User talk:Orangemike

TUSC token fa255ad995d61b015320a1a04245a250

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Note

Please watch for an e-mail from me. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:45, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Megan Henwood wiki page

Dear Mike

Thank you for your comments and observations regarding my considerable updating of in the last week or so of the Megan Henwood wiki page. I wish to remain totally respectful of Wikipedia guidelines and only wished to make corrections where I believe there were errors in punctuation or fact. I hope the page will now provide a framework for improvement by other contributors. I promise to try not to mess with it in future :)

Thanks again,

Riverman48 (talk) 00:30, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Alexanderwolfe Wiki Page

Hi Mike

This is with regard to your comment on deleting the Alexanderwolfe wiki page. I am Alex's manager and we created this page together taking information and photos only from his approved source. Could you please tell me why this page has been considered for deletion. I have added in some references today along with links to provide proof of him as a releasing recording artist, and not of questionable notability. Bang Management Alexanderwolfe (talk) 10:26, 3 June 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexanderwolfe (talk • contribs) 10:23, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Joel Rosenberg's death

I've posted Joel's obit on SF Site based on word from Felicia, his wife. I've also sent information to Locus and other sites that Wikipedians consider reliable. I'm currently trying to work on an obit for SFWA. Shsilver (talk) 13:16, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

User:BBCForum

Hi Orangemike, I see you blocked this user for username problems (and the side order of spam); were you aware of the AN/I discussion with them? I think they are a good faith editor who could provide helpful materuial to WP and as you see they have undertaken to restrict themselves to talk pages only and not to post links in articles direct. They were notified about their username but haven't really had much chance to request a name change - do you think it would be reasonable to unblock them so they can request a change, and then all their contributions could be seen together? They could of course just open a new account but it might be more appropriate for a name change to go through? Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 13:39, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

An unblock to request username change is certainly in order. I've got to be on the floor of my union's convention in about ten minutes, so I don't have time right now. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:48, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Mike, I'll post on their talk page to advise them what to do. I'll unblock them myself having discussed it with you, but ask them to register a username change request before making any other edits. All the best, Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 14:03, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Oriental Theatre "currentuse" parameter

Hi Mike,

Sorry about any confusion with the infobox for the Oriental Theatre (Milwaukee) that I created yesterday... in my original edit with the infobox, I included the currentuse parameter, but then later realized that the template specifications say that it's only for when it's not used for a theatre anymore. I did consider the fact that the Oriental is a movie theatre, rather than a performance theatre, and maybe should have the parameter after all. But I decided against it because it could give the impression that the Oriental was used as a performance theatre in the past at some point, which it never was.

I hope that clears up my rationale, and let me know if you have any other thoughts on it.

Thanks! --Shadowlink1014 (talk) 05:26, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 June 5#User:Timeshift9

As you participated in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Timeshift9, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 June 5#User:Timeshift9. T. Canens (talk) 10:14, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

PROD for iPad accessories

Why wasn't I notified of this? I think failing to notify the author is really rather poor... -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 17:40, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

I was under the impression that that template automatically notified the author; my apologies. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:08, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Pasch article response

If you feel that the votes which I have added to Democratic state rep. Sandy Pasch's article add undue weight to make Pasch appear in too favorable of a light you are free to add votes which you feel may be less popular. The votes which I added were selected because they are more notable and have received a greater level of press coverage than other votes that I did not include.--Tdl1060 (talk) 20:18, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Okay, but my response stays the same. The votes that were added are notable, and if you feel that there are other votes that she has taken that are either more or less popular that are worthy of inclusion, you are free to add them yourself.--Tdl1060 ([[--Tdl1060 (talk) 23:30, 6 June --Tdl1060 (talk) 23:32, 6 June 2011 (UTC)--Tdl1060 (talk) 23:32, 6 June 2011 (UTC)2011 (UTC)User talk:Tdl1060|talk]]) 20:36, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Such lists are not customary content for state legislator articles, due to the temptation to pick and choose among votes to fit an agenda. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:38, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Not customary content? Numerous articles of legislators including some state legislators list notable votes and positions that they have taken. And secondly, unless a policy or guideline exists that you can point to, wouldn't your argument be merely a deletionist version of WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS?--Tdl1060 (talk) 20:53, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

