Jump to content

User talk:Theroadislong

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mpcpro (talk | contribs) at 21:32, 3 January 2011 (Ralph Cupper). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

George, every edit that I made to in the talk page of the ACE Limited page included a link to where this information was listed and was written in a factual, neutral tone. Instead of not including ANY of the edits, I would prefer you suggested comments to the edits I made. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wellsjam (talkcontribs) 16:03, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The edits I read were clearly promotional in tone and you have a clear conflict of interest promoting your company.TeapotgeorgeTalk 16:09, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is sarcasm a normal part of your critiquing? I am just beginning and trying to learn how to do all this correctly in a short time, and don't appreciate it. Also, on my last edit, a spam blacklist msg. appeared. Did you do this and if do why are you doing this? I'll restart the page on the practice wiki space until it meets the rigid wiki standards, so please cease and desist concerning yourself with my page or I will report you. It seems from reading the comments here that others have a similar response. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davenru (talkcontribs) 20:09, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MY apologies for my sarcasm. I have left you a welcome message which has some links on it that you may find useful. Happy editing.TeapotgeorgeTalk 20:21, 1 October 2010 (UTC)Thanks, appreciated, I will study what you sent, and as you say, do happy editing! Have a nice weekend.[reply]

You recently put down that UKFast is written like an advert. I have put a lot of time into keeping this updated making sure the wikipedia version evolves at the same pace the organisation does. Every article is accurate and has press substantiating every fact ranging from BBC to a wide range of credible news stories.

You have also removed a link to a news story describing as "promotional copyright" however again this was an opinion of a journalist and it appeared in a reputable manchester newspaper.

Are you going to attack all my contributions?

I'd prefer it if you'd help me improve my technique. I am a journalist / copywriter by trade in the world of Rugby. Computers are a bit daunting to me at times, although I am getting there!

By the way, the addition to the internal link which hid the word businessman was very useful thanks.

JE —Preceding unsigned comment added by MarcoMole (talkcontribs) 15:25, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to help... the article includes lots of peacock terms and has an advert sounding tone. As for the quote, as I said before it is copied and pasted from a source which is against Wikipedia guidelines.TeapotgeorgeTalk 15:28, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help.(Professor Mole 16:34, 25 July 2010 (UTC)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by MarcoMole (talkcontribs)


Hello ! Sorry but this IS a category : Category:Comac]] ! Comacoketchup (talk) 13:57, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is a workplace computer so if there were previous vandalous edits from here I had nothing to do with them, but my edit to the creationism/evolution debate did NOT constitute vandalism. The material presented was in direct violation of Wikipedia's neutrality policy. Consider yourself reported. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.127.169.157 (talk) 16:21, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your reversal and warn of 76.127.169.157 was out of line, the edit was valid and what he removed was against our WP:NPOV policy. Please pay closer attention before you revert and warn. Also skipping directly to a final warning in this case was also against policy. Consider this a warning. — raeky (talk | edits) 16:23, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The edit removed referenced content that had been there for some time with no adverse comments that I can find?TeapotgeorgeTalk 16:30, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously an IP editor can't make valid judgement of a source (which is a DICTIONARY) and must be a vandal editor? Did you even read what he removed? — raeky (talk | edits) 16:32, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm very sorry but I still can't understand what you are trying to say?TeapotgeorgeTalk 18:40, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My edit restored the version that had been there for at least 6 months there was no discussion or consensus on the talk page to change it.TeapotgeorgeTalk 18:49, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well I'm backing up the change of the IP editor. Your coming a bit off like IP editors are not allowed to modify the article? Removal of a source (specifically a dictionary source) and removing wording that sounds very un-encyclopedic, regardless of how long it's slipped through the cracks, doesn't require lengthy debate, thats part of WP:BOLD. Reverting it as vandalism (when it CLEARLY wasn't) then issuing a FINAL warning, is abusive. — raekyT 18:59, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage protection

FYI, I've semi-protected your userpage since you seem to be attracting quite a bit of vandalism. If you want it unprotected at any time for any reason, just drop a note on WP:RFUP or my talk page. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:07, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]


David Darom

Dear George, Thanks for your attention and your help in editing my article David Darom. I wrote this article, and since it is a biography of a living person (one of the best nature photographer in Israel) I asked him to review my article, and also to load to the public domai some of his grreat photographs. I understand your comment regrading advertisment and removed the pictures of his books. Please let me know what elso to change. Happy new Year!Ntronb (talk) 18:19, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Hi again - Regarding your comment about forums: The forum references are of several Book Reviews only or of a factual stating of an event (the Guild's award)... Not just "talk"... I ask Darom to leave the article - since I understood this is not ethic to let someone to edit his own biography.

