Gioacchino Failla

User:InfoDataMonger/Gioacchino Failla, a page which you created or substantially contributed to (or which is in your userspace), has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:InfoDataMonger/Gioacchino Failla and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:InfoDataMonger/Gioacchino Failla during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Legacypac (talk) 06:30, 6 June 2017 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

InfoDataMonger (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #19032 was submitted on Aug 20, 2017 17:48:52. This review is now closed.


--UTRSBot (talk) 17:48, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ibrahim Al-Haidos for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ibrahim Al-Haidos 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/Ibrahim Al-Haidos until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:07, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Albert Johnston (fishing vessel captain) (September 10)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Domdeparis was:
This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
no sources to help prove notability and this reads like an advertisement
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Domdeparis (talk) 19:44, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ibrahim Al-Haidos for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ibrahim Al-Haidos 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/Ibrahim Al-Haidos (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. SmartSE (talk) 14:49, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Henry P. Iba Citizen Athlete of the Year Award

The article Henry P. Iba Citizen Athlete of the Year Award has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

An extremely long way from being a notable award. Original author has been blocked for undisclosed paid editing of which this was presumably an example.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SmartSE (talk) 19:36, 17 October 2017 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

InfoDataMonger (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #20140 was submitted on Dec 23, 2017 18:37:47. This review is now closed.


--UTRSBot (talk) 18:37, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sigma Xi has been nominated for discussion

Category:Sigma Xi, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Oculi (talk) 00:17, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

InfoDataMonger (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

1. I admit that in the past, I edited articles and had COI due to undeclared compensation for these articles. This was a mistake that will not be repeated. 2. I would like to have the privilege of editing and making contributions on Wikipedia restored. I will declare all future COI. COI for undeclared paid editing will not happen again, moving forward. In the future, all edits with COI or the potential for COI will be declared on my user talk page and on the article's talk page, as appropriate. 3. There will not be any undeclared COI in the future. I have thoroughly reviewed the guidelines about COI. 4. The majority of my contributions and writing on Wikipedia are for scholarship with no compensation or COI. By far, the bulk of my work and edits are for such scholarship. I became involved with Wikipedia as an effort to contribute to the body of knowledge for the online encyclopedia. I am still learning about ways to contribute. I really enjoy writing about people and events from the past. People and events that until I learned about them and wrote about them, were largely forgotten. That is, until I wrote a Wikipedia article about that person or event or company from the past. Not any of these edits or contributions have COI. I enjoy writing about women, especially women in science, medicine, engineering, art, literature, music, etc. I have 3 daughters (this fact serves to drive my efforts) and also enjoy sharing the discovery and writing process with them. Some further insight: So how do I pick a subject or topic to write about? Here is one example. Sometimes I come across a photograph. The photo may have limited information about the image, often only a name. After a quick cursory search, when I am not presented with any significant details about the person, I am thrust into the desire to write about that person. After all, if the National Library of Medicine, the National Archives, or the Library of Congress decided to preserve the image then that person (in my opinion) is significant enough to write a biographical article for Wikipedia. In my own small way I hope to reduce that number of unheralded women. Along the way I have had the opportunity to uncover some amazing life stories and events from history. I hope to continue these efforts and writings and discoveries and contribute to the body of knowledge called Wikipedia. The block is no longer necessary because the reason for the block is thoroughly understood, undeclared paid editing you will not happen again, and only productive contributions will be made from this point onward.

Decline reason:

There's no reasonable chance you'll be unblocked under these terms, given your previous second chance. If you were to promise to refrain from all further edits which could be considered a conflict of interest (instead of, as you suggest, allowing you to continue to make such edits after disclosing your conflict of interest) and if you were to declare (and keep up to date) a list of all conflicts of interest you are under, I'd have looked upon the request more favourably. But I can't sanction an unblock where we allow you to continue making such edits, given the problems we've had getting you to follow WP:COI, WP:PAID, and WP:PROMO in the past. So, I'm declining your request. I can't say other admins would consider an unblock under the stronger restrictions I've suggested, but I do expect no other admin will consider an unblock without stronger restrictions. Yamla (talk) 15:42, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