I have added secondary non partisan sources from notable, respected newspapers and TV stations to illustrate the notability of the votes that are included and to remove any problems which may arise from reliance on primary sources. Hopefully this will clear up any remaining objections. --Tdl1060 (talk) 22:59, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Your own statement undermines your claim that my edits are made with the intent of influencing the election, as there are no farmers who would live in Pasch's district, and very very few farmers in Alberta Darling's district. There are certainly not enough farmers in the 8th district to make any difference in this election. However I have provided a reference (and could provide more if need be) to show the issue regarding the legality of raw milk has emerged as an issue both nationally and in Wisconsin in particular due to its status as a dairy farming state. Maybe the way that a Wisconsin lawmaker voted on the legality of raw milk may be trivial on a global basis, but the legality of raw milk is not only being debated in Wisconsin [1]. Secondly; you have raised the issue of other edits to articles related to Wisconsin politics. Yet aside from Sandy Pasch and Jennifer Shilling, what edits have you found objectionable, to support your claim that I have demonstrated a "pattern of extremely selective editing"?--Tdl1060 (talk) 23:32, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Juan José Güemes

Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Juan José Güemes. The community has decided that all new biographies of living persons must contain a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article as per our verifiability policy. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:10, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Block on User:Daviddaltonagency

I was looking at User:Daviddaltonagency's request to be unblocked in order to request a name change. I notice that this user name has been in use (sporadically) for 4 1/2 years. I also haven't found any obvious CoI. Is there something I'm not seeing here? -- Donald Albury 11:29, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

It's a company name, and thus forbidden under our rules. I certainly don't object to his being unblocked for a change of username. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:36, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, he has to change it. I probably would have warned him before I blocked. -- Donald Albury 20:50, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

I've come to the same conclusion myself, and said so. A "softerblock" would have been the better route to go. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:53, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

The block was within your discretion. I've been sorely tempted at times to block someone for a less clearcut reason. :) -- Donald Albury 11:18, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

I really, really like and admire you

Not only do you seem to be completely neutral (i.e. see fair and balanced), but you are smart. WE NEED MORE PEOPEL IKE YOU IN THE WORLD GOD BLESS U AND GOD BLESS AMERICA (THINK THAT WHERE UR FROM) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Puglover123 (talk • contribs) 16:48, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Zack Heart

Thank you for updating Heart's page.... if the page stays around at all. A few of the changes I didn't know what to do and looks like I missed some big ones. Could you do me one huge favor. Could you look over the talk pages and tell me where I screwed up, what I should do better next time or any other comments. I'd like to a much better job the next time something like this happens.

Here is where I advised them about COI. I left messages on User talk:Krystic1 and Heart's Talk:Zack Heart page Bgwhite (talk) 17:59, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank You!

Thank you, Orange Mike, for your support in lifting my blocking. Your comment acknowledged the personal concern I felt, for which I am grateful. My name change is in progress. Daviddaltonagency (talk) 02:53, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

My article isn't autobiographical!

Hi Orange Mike. You have just flagged my article for being autobiographical (Rimma Sushanskaya) As much as I would like to be Rimma Sushanskaya I am not! I am Ruth. Perhaps you have jumped to conclusions a little too quickly although my username perhaps suggests it. What do I need to do to get this article live - I am new and need help and encouragement!?

Thanks, Ruth Rimma2011 (talk) 17:09, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

I already moved the article as you requested, to Rimma Sushanskaya. It will probably be deleted, though, as it is a shamelessly promotional piece. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:14, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for moving it. If it is likely to be deleted don't you think you could give me some advice about why you think it is a 'shamelessly promotional piece'? Do I need more references in it? Does it need a bit of bad news in it? Do I need to remove parts of it? This is the most unhelpful posting I have every recieved - my article is about an internationally acclaimed and well respected violinist and if it isn't writen correctly I would prefer it if it was deleted.