This is my first article in Wiki and I realy learn a lot - please don't hasitate to wite me more comments and let me know what should I do in order to remove the delete threat. Best Ntronb (talk) 14:41, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Count

I have a question that I put on my discussion page but nobody will answer it. I hope you can help.

Is there any way for me to have some sort of thing that can display how many edits I have made on my user page?Epicstonemason (talk) 23:20, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Marketing and media assistant?

Are you recommending that I add the Marketing and Media Assistant names to the Pritish Nandy Communications article? I could find out their names. You've removed some key names for the umpteenth time and I don't understand why you would considering it's not promotional and there is no rule on Wiki that restricts the number of key people one can add to an article. Shishir58 (talk) 17:29, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am NOT recommending you add your name to the article [1] TeapotgeorgeTalk 18:14, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You must be joking if you're trying to insinuate that we're the same 2 people! Now I get where all this cynisicm and negativity towards me and my article is coming from. Unbelievable! Maybe I should do an article on the name Shishir inorder to prove how common a name down here it is! Shishir58 (talk) 11:29, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise if I'm mistaken.TeapotgeorgeTalk 12:01, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are George. Anyways. We all learn. Shishir58 (talk) 13:05, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Edits

I have 3 deleted edits. These edits were deleted today, but I have only been working to repair stub articles. What does this mean?Epicstonemason (talk) 17:26, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I explained in the edit summaries if you look. You were adding content already in the article if I remember correctly?TeapotgeorgeTalk 17:38, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

I want to be a reviewer. I am taking action to do tasks that will increase my chances of becoming one. One of these tasks is reverting vandalism. I have searched for vandalism but I can't find any. If you know somewhere I can go to find a list of frequently vandalised pages I would be happy.Epicstonemason (talk) 19:07, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

unreferencedBLP

Please look at the many links at the bottom of my page for references.

to wit...

External links

   * Gary Lee Nelson's home page
   * CDs available from CDeMusic
   * Nelson featured at Subtle Technologies Festival, Toronto
   * Nelson at ArchivMusic
   * Featured composer at the 5th annual Florida Electroacoustic Music Festival
   * Society of Composers Internation University of Akron, 2001
   * Ohio Arts Council grant
   * Boston Museum of Science commission
   * Nelson interview on NPR's Pulse of the Planet
   * First prize in music, Contours of the Mind, Australia
   * "Further Adventures of the Sonomorphs" published paper

and in particular the following

  1. (cur | prev) 20:36, 30 July 2010 VernoWhitney (talk | contribs) (6,333 bytes) (OTRS permission verified - removing copyvio blanking; removing speedy delete tag - professor is a credible claim of importance) (undo) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Garyleenelson (talkcontribs)
Thank you..they are external links... I have no way of knowing what if anything they verify?TeapotgeorgeTalk 08:39, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This user, [User:Teapotgeorge|george] may be part of a concerted effort at vandalizing the above article. See Talk page for this article for further details. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.177.67 (talk) 15:24, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't accuse me of vandalism I have added perfectly acceptable citation requests for unreferenced material.TeapotgeorgeTalk 15:32, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wells AFD

Would you be so kind as to refactor your comment about Wells? Commenting on people's mental state is surely a violation of BLP. I appreciate it. Guettarda (talk) 00:02, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Bert M Petersen

Recently a client, Bert M. Petersen, wanted me to update his Wikipedia page. New copy was written, per his request. But, every time I try to put it up, you are taking it down, and then sending me a final warning.

I don't understand. It is basically an expansion of what was already on his page, just an update. You say it is advertising. It is an autobiographical type account, just like the original. What do I need to do, in order to change it, so you will quit reverting it. I am clueless.

The client is angry with me, because his site still looks the same.