InfoDataMonger (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I may not have worded this properly. I will not make any COI edits. I am done with that mistake. I will refrain from edits that could be considered a COI. I would like to have the privilege restored to edit and contribute to Wikipedia. I do not have any current COIs, as I no longer conduct paid editing of Wikipedia articles. I will declare and keep current the edits that involve COI for undisclosed paid editing. With this request, I am trying to follow the Wikipedia guidelines for declaring COI and undisclosed paid editing done in the past, and how to move forward to return in good stead with Wikipedia.


Please include a decline or accept reason.

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

InfoDataMonger (talk) 16:39, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

More information, explanation regarding Unblock request

I may not have worded this properly. I will not make any COI edits. I am done with that mistake. I will refrain from edits that could be considered a COI. I would like to have the privilege restored to edit and contribute to Wikipedia. I do not have any current COIs, as I no longer conduct paid editing of Wikipedia articles. I will declare and keep current the edits that involved COI for undisclosed paid editing. With this request, I am working to follow Wikipedia guidelines for declaring COI and undisclosed paid editing done in the past, and how to move forward to return in good stead with Wikipedia. InfoDataMonger (talk) 20:05, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Phi Kappa Phi has been nominated for discussion

Category:Phi Kappa Phi, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:53, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Phi Lambda Upsilon has been nominated for discussion

Category:Phi Lambda Upsilon, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:49, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedian health physicists has been nominated for discussion

Category:Wikipedian health physicists, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. – S. Rich (talk) 08:53, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Albert Johnston (fishing vessel captain) concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Albert Johnston (fishing vessel captain), a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:32, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

InfoDataMonger (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

1. I admit that in the past, I edited articles and had COI due to undeclared compensation for these articles. This was a mistake that will not be repeated. 2. I would like to have the privilege of editing and making contributions on Wikipedia restored. I will refrain from all further edits which could be considered a conflict of interest. I will declare (and keep up to date) a list of all conflicts of interest that I am under on my user talk page and on the article's talk page, as appropriate. 3. There will not be any undeclared COI in the future. I have thoroughly reviewed the guidelines about COI. 4. The majority of my contributions and writing on Wikipedia are for scholarship without compensation. The bulk of my work and edits are for such scholarship. I became involved with Wikipedia as an effort to contribute to the body of knowledge for the online encyclopedia. I am still learning about ways to contribute. I really enjoy writing about people and events from the past. People and events that until I learned about them and wrote about them, were largely forgotten. That is, until I wrote a Wikipedia article about that person or event or company from the past. Not any of these edits or contributions have COI. I enjoy writing about women, especially women in science, medicine, engineering, art, literature, music, etc. I have 3 daughters (this fact serves to drive my efforts) and also enjoy sharing the discovery and writing process with them. Some further insight: So how do I pick a subject or topic to write about? Here is one example. Sometimes I come across a photograph. The photo may have limited information about the image, often only a name. After a quick cursory search, when I am not presented with any significant details about the person, I am thrust into the desire to write about that person. After all, if the National Library of Medicine, the National Archives, or the Library of Congress decided to preserve the image then that person (in my opinion) is significant enough to write a biographical article for Wikipedia. In my own small way I hope to reduce that number of unheralded women. Along the way I have had the opportunity to uncover some amazing life stories and events from history. I hope to continue these efforts and writings and discoveries and contribute to the body of knowledge called Wikipedia. The block is no longer necessary because the reason for the block is thoroughly understood, undeclared paid editing you will not happen again, and only productive contributions will be made from this point onward. I would ask for other independent opinions in this matter. How do I move forward to become unblocked to be able to edit? InfoDataMonger (talk) 13:26, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Duplicate, copy paste of earlier request that was declined —SpacemanSpiff 05:31, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Status of unblock request

Asking for review of Unblock request. Independent opinion requested.InfoDataMonger (talk) 19:55, 2 March 2018 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

InfoDataMonger (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #20895 was submitted on Mar 17, 2018 12:19:50. This review is now closed.