Rimma2011 (talk) 17:24, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

It has already been deleted. Press-agent language like "one of the leading violinists of her generation. As the last student and protégée of the legendary David Oistrakh, she continues the great Russian string-playing tradition. Her wide array of opulent tone colours, her gripping expressive virtuosity, and her ever-present rhythmic vitality have won audience ovations and critical plaudits in three continents" has no place in an encyclopedia. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:27, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you... Pleased you can act so quickly to delete peopls work - another acolade! Rimma2011 (talk) 17:47, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Your best bet is to create a new draft article in your userspace, concentrating on the verifable facts about the subject and not the peacock words. I'll be glad to help. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:19, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

modeling agencies

hello you deletd two times apage i created i plan to create pages for some of the modeling agencies missing i created a draft at the following address http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Wikilawrenceolivier/City_models if you have any comment please feel free to make them and voide delting other people work , it s easier to comment or amend your suggestions are welcome as i checked several other pages and defenitely most model agencies pages are all the same thank you ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikilawrenceolivier (talk • contribs) 18:15, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Think help not kicks

Orange Mike. I am astounded that you can make such swift judgements, come to a very wrong conclusion so quickly and delete without giving help and advice asked for at the start of the process. I quite innocently wrote an article and there was no helpful advice about what I was doing so wrong - until it was deleted. I am very happy to accept reasoned criticism - but that obviously isn't your style. I will write this article again and I will remove the 'press-agent language' which has been the only helpful comment you have made. I know you are very proud of your reputation for speedy deletions Mike - but sometimes a little consideration wouldn't go amiss for new authors.' Rimma2011 (talk) 18:17, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Rimma2011, you need to lose the attitude. Orangemike hasn't done anything wrong, and your snarky, sarcastic comments are not welcome here. He's kindly offered to help you, so either accept his help or move on to something else. — Satori Son 14:52, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

I've done some things to help her since she posted this note, so (while I appreciate the defense) I think we're good now. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:55, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Reply at my Talk page

I've replied to your templated comment at my Talk page -- Avanu (talk) 02:52, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

(@ Orange Mike) Hi Orange Mike. Avanu re-added the content to the article talk page prior to my commenting at Chaser's talk page. Since you are an uninvolved editor, I wondered if you might take the step to remove it. Gacurr (talk) 03:17, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

And Chaser re-removed it. Seems that none of you are actually big on communicating the specific details of the actual problem here, despite my efforts to ask you to open up. I realize that a joke isn't strictly on-topic for a Talk page, but my goodness, all the ire for a silly thing such as this baffles me. Do we ever stop to laugh at ourselves or at anything here in Wikipedia or must it always be the most strict seriousness? -- Avanu (talk) 04:06, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

There was a time long ago when I heard Tony say, "Why are you wasting time on this?" I learned something very important from that. Gacurr (talk) 04:36, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Given the pointed and implied-agenda-pushing comments we sometimes see in Talk pages, I would hope it isn't a waste of time to release the tension and laugh once in a while and remember that other editors are people too, not just editing robots. -- Avanu (talk) 04:39, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Avanu, read WP:FORUM, read the top of the talk page. This is not a social club. You are free to laugh in your own space. Placing inappropriate content on article talk page is against the rules. You know this. Yet you insist on being disruptive and re-adding the content anyway. Tony's advice is gold. We should not be wasting time on this. Gacurr (talk) 05:08, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Lighten up. My goodness, its been removed and you're still quoting policy and acting like a robot. -- Avanu (talk) 05:11, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Your clarification and assistance on Cutter Aviation deletion