I can't even find help on the Internet to figure out why I can't just add the new information and update his page. Your help is greatly appreciated.

Communications Coordinator 174.45.2.214 (talk) 17:30, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What?!

What was that for?? I didn't do anything wrong. Bob Dylan ISN'T dead!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.37.83.236 (talk) 22:38, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

editing

So nice to keep following your edits. Nice to see that you are are zealous as ever ensuring that everyone has each t crossed and i dotted precisly and exactly. Nice to know that you are always on duty to stictly censure and police wikipedia to ensure that no individual ideas veering away from the basic guidelines creep in. Well Done!--Jackie ohlsen (talk) 09:56, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure... have you nothing better to do?TeapotgeorgeTalk 10:03, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes TP. Thanks for remembering. I am awfully busy with my art. Painting, promoting, showing as well as writing a book and working at the office as well. That is why it is so nice to see that you are always here keeping tabs on things because my life is so full at the moment, it keeps me too busy, I unfortunately do not have so much free time at my disposal.So, it is wonderful that you can be on watch. Keep up your vigilance as you always do. :-) --Jackie ohlsen (talk) 16:53, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do not delete my Miraclesearch page, it is real and it is not promoting or advertising, it is a real copywrited company and should of had a page a long time ago, if you wish tell me what it is missing, nxt time look before you leap —Preceding unsigned comment added by PISearch (talkcontribs) 20:20, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was deleted by User:RHaworth Cheers TeapotgeorgeTalk 20:47, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, TeapotGeorge... You'd left me some 'citation needed' edits on the Bridgewater Systems page - thanks for the specific notes instead of the standard warning box at the top of the page. I've addressed the areas noted and left notes in the page's talk page; I'm curious if we can revisit sometime in the next week or two so that the warning box at the top can be removed. BWCwiki (talk) 18:12, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Epiphany (christian teenage magazine)

Hello Teapotgeorge. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Epiphany (christian teenage magazine), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 cannot be applied to journals or newspapers. Thank you. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 15:54, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK my apologies. TeapotgeorgeTalk 15:55, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delftware

Hey Teapotgeorge, I would have rather discussed this in person, but why did you discard my change? I only updated a broken link and you threw away the entire external link, the original link was there already.

Why do you have the right to edit this page and what is your connection with Delftware? Just for a start, Delftware is not only used for the Dutch faïence, but also for the English wares made following the same procedure, so called 'English Delftware.'

Please get back to me and also let me know, why a link to one dealers website is acceptable and to another it is not!

Connaisseurdart (talk) 20:54, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I replied on your talk page. I removed a link to a commercial website. I have no connection to Delftware at all. regards. TeapotgeorgeTalk 21:00, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial doesn't automatically mean non-educational! Connaisseurdart (talk) 21:40, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summary

Sometimes edits and their intentions are so obvious that don't need any summary. Even then, should I make them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phoebus de Lusignan (talkcontribs) 16:48, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well it depends on how helpful you want to be I suppose? Cheers TeapotgeorgeTalk 16:51, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Excessive tagging?

This edit seems a bit excessive. Since the article is already undergoing a deletion discussion, is it necessary to point out the issues on the page as well? If the article survives its AFD (doubtful), then the tagging might be useful until a cleanup is effected, but until the AFD is done, it just seems to be a bit of a sledgehammer. Just my 2c worth. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:31, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are probably correct...I thought it might indicate to the article creator what needs to be done to stop it being deleted? TeapotgeorgeTalk 12:46, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would think a look at the AFD discussion itself would provide that feedback. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:14, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

George? I am doing my first page and appreciate your imput, but if you could give it a few days I will make the references and so on appropriately Wiki esque, it is not a personal page by the way, as you are incorrectly guessing. I am working with limited info, and trying to get it up quick, all the reference are a small section of thousands of work by a little known yet long and hard working artist.. he is still going strong at 96. Since he has thousands of legit credits, and all the intro credits are cited below in references I am not sure why you ask for a citation there? This is a sampling.. is less better do you think? I am finding wiki writing much more complex detail oriented than I thought, it will fall into place in all the appropriate ways, but until then I would appreciate it if you could postpone all helping comments for at least a week. Thanks, Dave ps I also don't get the Talk mechanism of Wiki, so if this is not the right place to talk, feel free to let me know where exactly, talk back is.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davenru (talkcontribs) 18:00, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

simplechurches.ca

I understand the reason for the removal, there are a lot of links. However, many of those seem to be from sites that are no longer functioning or are well out of date. simplechurches.ca is an example of a community that has been functioning and thriving for four years. We are also a Canadian example. The site is updated weekly, including blog entries from simple church participants. I believe the site should remain as a perfect example for the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andylambkin (talkcontribs) 22:32, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