--UTRSBot (talk) 12:19, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

InfoDataMonger (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I admit that in the past, I edited articles and had COI due to undeclared compensation for these articles. This was a mistake that will not be repeated. 2. I would like to have the privilege of editing and making contributions on Wikipedia restored. I will not make any edits which could be considered a conflict of interest. I will declare (and keep up to date) a list of all conflicts of interest that I am under on my user talk page and on the article's talk page, as appropriate. 3. There will not be any undeclared COI for paid editing in the future. I have thoroughly reviewed the guidelines about COI. 4.The majority of my contributions and writing on Wikipedia are for scholarship without compensation. The bulk of my work and edits are for such scholarship. I became involved with Wikipedia as an effort to contribute to the body of knowledge for Wikipedia. I enjoy writing about women, especially women in science, medicine, engineering, art, literature, music, etc. I have 3 daughters (this fact serves to drive my efforts) and also enjoy sharing the discovery and writing process with them. I hope to continue these efforts and writings and discoveries and contribute to the body of knowledge called Wikipedia. The block is no longer necessary because the reason for the block is thoroughly understood, undeclared paid editing you will not happen again, and only productive contributions will be made from this point onward. I would ask for other independent opinions in this matter. How do I move forward to become unblocked to be able to edit?

Decline reason:

You still haven't declared your COI from prior to the block, this copy pasting of your prior unblock requests is now becoming disruptive, you were already given a second chance once before (after you failed to adhere to prior warnings), and continued with a different sort of disruption after that, you haven't given any reason to believe that now would be any different. Your talk page privileges will be revoked if you continue this with future unblock requests. —SpacemanSpiff 05:39, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

InfoDataMonger (talk) 13:09, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Declaration of conflict of interest for undisclosed paid editing

These articles were edited and compensation was received for the work. This editor will place the

template at the top of my talk page.

  • Daniel Burrus
  • Michel Gordillo
  • Royal Variety Performance

    • InfoDataMonger (talk) 21:35, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Your draft article, Draft:Albert Johnston (fishing vessel captain)

    Hello, InfoDataMonger. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Albert Johnston".

    In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

    If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

    Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ―Susmuffin Talk 08:29, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Very disruptive editing

    Dear admins, when reviewing unblock requests, please note that this author's edits are particularly disruptive to Wikipedia. He created tons of articles with outright lies and hard-to-verify sources. Many of the articles have caused tremendous disruption as journalists use Wikipedia as the starting point of research. I am just stunned. 71.31.30.66 (talk) 03:05, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    File source problem with File:Marinelli beakers.png

    Thank you for uploading File:Marinelli beakers.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

    If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

    Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Wikiacc () 16:32, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    File source problem with File:Marinelli glass beaker.png

    Thank you for uploading File:Marinelli glass beaker.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

    If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

    Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Wikiacc () 16:34, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    File source problem with File:Marinelli glass tube for GM.png

    Thank you for uploading File:Marinelli glass tube for GM.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

    If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

    Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Wikiacc () 16:36, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Sockpuppets

    Stop creating socks or I'll report you. You know what I mean. 71.31.30.66 (talk) 15:00, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Proposed deletion of File:Johnston-brothers-swordfishermen.png

    Notice

    The file File:Johnston-brothers-swordfishermen.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

    orphaned image, no context to identify an encyclopedic use, banned user

    While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

    You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

    Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

    Also:

    This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    File:Leonidas D Marinelli.png listed for discussion

    A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Leonidas D Marinelli.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Wikiacc () 15:42, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Category:Royal Photographic Society has been nominated for renaming

    Category:Royal Photographic Society has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 08:47, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    File source problem with File:John Boice.jpg

    Thank you for uploading File:John Boice.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

    If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

    Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sreejith K (talk) 04:10, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Category:Cosmos Club members has been nominated for listification

    Category:Cosmos Club members has been nominated for listification. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:05, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:InfoDataMonger&oldid=1077729070"