Thank you for providing me direct links to the policies on conflict of interest at Wikipedia and how it applied to the deletion of the article for Cutter Aviation. I now agree with the speedy deletion on these grounds and appreciate your assistance to educate me as I make future contributions to Wikipedia. I appreciate your ongoing efforts to maintain quality standards on Wikipedia. --Avolareaz (talk) 02:33, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Hello Orange Mike, I noticed your remark about your 30th wedding anniversary and wanted to offer my warm regards. My wife and I will celebrate the same event on September 6. I hope that the two of you have a wonderful day, and a wonderful future together. Cullen328 (talk) 15:54, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

My congratulations also to your wife and yourself on your 30th wedding anniversary!RFD (talk) 16:34, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Need help with Message about external links

I received this message below but don't understand how to address it:

"As per Wikipedia's policy on external links, I don't think adding links to search results pages on DigitalNC.org is recommended. I've removed this link from the Davidson College page, but it looks like you've added such links to many pages on Wikipedia. Npdoty (talk) 23:14, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

This is your last warning; the next time you insert a spam link, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. ElKevbo (talk) 16:00, 13 June 2011 (UTC)"

I have not violated any policies by inserting internal links for DigitalNC.org. I do not want to risk either myself or the organization wrongfully being blocked from Wikipedia.Emjohns (talk)Emjohns

1. Your phrasing (e.g., "View Davidson College student yearbooks on DigitalNC.org") is exactly the kind of phrasing used by spammers, with a promotional tone.

2. You seem to be doing nothing in Wikipedia except adding links to DigitalNC, which suggests that you are trying to raise the online profile of that website.

3. The tone of some of your talkpage remarks seems strongly to suggest that you work for DigitalNC in some capacity, and thus have a conflict of interest in doing these edits.

4. Those are external links, not internal links; internal links are bluelinks referring the reader to other articles and pages within Wikipedia. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:43, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Karl 334

I think you blocked Karl 334 (talk · contribs) by mistake. Acroterion (talk) 20:10, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

User:Edw987/Ciaccio Transform

This is about a mathematical transform we created that is now in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. I am writing about it as the one who understands it. Supposing you prefer that we wait and see if it eventually gets written up by someone not associated with our group to prevent conflict of interest. If so can you delete said pages in my workspace and the images Spec0ec.jpg and Spec1ec.jpg. Thank you kindly. Edw987 (talk) 21:23, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I've done so at your request; but I hope this does not discourage you from contributing to Wikipedia in other ways. Me, I couldn't tell an infinitely-differential Riemannian manifold from an exhaust manifold; we need subject-matter specialists like you here! --Orange Mike | Talk 21:29, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Suggested Deletion of OrangeMike Page under ‎ (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement)

Unless you can provide me proof within one day that you have the rights to the content in question. Note that this is more time and warning than you gave me bucko. UrbanTerrorist (talk) 05:53, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Which page are you referring to? Precisely what content is a copyright violation, and where is it copied from? The two articles which you were notified of as being copyright violations included the source where the copyrighted text could be found. If you have a genuine copyright violation, you need to give the source - it is your job to prove the violation, not OrangeMike's to disprove it. For legal reasons, copyright material isn't allowed on Wikipedia, which is why those 2 articles were deleted. Any copyright violation can be deleted immediately by an admin with no warning for this reason. As I am on my mobile, I am not logged I'm as my main account which has admin rights, so I can't see your deleted contributions, but if an article you had created was deleted as a copyright violation and you weren't notified, then apologies on behalf of OrangeMike - we're all human, and sometimes things get forgotten! Regards, -- PhantomSteve.alt/talk\^{[alternative account of Phantomsteve]} 06:13, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

I guess UrbanTerrorist is referring to deleted Laywers in Hell? Which was clear G12 deletion candidate, text identical to this. There's nothing G12-able about Orangemike's user page so any threats to attempt to get it deleted are idle. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:21, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Correct, there isn't. I was trying to make a point. There wasn't any copyright infringing material on the page that OrangeMike so carelessly deleted. I had the requisite permissions from all of the copyright owners to use the content I used. In fact if you do a whois on the website of Janet Morris you will notice that the website is in my name (Wayne Borean). OrangeMike did not perform his duties according to the rules. I spent a fair bit of time working on that page, and due to his carelessness my time has now been wasted. If he had followed through the way he is supposed to, he would have found that I had the permissions. Under the circumstances the proper response by OrangeMike would be for him to replace the content in question. If he does not do so, I will file a complaint. UrbanTerrorist (talk) 13:49, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