Thank you for correction, I did not realize it, the article inherited that from previous article. BalochMedia (talk) 22:35, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

poetry atlas reference

i do not understand why you have deleted this link. i came across the poetry atlas site and felt that it is a useful reference point for these articles? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomthumb1 (talkcontribs) 12:20, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the coi and notability on Scouts Royale Brotherhood (SRB). I'm an alumnus of Alpha Phi Omega in the United States, SRB developed as an semi-official youth wing of Alpha Phi Omega in the Philippines, but split off and now has collegiate chapters as well. Showing Notability for the Philippine Fraternities gets tough, but there are certainly more chapters than some of the USA groups. I'm definitely monitoring the page, and looking online for both a complete list of the founders and I just changed the list to a bulleted list, but there are probably better ways. I'm a fairly experienced wikipedia editor, and I do think this article can be made better. I appreciate your comments.Naraht (talk) 14:59, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, TeapotGeorge

Thank you, and I agree with you. I did not write that article. My editor did. I have just been neurotic (probably too much so) about posting it! I've been written up before, but it's always scary. Thanks again.

Madalyn Aslan Junodriving (talk) 22:40, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notability template on Rachel Sussman

I've left you a message on Talk:Rachel Sussman. --Bsherr (talk) 19:08, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

G o 2 Article

I'm not sure why this is flagged as resembling a fan site. Fan sites seek to promote as well as sell group merchandise or music and influence new fans to join some sort of email list. This page is meant only for information (Facts) about the group. As with most Wikipedia articles on artist.

There are hundreds of articles on Wikipedia of the same notability and subject matter as this article. I have listed a few of them. I'm not clear on why this article has been flagged. Wikipedia has a lot of articles that relate to Holy Hip Hop, and just as these articles that I have linked to only give information on the groups pioneering this genre, Go2 should also be noted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trip_Lee

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Da%27_Truth

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLAME

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross_Movement

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obie_One_B.A.

The statement "It may have been edited by a person who has a conflict of interest with the subject matter" is an unfair opinion/judgment of the writer. I can assure you I have no conflict of interest, although I can understand the concern.

I would like to suggest that you tag the article with this tag "This article needs additional citations for verification." instead of totally discrediting it. Thank you for taking the time to make this work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bowmanreports (talkcontribs) 18:18, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have not suggested that you have a conflict of interest? You haven't edited the article unless you are a sockpuppet of User:Wordworks2010

Feel free to add "This article needs additional citations for verification' TeapotgeorgeTalk 18:30, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

lol. Sorry bout that, I was attempting to create another account and decided against it and used the back button to get back to my recent page "Bowmanreports", but my edits may have been recorded under the new account, sorry. I've had trouble getting this article published, can you please help with a solution as opposed to just suggesting it be deleted. I have no affiliation with the group personally and I really believe they should be given every opportunity to have their own wiki article. I don't have any other references/citations to give, but maybe someone else out there can bring this article up to speed if given the chance. Thank you so much for any help you provide. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bowmanreports (talkcontribs) 19:09, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification: I didn't want to add the statement about citations on top of all the warnings/flags about the article. If all those warnings have to be there then there really is no reason to have the article up as they discredit the article before the user even reads it and also highlights it for deletion. Again thanks for any assistants. Bowmanreports (talk) 19:19, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Still waiting on a response from you Teapotgeorge. Can you help me get this fixed and address my concerns? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bowmanreports (talkcontribs) 19:56, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you click on the various blue links in the maintenance template messages you will see explanations for what the concerns are.TeapotgeorgeTalk 20:21, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer to the polymer clay talk page

HI Teapot: If you review the links on the polymer clay talk page, I think you will agree that this site conforms to all of Wikipedia criteria for inclusion. I tried to research those criteria fully. I also noticed that no one had been involved in discussion on that page for years. So I tried as best I could to write an objective reference that would be helpful to readers.