If you have permissions, then follow the procedure to prove that you have them before adding them to an article (especially when we're talking about a book about lawyers). It wouldn't matter in any case, since (as usual) the language was totally non-encyclopedic, being the kind of promotional copy intended to sell a book. You should know better by now. --13:58, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

I've been an editor on Wikipedia for years, and I was not aware of this set of rules that you are talking about. Deleting a page without pointing to the relevant rule first so that the editor can fix the problem is an inefficient use of resources.

The entire Wikipedia rule structure is inefficient. Several times in the last six months I've wasted huge chunks of time trying to determine what the rules are, or at least where to find them. This is something that needs to be addressed. For example a Bot had earlier popped up on the page, and wrote this:

Lawyers In Hell

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Lawyers In Hell, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.kerlak.com/lawyerhell.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) 13:11, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

I was in the process of working through the information that CorenSearchBot supplied, when the page disappeared without warning. It is rather difficult to fix problems with a page when the page no longer exists. UrbanTerrorist (talk) 12:40, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

As noted above, Wikipedia is under no obligation (nor is it technically able) to deduce copyright ownership of material cut-and-pasted from external websites. If you own the content, you may submit proof via OTRS. Wikipedia is obligated to delete apparent copyright violations, and OrangeMike did indeed do his duty according to the rules. Please do not attack other editors or disrupt Wikipedia to make a point. Acroterion (talk) 13:59, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

One of the ironies here is that Wayne/Urban is (like myself) a member of science fiction fandom, a community which is usually under attack from "mundanes" on one pretext or another. On other topics, he and I work together much better. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:05, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

First pass. I got the page up, family matters intervened (it's a miracle I'm not in jail right now for second degree murder). So I got back to it later than intended to re-write the page to make it more encyclopedic. But I've lost time, the relatives have caused problems, another fan feud is costing me time as well, I have two articles due by Friday, and an elderly relative who is dying, and won't admit it. So yes, I'm not my usual bright and cheerful self, and everyone else gets to live with the fall out. Oh, and my beagle puppy got loose, and was hit by a car this morning, and didn't survive, so pardon me while I be a total bastard for a week or so. UrbanTerrorist (talk) 14:14, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Brobins4

Hi Mike, I have a question for you. I've been dealing with User:Brobins4 for a couple of days on one article, I would like you to look at his edits and then his talk page to see if I'm handling this correctly. He is claiming to be person in article. Thanks Karl 334 ^{☞TALK to ME ☜} 19:30, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Shannon Letandre

I added a G7 speedy deletion tag to this article. You removed it stating that because it was edited by six editors it did not meet the criteria. This diff shows that since the last edit by the original author there has been no substantial content added aside from references. The requirement for G7 states that "the only substantial content to the page and to the associated talk page was added by its author." Per this, I believe it qualifies for G7. Ryan Vesey (talk) 21:33, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Block of User talk:Cranialsodomy

Yeah, perhaps, given that they have been active for 6 years before you blocked them, something like WP:RFCUN may have been more appropriate. Presumably, hundreds of editors before you have seen the username and not raised any objection, given the length of time it has been around, it may have been best to handle this with something smaller than the biggest gun in the arsenal. If I agree to start the thread at WP:RFCUN and see where it goes, will you concede to allow me to unblock? --Jayron32 03:58, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Certainly! --Orange Mike | Talk 12:11, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Bot revert

You have an issue with this? Revert of a bot? A bot run that I requested with categories that I specified? Really? For all intents and purposes I consider this a self-revert. Fyi Wikiproject members are given a great deal of discretion when it comes to tagging articles for their project. Lionel (talk) 20:05, 16 June 2011 (UTC) Incidentally a wikiproject banner is not a "classification." It is merely a tool for tracking articles for a wikiproject--it doesn't add anything to an article--it isn't political. Banners and categories are completely different. Lionel (talk) 20:13, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm just seeking to understand your decision, which had no edit summary to explain it. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:31, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Please pardon the tone. Your inquiries are reasonable and even welcome. The more publicity WPRight gets the better. The banner has nothing do do with article content and classification and everything to do with internal tracking of the wikiproject. This banner turns on a switch at WPRight and from now on every edit, RfC, move request, RecentChanges, will display in realtime on our project page where we have 30 members. With over 2400 articles this can be expensive. TPC is not an important article to the project, so I reverted the bot.Lionel (talk) 22:47, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

June 2011

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Jerome Corsi, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Also, libel is never permitted on Wikipedia. Thank you. Lunixer (talk) 21:12, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

1. I restored, not removed, content; said content was non-libellous wording fully sourced to cited sources. 2. Truth is an absolute defense against accusations of libel. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:14, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

AN email thread

Hi OM, I replied to your initial comment on the email issue at AN with something that, in retrospect, might have appeared to you to have been unduly flippant ("Jail? <g>")

I apologise for this as I did and do understand that yours is a genuine concern. It was just that, as has since been said by others, it probably does not matter in Real Life. I would certainly let WMF know about it but wouldn't worry unduly about any real life repercussions. As someone who has faced a fair amount of legal threats in my life, often regarding what would be classed here as BLP issues, you are so far in the clear that it is unbelievable anyone would make any sort of legal threat. Unless, of course, they are full of themselves and make such threats for a living. Put simply:

• if your respond at all then don't do so using your primary email address
• report to WMF for logging purposes
• do not fret. You are not the one who has a "fan club" of several thousand Indian caste warriors trying to locate him in order to do some possibly life-threatening damage. That should put it into perspective, I hope!

Again, my apologies for the flippancy and, please, sleep the sleep of a just person. You have nothing to fear in this instance, even if you were in fact the person who deleted the article. - Sitush (talk) 00:06, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

No big; but he already has my home/primary e-mail address: that's the one he sent the threat to. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:08, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

/* Inside Croydon */

Hello Mike. Last month you deleted an edit on a biog because it only referenced unreliable sources. This material has reappeared in an amended form; the sources are little different, just as unreliable or inaccurate and that is now a matter of a legal dispute. A comparitive read of the accounts on the Barwell and Croydon blogs suggests that the account as listed here is wide of the mark; the local newspaper report is unsourced (apart from lifting a quote from Barwell's blog) and inaccurate.

It appears that Aristottie may well be another name for a previous malicious editor - Lolitaleveaux - who was eventually blocked by an admin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.161.37.215 (talk) 00:24, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Could you give me a link so I know what you're talking about? --Orange Mike | Talk 00:42, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you!!!!

orangemike, big fan. Thanks for your recent contribution to the University at Buffalo...with the official title and name. Buffalofan4255 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:52, 17 June 2011 (UTC).

It's a question of sound sourcing. Now if you could just clean up the rah-rah boosterish tone of the article as a whole.... --Orange Mike | Talk 01:58, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion for WikiProject United States to support WikiProject US State Legislatures

It was recently suggested that WikiProject US State Legislatures might be inactive or semiactive and it might be beneficial to include it in the list of projects supported by WikiProject United States. I have started a discussion on the projects talk page soliciting the opinions of the members of the project if this project would be interested in being supported by WikiProject United States. Please feel free to comment on your opinions about this suggestion. --Kumioko (talk) 20:19, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Kool-Aid

Thanks for taking care of this--Phagopsych (talk) 12:27, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Nestor Papoutsis

Hello, why did You delete the above mentioned article? Because it was once deleted, due to missing proof, that does not mean that it should be deleted over and over again, while also proofing links (IMDB) were attached. So in my oppinion this deletion was not correct. --YUGO (talk) 12:50, 19 June 2011 (UTC)