The archive site is not promoting any individual or group. It's purpose is education and documentation. It is not commercial - does not sell any product nor does it accept advertising - and it provides background on polymer that is not available anywhere else - neither on the internet nor currently in print.

Since this medium is very new it doesn't have the long tradition - or the kind of historic documentation that other art media have.

Under these circumstances, I hope you will consider undoing your edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Color&light (talkcontribs) 15:56, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you list your website here... http://www.dmoz.org/Arts/Crafts/Modeling_Compounds/Polymer_Clay/

Wikipedia is not about promoting particular websites especially your own. CheersTeapotgeorgeTalk 16:59, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, if you will check the edit history you will see that the original reference to the polymer art archive was part of a very lenghty entry made by someone else - a third pary that I do not know. It stood for many months. Then last week one of the artists mentioned in the original entry added her own website link causing Ronz to delete the entire entry. I was merely trying to resurrect the reference to a useful resource. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Color&light (talkcontribs) 00:16, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No worries...

Thanks for the message! Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 20:24, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher Richard Barker

What is your problem? Clearly you have taken personal offence and are now nit-picking. If you would simply read the pages cited / linked to, or click on the links cited on the pages cited / linked to, you would instantly obtain proof validating the claims.

You are being malicious and unprofessional. You are costing me huge amounts of time just because you are too lazy to read through the citations provided. For example, it is easily proven that Barker contributed two stories to Supernatural Tales, but because you couldn't be bothered to scroll down the page then you missed them.

I have repeatedly asked that this matter be referred to a higher authority. Tomorrow I shall do so myself by contacting somebody high up in Wikipedia, and ask them to look over my article, and scrutinise your unfriendly and trigger-happy behaviour.

(Curemaniac (talk) 22:46, 14 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

I missed the first mention because the page is an image not searchable type. Your reference http://www.locusmag.com/index/yr2004/b61.htm#A2071 does NOT mention Barker and making insulting remarks is likely to end up in you being blocked. TeapotgeorgeTalk 22:54, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It does if you click on the 'Contents' page. Would you like me to link to the 'Contents' page instead?

I am sorry if I offended you but I am a newbie and your revisions and behaviour strike me as aggressive and non-proactive. After all, it was easily proven that Barker had contributed stories to Supernatural Tales, wasn't it? You would have seen this had you scrolled down the page or done a simple page search on the name 'Barker'.

I am not surprised that many of the authors and celebrities I know do not have Wikipedia entries given the negative experiences I have had today. Nothing controversial or inflammatory was said in the original article yet it was instantly torn to shreds. It would be far more helpful had you emailed me direct or sent me a message raising your concerns - perhaps giving me five or seven days to effect changes or cite proof - than this sudden and savage reaction to the article.

I thought Wiki was meant to be user-friendly and an online resource of inexhaustible knowledge. I have spent several hours creating a legitimate new article and have been treated like a lamb straying into a lion's den.

(Curemaniac (talk) 23:05, 14 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Yes a more direct link would be helpful there are around 50 "contents" links on that page, how is anyone supposed to find the reference? Wikipedia relies on reliable third party references and verifiability . The main problem you have though is to show that Barker is notable.All good wishesTeapotgeorgeTalk 23:14, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorted! Direct link now provided.

Do I get a nice cup of tea now, Mr George?

[Joke!]

(Curemaniac (talk) 23:27, 14 October 2010 (UTC))[reply]


Response to Teapotgeorge from ArsenalTechKB

Dear Teapotgeorge,

I am sorry about your concern regarding a conflict of interest on my part related to my edits on the Arsenal Technical High School page. I am only trying to flesh out this page similarly to other high schools and to provide information regarding Tech that other editors, especially those who are not alumni, either have not included in the page or do not know. Hopefully, I have been providing this information from a neutral point of view and will continue to do so in the future. Please communicate with me and/or modify what I have written or will write, when you see that it is not from a neutral point of view. Thank you.

Sincerely,

ArsenalTechKB (talk) 22:08, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's your username that gives the impression there may be a conflict of interest. Cheers TeapotgeorgeTalk 23:24, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for pointing out the way Wikipedia works. For some reason you feel free to enforce Wikpedia policy on others when you seem to protect that which you have created yourself, contradicting your own attitude towards the work of others. I have already decided to retire because I am sick of this attitude (there is no possibility for assuming good faith here, this is obviously malignant). I will bring this to the attention your fellow administrators. --JHvW (talk) 22:10, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to prod the Whitworths article for deletion if that is what you consider to be correct, but please don't vandalise it. Kind RegardsTeapotgeorgeTalk 22:14, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. You have been notified.

I was not attempting to vandalise it, only to Wikify it. The discussion for deletion is something the community will have to decide upon. As I have already decided to retire I will not fight this battle, just not worth it. The only thing I can do is follow procedure and bring this to the attention of the administrators. Perhaps they will protect you, perhaps not. In the end it is Wikipedia that suffers, this sort of behaviour does not work toward maintaining or improving Wikipedia. Therefore contravening a core policy. --JHvW (talk) 22:26, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry how does calling something blatant advertising [2] in the article count as wikifying? You may want to see WP:POINT and WP:RS and WP:Citing sources none of which suggest what you did is in any way acceptable. Nil Einne (talk) 23:36, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TEAPOTGEORGE - PLEASE CAN YOU CHECK OUT THIS RHODES WEBSITE

Hi there Teapotgeorge. I wonder whether you would be so kind as to check out my large and very comprehensive website on Cecil John Rhodes, ie www.cecilrhodes.co.za. I have tried to 'external link' it to the main Cecil Rhodes entry on Wikipedia, but it got automatically rejected because it was a 'private' website. Nothing is being promoted on this website, and I'm sure you will agree on looking at it that it will be an immensely useful source of information about Cecil Rhodes, who I have been researching (here in Cape Town where he lived) for the past 20 years.

Rhodomain (talk) 06:45, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In line with Wikipedia policies, you should avoid linking to a site that you own, maintain, or represent—even if WP guidelines seem to imply that it may otherwise be linked.TeapotgeorgeTalk 09:20, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

sbokov (talk) 13:10 November 3, 2010 (UTC) I am attempting to improve the content of the previous page Multicharts, and the name needs to be corrected because the proper name is MultiCharts. That is the reason for redirecting the old page [Multicharts]] and contributing the new one MultiCharts. I would appreciate if you could help me do that.

You need to move the old article to the new name by requesting a move here [[3]] TeapotgeorgeTalk 13:32, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I see this has now been done for you. cheersTeapotgeorgeTalk 13:36, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article author became distressed, blanked the article, and then requested its deletion; but actually, I think Shoessss' suggestion of a redirect was a good one, she has agreed, and per WP:IAR I have implemented it. I have proposed at the AfD that it be closed as "redirect", but I am checking with you in case you would rather maintain your "delete" !vote. Please comment there. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 22:03, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your diplomacy, a redirect is absolutely fine. Regards TeapotgeorgeTalk 22:06, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Username derived from Russell's_teapot? Bridgetttttttebabblepoop 02:02, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your interest Bridget, I am in fact a teapot maker. It appears to anger you that I don't share your beliefs? Kind regards TeapotgeorgeTalk 09:35, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, I am trying to make friends with you after the mess yesterday. Guess what? I love to throw clay! Bridgetttttttebabblepoop 12:52, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've made slipcast teapots for the past thirty years but recently bought an ancient Leech kick wheel I haven't thrown for 36 years but hope to start again soon. All good wishes TeapotgeorgeTalk 12:56, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Pottery is a well written article, but I don't see anything on how clay is processed from the ground. This part of the country fired the big sewer pipes from native clay. It's all shut down. I've wondered if it would help this very bad economy if that same clay could be brought up to throwing-grade. Maybe something we could jointly write about, unless I missed an article already covering the process. Bridgetttttttebabblepoop 13:42, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

personal attack

Ok, no more personal attacks from me. Can you please reprimand the one who tattled on me who told me to "cut the crap" - is not "cut the crap" a personal attack —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.151.58.242 (talk) 12:18, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pottery

I tried to add my site about American Art pottery & companies (my site is purely informational - I promote nothing) but you removed it....Oh well, I don't care. How about removing the dead link that I tried to replace? Keep up the 'good' work. ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.16.224.208 (talk) 22:59, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This was a long time ago (back in January) but thank you for adding the copypaste tag on that article. Just to let you know, the infringing text was copied from two sources, http://ciit-isb.edu.pk/About%20CIIT/HistoricalPerspective.aspx and http://www.cnt.com.pk/. Minimac (talk) 18:33, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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 Adelina ismaili 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, a rephrasing of the title, 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 that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. — Timneu22 · talk 16:09, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

LENORE RAPHAEL

Thank you Teapot for your conscientious input to this page. If you have the time, I would like your guidance as to what more I need to do to meet Wikipedia standards. As a jazz historian, I know that this artiste deserves Wiki status and I hope you can help me put the finishing touches. Love your pseudonymn, by the way :-) Sammypepys (talk) 19:25, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You need to find more, reliable third party references rather than primary sources. It's looking better though. regards TeapotgeorgeTalk 19:29, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you tell me specifically where it is still lacking, and I will do my best to hunt it down. Is it ok to remove the two boxes on top of the page, while I I try to make it reach the standards required? Are you a jazz fan by any chance? This is the best female jazz pianist ever to please my ancient ears. Kindest regardsSammypepys (talk) 20:18, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article has no independent third party references yet, which it needs to confirm notability. Has she been written about in the press for instance? Sorry I'm not a jazz fan!TeapotgeorgeTalk 20:25, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Would this suffice, George: http://www.boomnc.com/2010/09/articles_fiftyfab_triangle_201009.htmlSammypepys (talk) 20:33, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a good start.TeapotgeorgeTalk 20:50, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And four more ... http://www.jazzreview.com/article/review-7625.html ... http://www.allaboutjazz.com/php/article.php?id=26925 ... http://www.jazzreview.com/article/review-5180.html ... http://www.jazzreview.com/articledetails.cfm?ID=3145. Hope this gets her the annointment she deserves, George. I am in the UK. Don't suppose you can tell me where you are? Sammypepys (talk) 21:13, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you can work them into the article that would be great...and then remove the maintenance templates. I'm in UK too. Regards~~

~~ Will do George, and will be as factual as possible. Thanks for your guidance. Kindest regards Sammypepys (talk) 21:21, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cy Gowdie

Can you tag a fictional character with db-bio? Peridon (talk) 21:06, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well spotted! I was just going to change it but was beaten too it. RegardsTeapotgeorgeTalk 21:12, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My fault. I took TeapotGeorge's eye off the ball :-) Sorry! Sammypepys (talk) 21:27, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

coi: archives & museum informatics

hi,

you've put a COI tag on the entry for Archives & Museum Informatics (disclosure: in which I am a partner) perhaps because it and Museums and the Web were both edited by someone calling themselves Museumstaff10.

we don't know who this person is, and have had no involvement in the creation of either the A&MI / archimuse or the Museums and the Web entries. perhaps you could revert the changes you find problematic?

thanks. /jtrant (talkcontribs) 23:27, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Having looked at this instance and the prior instance of Scouts Royale Brotherhood, I'm not sure G4 applies. While the page lacks references (and for that matter those there are screwy), I don't think it meets "Sufficiently Identical". Having said that, at the currently level, it is a worse page than the one that was actually deleted.Naraht (talk) 16:50, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit

Dear George, the recent edit that I made was due to the insignificance of the images to the article, in my knowledge, the title images should provide highly notable people. I had also put a summary of the reason behind the edit. Usualphonexs (talk) 13:31, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I am aware there is no requirement for images to be of notable people? Can you point me to the guidelines that say this? Regards TeapotgeorgeTalk 13:33, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Baloch people

Dear George, I do not know why, but you did not understand what I said.

The title image of an article has to be relevant to the subject of the article. or not? You reverted my edit because the last editor called it vandalism without even looking into it. On my talk page you said I should put an edit summary and I had put an edit summary but you did not see it. Please kindly look into it carefully before reverting it completely or calling it vandalism. Usualphonexs (talk) 12:53, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies it was a standard template for removing or blanking content... and like the other editors I still do not understand your reasons for removing the content. Kind regardsTeapotgeorgeTalk 19:13, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear George, I have tried my best to explain why I deleted the title image, I have worked a lot on the article providing references for all the points made but when a Title image is posted that does not support the article it becomes irrelevant and affects the hard work done on the article's and its quality. I do not know how else to make it understandable. Usualphonexs (talk) 02:39, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can ascertain all the people featured in the photo are notable for one reason or another and all have strong connections with the articles subject?TeapotgeorgeTalk 10:18, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Cartwright (artist)

You asked on the BLP page for someone to look at this article - give it the once over - its impossible - a page from an old newspaper - thats it for notability - don't you think this article is terminal? I aint gonna waste another minute on it. MarkDask 00:23, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nothin' Fancy bluegrass

Is it stated Wikipedia policy to not include facebook and/or myspace references? Am new to editing Wikipedia, am co-owner of Nothin' Fancy LLC. There are some basic factual errors about our band in the site but I don't want to go through a big editing process if it's all gonna get thrown out. Thanks. Chrissexton (talk) 17:07, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yep it is part of the Wikipedia external links guidelines to not include social networking sites such as facebook and Myspace links. You might want to read the Conflict of interest guidlelines too. RegardsTeapotgeorgeTalk 17:15, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Roger that. Will make some basic edits, like taking out Rhonda Vincent's page from our external links (huh? We know her and all, but we aren't her...) Thanks for your work, and check out Manassas Clay if you're around Northern Virginia. I've no connection to them other than spending too much money there, but they do nice work.Chrissexton (talk) 17:24, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stop.

Please be more careful with how you use Twinkle. You put a speedy deletion tag on a page I was working on for the WMF fundraiser that was clearly marked in multiple places that it should not be modified without WMF office permission. I was literally in the process of full-protecting it when you tagged it.

You obviously did not spend any time reviewing the page before you deleted it. Administrators must pay attention to what they are doing, especially when deleting with tools, to prevent mistakes like this. Don't let it happen again, please. DanRosenthal Wikipedia Contribution Team 19:25, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies but I am not an administrator...and it looked like a test page to me. TeapotgeorgeTalk 19:29, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Test pages would not typically say to contact the WMF office for more information. :) Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 19:38, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right no harm done, just saying please be more careful in the future. And yeah, I meant to say editors, not administrators. DanRosenthal Wikipedia Contribution Team 19:39, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jo Hamilton (musician)

Hi George

You flagged Jo Hamilton's page with COI several months ago - presumably because I edited it I'm guessing. It's true I work with Jo, however I'm wondering if since no-one has AFAIK contradicted my additions/changes we would be ok to remove that tag?

In the future am I simply forbidden from contributing to her page? That would seem a shame as I maintain her web presence generally and probably know better than anyone what she's doing - things like release dates etc. Appreciate your thoughts - thanks, Jon — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joncotton (talkcontribs) 22:55, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the tag and will keep an eye on the article, as you have a clear conflict of interest. Reliable third party references will always help rather than your own primary sources, Wikipedia is not here to promote people. CheersTeapotgeorgeTalk 19:09, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

December 2010

Dear George, please refer to my talk page, sorry for the trouble - Sdistefano (talk) 17:03, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

That doggoned "Ananny" spammer has gotten active again as of late; thanks for the alert. I'll initiate a sockpuppet investigation to look into the possibility of a rangeblock. I'm alerting Jimbo as well since we know who's responsible. The Foundation may wish to take action. Happy New Year! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 15:55, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You might be able to help an editor at

WP:HELPDESK#Unreferenced material and concerns of one editor's sincerity. - I think he does need advice, he appears to be editing in good faith but new. Dougweller (talk) 13:29, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Ralph Cupper

I have been speaking to admin Kim Dent-Brown and he said I could repost this with the added reference files which makes it a valid topic under one of the WP:MUSICBIO criteria. So could you please remove the speedy deletion notice? Mpcpro (talk) 20:47, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I posted you a reply on the discussion topic. Mpcpro (talk) 20:59, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just tell me to stop posting here if your checking the other page regularly. Since I am not sure. Anyway I have posted another reply. Mpcpro (talk) 21:10, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. Thanks for the change. Do you have any suggestions which would make it more notability? Also I added some categories at the bottom and I would like to say sorry if I came across as a bit ignorant. This is my first page, and I am trying to make it look well! Mpcpro (talk) 21:32, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]